RE: A pantheistic argument.
November 1, 2012 at 12:55 pm
(This post was last modified: November 1, 2012 at 12:59 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
Yes, and this "sexed up atheism" that Dawkins described in TGD - naturalistic pantheism - is what I am referring to. I'm not talking about an intelligent or even conscious universe.
But, more specifically, I actually didn't define it either way when it comes to intelligence/consciousness, that was simply irrelevant to my definition. I'm saying that god is merely the universe because when I conclude "the universe is god" I had already defined god with properties that lead to god being merely the universe.
But, more specifically, I actually didn't define it either way when it comes to intelligence/consciousness, that was simply irrelevant to my definition. I'm saying that god is merely the universe because when I conclude "the universe is god" I had already defined god with properties that lead to god being merely the universe.