God, Energy and Matter

[EgoDeath]

My connection is that we think of God as being eternal - always existed and always will.  I look into science and discover that energy and matter can not be created or destroyed, giving it an eternal quality which it shares with God.  Pantheists believe that the universe is God.  In this case matter would be God, and energy could be viewed as his creative force and what keeps the universe in existence.

Who ever said that god is eternal? Where did you get that information?

So your claim is that all matter is god? How exactly does that work? Is my chair god?

I think I answered this above.  It was my own musing.  I was coming with an example in which faith and nature were in agreement and soliciting comments.

Okay, so basically you have no real basis to say what you're saying, other than faith, correct?

i'm thinking that, if the pantheist view is correct, then God is energy and he is the effects of energy.  Like God, the universe is eternal in it's purest form.  Therefore are God and the universe one in the same?  I make the possible connection because I'm a theist.

Saying, "if the pantheist view is correct" is a big leap. Who ever said the pantheists were correct? I'm not sure I think they are/were.

And, I don't know. Some people claim that god is "outside of the universe." Whatever that means. Why should anyone take your word over theirs? Or vice-versa, for that matter?

[The Grand Nudger]

I've plugged this book before, but, some really fine lines have to be drawn to confine pantheism and prevent it from contradicting it's own self defined premise.  A Religion of Nature.  Crosby.  There's a difference between the universe being god, pantheism- and nature being metaphysically ultimate, which is not pantheism at all.  Lek has been asserting that the attributes commonly given to his god describe (roughly) some natural x.  Not that the natural x's are a god.  He concludes as much, sure....but that's because Lek is a very....very sloppy thinker when it comes to all things G-O-D.

For lack of a better umbrella term to describe this, he's describing crosby's religion of nature, religious naturalism. Not pantheism. In religious naturalism, there are no gods. In pantheism, there is at least one god, lol. That's why it's got the -theism- tacked on at the end, there.

[EgoDeath]

I get what he is trying to say, I was just attempting to get him to play the record through so he could see how silly this assertion is.

[The Grand Nudger]

The assertions of religious naturalism aren't silly.  That's pretty much how this rational religion stuff works.  We pick something not silly as a point of reference for our silly beliefs. I do the same with MREs.

Theyre all tuna bricks. It's the texture and consistency, combined with the fact that all of the slices were "off". Those two articles are true, and not silly.


Lek describes religious naturalism as a point of reference, then calls it pantheism, because he's a theist..as he mentioned.  It gets him a step closer to his own beliefs (he thinks). It doesn't. Religious naturalism is a complete and unequivocal rejection of theism (and the supernatural as a category) in any form.

[EgoDeath]

Well, it's silly to me. So I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

Do you see?

[The Grand Nudger]

Not really.  I'm sure that you and I can come up with a list of propositions which arent silly on the one hand, and identify a list of propositions that are, on the other.  Even in leks posts.  I'll break the thrust down in that order below.  Were hearing the back end of one of eddie izzards punchlines.

Comments on the nature and existence of energy. (not silly)

....and this reminds me of our lord jesus.

Ipso facto god comments. (silly)

---

People have mis-attributed the metaphysical primacy of nature for a gods properties  -Religious Naturalism.  (not silly).

....and this reminds me of our lord jesus.

The universe is (like) a god.  -Pantheism.  (silly).

Leks negotiating with reality, and us. Trying to find an acceptable middle ground between his theism, and fact.

[EgoDeath]

To me, citing the nature of things and calling that nature god is silly. Where do they connect the gap? Why even call it god? Their pre-existing notion that there is a god is what's allowing them to form this opinion; they're not just coming up with this out of nowhere, right?

All religious naturalists are doing is using pre-existing concepts of the nature of things around us and combining it with their preconceived notions of god or "spirituality" to create some more palatable version of religion.

If, however, by religious naturalist you mean someone who is fascinated by nature and claims to derive a sense of spirituality from it... Then... Okay? I still don't see the need to add spirituality into mix, but okay.

[Deesse23]

God is bacon sandwich!

[EgoDeath]

God is bacon sandwich!

Bacon can be neither created nor destroyed... Therefore GAWD

[The Grand Nudger]

To me, citing the nature of things and calling that nature god is silly. Where do they connect the gap? Why even call it god? Their pre-existing notion that there is a god is what's allowing them to form this opinion; they're not just coming up with this out of nowhere, right?

All religious naturalists are doing is using pre-existing concepts of the nature of things around us and combining it with their preconceived notions of god or "spirituality" to create some more palatable version of religion.

If, however, by religious naturalist you mean someone who is fascinated by nature and claims to derive a sense of spirituality from it... Then... Okay? I still don't see the need to add spirituality into mix, but okay.

Religious naturalism explicitly rejects god and spirituality, of any kind.  It rejects the very notions as a misattribution. No god, no animating force, no spirit. Just nature, metaphysically ultimate.

I do get why you think the bit seems silly. The points of reference, though, arent. Those are legit...and even the nuttiest believer is conceptually leaning on a more legitimate piece of data than their own ridiculous beliefs. More legitimate even by their own reckoning, lol.