(October 13, 2021 at 3:30 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:

(October 13, 2021 at 2:43 am)Belacqua Wrote: Is a "diety" like when you're trying to lose weight but not really? Like it's diety, but not really a diet?


You're still imagining that God is a thing with a big physical body. Maybe you're confusing him with Godzilla.

 Why yes, fek you very much for again pointing out my poor spelling. Something I've been struggling with for a tad while now. Shouldn't you stop fattening your wife? (As a suitable bite back)  

No I am not putting any ideas/label what have you on the all encomasing deity that's been postualted.

What is this 'Essence' then of which said proposed deity is composed of that can cirumvent how we understand reality to behave, pray tell?

Not at work.

The essence which can be named is not the true essence.

(October 13, 2021 at 2:43 am)Belacqua Wrote: You're still imagining that God is a thing with a big physical body. Maybe you're confusing him with Godzilla.

Or maybe he is just confusing him with the God of the Bible who is many times described as having a physical body, walking around, visiting people, etc.

(October 13, 2021 at 1:05 am)Belacqua Wrote:

(October 9, 2021 at 11:51 pm)Ferrocyanide Wrote: What does a god do? Does he memorize the location of every object, every atom, every subatomic particle, every photon? That is going to require a large amount of memory.

No, God's mind just is the universe. There is no memory separate from the universe. According to the standard theology. 

Alright, so all this is god’s brain. So, god is walking around in his own universe (Let’s call it UniverseA), in his own world and there are perhaps others other gods that he is interacting with. He is a conscious beings like us.
It is even possible that my brain is a universe as well and the same goes for all brains.
We are in UniverseB, which is actually god’s brain.

It is also possible that the universe that the god is in and his friends and everything are the brain of an even bigger god’s brain.

(October 13, 2021 at 8:23 am)Ferrocyanide Wrote:

(October 13, 2021 at 1:05 am)Belacqua Wrote: No, God's mind just is the universe. There is no memory separate from the universe. According to the standard theology. 

Alright, so all this is god’s brain. So, god is walking around in his own universe (Let’s call it UniverseA), in his own world and there are perhaps others other gods that he is interacting with. He is a conscious beings like us.
It is even possible that my brain is a universe as well and the same goes for all brains.
We are in UniverseB, which is actually god’s brain.

It is also possible that the universe that the god is in and his friends and everything are the brain of an even bigger god’s brain.

Well, if you want to build a logical case for all that I guess you could try.

For classical theology, the idea of God "walking around in" the universe doesn't make any sense. God and the universe do not make two.

(October 13, 2021 at 8:36 am)Belacqua Wrote: For classical theology, the idea of God "walking around in" the universe doesn't make any sense. God and the universe do not make two.

In that case, classical theology is distorting God of the Bible because Jacob beat God in a wrestling match in Genesis 32.

Moses spoke to God face to face and even got a peek at God's backsides. And I [God]will take away my hand, and thou [Moses] shalt see my backparts. Exodus 33:23

And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend. Exodus 33:11

God sitting on his throne:
I [Micaiah] saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left. 1 Kings 22:19, 2
Etc.

Theres nothing in classical theology that prevents a god from walking around n the universe...jesus christ.

At work.

(October 13, 2021 at 4:15 am)Belacqua Wrote:

(October 13, 2021 at 3:30 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:  Why yes, fek you very much for again pointing out my poor spelling. Something I've been struggling with for a tad while now. Shouldn't you stop fattening your wife? (As a suitable bite back)  

No I am not putting any ideas/label what have you on the all encomasing deity that's been postualted.

What is this 'Essence' then of which said proposed deity is composed of that can cirumvent how we understand reality to behave, pray tell?

The essence which can be named is not the true essence.

So....

The diety's 'Nature' is.... 'Unknowable'? 'Unquantifyable'? 'Insert adjective to not understanding here'?

So... you're positing something akin to 'Unobtainium' then?

And this ('Place holder') defies our understanding of reality by.... ?

(October 13, 2021 at 3:10 pm)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote: At work.

(October 13, 2021 at 4:15 am)Belacqua Wrote: The essence which can be named is not the true essence.

So....

 The diety's 'Nature' is....   'Unknowable'? 'Unquantifyable'?  'Insert adjective to not understanding here'?

 So... you're positing something akin to 'Unobtainium' then?

 And this ('Place holder') defies our understanding of reality by....  ?

 
I'm a bit confused again.

This is how I see it:  I'm an agnostic atheist. That means I don't believe in god(s) due to a lack of empirical evidence. I make no claims of knowledge.

I also disbelieve in the soul, angels, demons, heaven hell, an afterlife, the supernatural, the paranormal, including all kinds of fortune telling, mountain trolls, dragons and fairies at the bottom of my garden.

It occurs to me that I may have been in error to lump all of those things with my atheism. Some at least possibly belong under the headings of  sceptic/cynic/materialist .

Posts in this thread seem to be suggesting that a person may indeed be both an atheist and a pantheist. BUT, the very name 'pantheism' infers a  belief in some form of god(s). As far as I can tell it posits the notion of  a deity without an individual existence, such as seeing the universe as 'god'.  Please correct me if I'm in error. That sounds like an argument for for first cause. 

Can it not be argued that defining reality as divine is so broad as to be meaningless? I am often in awe of natural beauty, and indeed of my notion of life as an 'essence'. It's my position that the meaning of life is itself. I don't mean in a crude egocentric sense, but in the sense of the vast numbers of ways life manages to replicate itself.   This suggest but does not infer a prime cause or causes. For me, life and reality just are. A satisfying explanation might be nice, but I don't require one. I have no problem with saying "I don't know'. 

From wikipedia:

Pantheism is the belief that reality is identical with divinity,[1] or that all-things compose an all-encompassing, immanent god.[2] Pantheist belief does not recognize a distinct personal god,[3] anthropomorphic or otherwise, but instead characterizes a broad range of doctrines differing in forms of relationships between reality and divinity.[4] Pantheistic concepts date back thousands of years, and pantheistic elements have been identified in various religious traditions. The term pantheism was coined by mathematician Joseph Raphson in 1697[5][6] and has since been used to describe the beliefs of a variety of people and organizations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

(October 13, 2021 at 6:37 pm)Oldandeasilyconfused Wrote: I'm a bit confused again.

This is how I see it:  I'm an agnostic atheist. That means I don't believe in god(s) due to a lack of empirical evidence. I make no claims of knowledge.

I also disbelieve in the soul, angels, demons, heaven hell, an afterlife, the supernatural, the paranormal, including all kinds of fortune telling, mountain trolls, dragons and fairies at the bottom of my garden.

It occurs to me that I may have been in error to lump all of those things with my atheism. Some at least possibly belong under the headings of  sceptic/cynic/materialist .

Posts in this thread seem to be suggesting that a person may indeed be both an atheist and a pantheist. BUT, the very name 'pantheism' infers a  belief in some form of god(s). As far as I can tell it posits the notion of  a deity without an individual existence, such as seeing the universe as 'god'.  Please correct me if I'm in error. That sounds like an argument for for first cause. 

Can it not be argued that defining reality as divine is so broad as to be meaningless? I am often in awe of natural beauty, and indeed of my notion of life as an 'essence'. It's my position that the meaning of life is itself. I don't mean in a crude egocentric sense, but in the sense of the vast numbers of ways life manages to replicate itself.   This suggest but does not infer a prime cause or causes. For me, life and reality just are. A satisfying explanation might be nice, but I don't require one. I have no problem with saying "I don't know'. 

From wikipedia:

Pantheism is the belief that reality is identical with divinity,[1] or that all-things compose an all-encompassing, immanent god.[2] Pantheist belief does not recognize a distinct personal god,[3] anthropomorphic or otherwise, but instead characterizes a broad range of doctrines differing in forms of relationships between reality and divinity.[4] Pantheistic concepts date back thousands of years, and pantheistic elements have been identified in various religious traditions. The term pantheism was coined by mathematician Joseph Raphson in 1697[5][6] and has since been used to describe the beliefs of a variety of people and organizations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

Hello. I started this thread to see if a pantheist can clear things up for me.
I also would call myself and agnostic atheist and also an ignitist.

People use such words as divine and god and soul, etc. I try to get them to define what those words mean exactly since people tend to use their own imagination in these cases and it means something different for each person.

If someone says that the universe is god, then why isn’t this pencil on my desk not another god? Why call it a god? Why not call it zilbracorvem?
Maybe the pantheist is jealous of the theist? Maybe they want to claim that they also worship some god?

Because if they claim that it is not a personal god and it is not anthropomorphic, then what is it?
I would like to know what god means to them and the wikipedia article was not clear for me.

That’s why I wrote to Belacqua, is all this the brain of the god (just a comment ago)?

Well, that was your first mistake. Bel is a known bullshitter who wouldn't answer your question honestly even if he could...which he cant.

Pantheism is the idea that all of this that we see, everything, not a part of it but all of it together is...appropriately, god. Not some ghost or fairy. Pantheism rejects a transcendent anthropomorphic intervening god...by definition. It's an amusing tick of the english language and the historic development of ideas about the divine.