(July 5, 2015 at 8:50 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:(July 5, 2015 at 8:20 pm)Metis Wrote: A deist God has no interest in his creation, it moved on. There is a foricible seperation between man and god in Pops view. Not only that but with his talk of energy he clearly sees God as being the ground of all being.
It seems you didn't know that, as Pops' latest post proves.
It appears you may be right. I keyed on this:
"I believe there is one God who created everything, or at least got the ball rolling."
That reminded me of this definition:
Deism. Deism is actually a form of monotheism, but distinct in character and development. In addition to adopting general monotheism, deists also accept the specific ideas that the single existing god is personal in nature and transcendent from the created universe. However, they reject the idea that this this god is immanent, which is to say presently active in the created universe.
The term pantheism is built upon the Greek roots pan, which means all, and theos, which means god; thus, pantheism is either the belief that the universe is God and worthy of worship, or that God is the sum total of all there is and that the combined substances, forces, and natural laws which we see around us are but manifestations of God.
That's pretty much right, there is a small but increasing number of mostly dissafected Muslims and Christians who use the term for a creator active in the universe but this isn't really what classical or modern (pre-modern know I suppose) deism was ever about. What made it evident to me he didn't mean that was that he posted that this deity seeks reconcilliation with its creation, and that the evil would be reconciled with the evil it itself had created; that suggested an element of a divinely ordained fate if not judgement.
Pantheism in athiest communities tends more to refer to the works of the likes of Bishop Spong, the "atheist bishop" of the American Episcopal Church. His thoughts are certainly miles away from the mainstream but have been provoking debate for several decades now, while not something I personally subscribe to it makes for interesting listening for where Christianity could potentionally (but I think unlikely to) go next. I don't think this is quite what Pop means though and more like your later definition.
