My view and reasons for them. Atheist and Christians welcome here. (short)

[Quick]

Sure but consider how we have a direct impact on things separate from what is

Everything is directly or indirectly connected to everything else so therefore the notion of any type of separation is a false one
For even if there are other universes and we inhabit a multiverse what exists between them is a part of the fabric of reality too

The fact that everything is connected, is a reason why I hold the beliefs I do. When I talk about separation, context is important. It should be obvious what I mean, but instead you try and apply a grand principle to the dichotomy I used to make a point. You didn't address that point I made, you stated that on a grand scale my premise is wrong. When looking at things there are orders of magnitude. You used a level of magnitude that doesn't fit the situation.

I think that is a perfectly reasonable answer. The only thing I will say is that you probably changed and started playing the dance when you did find out what it was called.

What...on earth...are you talking about, lol?

I started off by validating what you said and then went on to take about how I saw thing. You are not doing the same. What do you think I am talking about?

I find myself in a state  of reevaluation knowing that what you are saying here about your beliefs is probably true. My only problem there is that I question where the point that your learned what it was called if you are an atheist since I think that is a pretty common belief which would be difficult to not know about.

I cant recall when I first heard the term atheist and said..hm, oh yeah.  Why would I know anything about atheism in a "historically" believing world?  You know we non-believers aren;t grown on atheist farms or anything like that...right?

Again, you make the same mistake as the person I replied to first. As an order of magnitude, looking at time and seeing that historically, as in, the history of humans, which is a much larger time frame than the time frame used to say in recent history of humans in relation to the length of time we have been alive, these are two different things and you have made a misuse of magnitude.

And spare me your facetiousness, ofc I know atheists don't grow on farms. This comment tells me you are not approaching this conversation in a effort to understand.

What makes you say I am automatically a hypocrite based on my beliefs? I am not saying those things lead to things that are miraculous or divine. 

Fairly simple, really..you let loose a minor bitchfest about how atheists™ weren;t thinking for themselves..a common bit of nonsense for the faithful...then immediately assured yourself (I guess?) that you weren't a hypocrite...directly before listing off not only a common belief, but a common set of rationalizations for that belief.  Now...sure...sure, you could have arrived at the exact script of every other nutter in existence, by enormous coincidence alone...in a "historically" believing world.........but if you already find it unlikely that some minority viewpoint is thinking for itself...the likelihood of your scenario being representative of anything other than groupthinking hypocrisy must be even less than that.

Right?

Well, that's not my stance and that is not what I am saying. If you read my other comments in this thread, I give context to what I mean when I talk about being in a dance. My opinion is informed based on what I know, ofc. Part of what I know is different viewpoints on the belief in God or gods. But I am not really following other pantheists/agnostics to see what they believe so that it can inform me on what I believe, which, when/if I did, then I would be playing the same dance that everyone else is.

I don't believe many people thought up the idea there is no God on their own since historically speaking, humans have believed a God exists.

What about 40,000 years of prehistory and other species of humans prior to homo sapiens sapiens? What about homo erectus?  What about australopithecines? What about other modern non-human apes like chimps that share over 98% of our DNA?  

What about the fact that even in the year 2018 we're not born believing in God either? Belief in God is no more natural than celebrating Halloween.

Well, then I would say the entity first has to have the actual capacity to make a decision on whether they believe in God or not. Animals do not have that capacity.

I don't believe many people thought up the idea there is no God on their own...

It comes naturally when you listen to wild-ass claims about things like people coming back from the dead, magic trees, and Talking Snakes™ and then realize, much to your shock, that some people believe those things are real.

Again, I would say this is believing in an antithesis.

I'm not religious.

How does your pantheism differ from atheism in any way in regards to what you actually believe? Is your pantheism a difference of belief or just a re-labeling of something that isn't a deity that everybody already believes exists (such as the universe)?

How does my believes differ from an atheists? We I have been talking about what I believe in this thread. Measure that with what an atheist believes and you will have your answer.
I am not very quick to say what category my beliefs fall into because I don't think it's important. In this way, I would say, no, it's not just a relabeling of something else.

Well, nothing happens in a vacuum. This goes for pretty much everything. Especially in the case of Victor Stenger's "God, the Failed Hypothesis" credible evidence was presented. Believing credible evidence is just basic. I suppose I could have tried to do all that research on my own, but I didn't have to. With anything, nobody starts from square one.

Now sometimes, charismatic people can convince you of things that aren't true, but I don't think this is the case here. Even if I had a  degree in Evolutionary Biology, I would have had to accept facts based on credible evidence to get to that point.

I mean, I could have gone back to being a Christian if I wanted to. In some ways my life would have been easier.

I am not sure how what you are saying conflicts with what I have said. Could you clarify?

I do not mean the God of the bible. I am very very agnostic towards what the bible says as a matter of fact. I am talking about my own subjective interpretation of how some things appear to be apart of something bigger than oneself and that this could be interpreted as the will of a greater being that is intentionally ambiguous in its dichotomies because it is very hard to see it's limitations and/or tangible observability.

What makes you believe that your subjective opinion maps, in an accurate way, to reality?

Humans live our day to day lives relying almost exclusively by inference and induction. This works well because, for the most part, today is almost exactly like yesterday, and tomorrow. We are overly proud of this ability, because it works so well, until it doesn't. It doesn't tend to work, with regards to existential claims.

The core problem, is that our minds act like "hyperactive agency detectors" and "hyperactive pattern seekers". We try to find patterns, where they may not exist. And we try to find agency where it probably doesn't exist. We do this, because we evolved to survive on the African plains, not ponder the universe.

So, how do you discern the whether your position (that, 'some things appear to be apart of something bigger than oneself'), is actually true, or that is just your brain using its natural proclivity to find patterns and agency where there is none?

Wouldn't using demonstrable and falsifiable evidence, reasoned argument, and valid and sound logic be more reliable, than depending on your subjective interpretation?

I mean after all, some people use their 'subjective interpretations' to come to the conclusion that: 1000's of people are possessed by demons, that all things are inhabited and animated by spirits, that crystal healing is effective, that Tarot card readings are accurate, that Jinn exist in middle eastern deserts,  etc, etc, etc...

I can't be sure my subjective mappings of reality are any more accurate than anyone else's.