Isn’t pantheism the same thing as atheism?

[The Grand Nudger]

Sure, an intelligence™...however constructed.... would be an example of a personal force, entity, or being. If the universe were an intelligence, that would fit pantheism.

[HappySkeptic]

When I think of a God or gods, which is what any kind of theism implies, I think of a form of being with a mind and willfully directed powers.  Without those attributes, you are talking about some mechanical force or forces.

That being the case, I think of pantheism as necessitating that the universe as a whole has a mind and a will.  I don't know of any atheists who also believe that about it.

Pantheism - God is all things, and all things are God.

I think Pantheists do believe that there is some sort of "potential" or "purpose" inherent in the universe.  However, I don't think they see it as an active intelligence, but rather see intelligence as something that evolves with the universe.  We are part of God, and our intelligence is important to the ongoing evolution of God/The-Universe.

Some may, however, have New Age ideas.

A pantheist will see the divine in the connections that exist within nature.

[Alan V]

When I think of a God or gods, which is what any kind of theism implies, I think of a form of being with a mind and willfully directed powers.  Without those attributes, you are talking about some mechanical force or forces.

That being the case, I think of pantheism as necessitating that the universe as a whole has a mind and a will.  I don't know of any atheists who also believe that about it.

Pantheism - God is all things, and all things are God.

I think Pantheists do believe that there is some sort of "potential" or "purpose" inherent in the universe.  However, I don't think they see it as an active intelligence, but rather see intelligence as something that evolves with the universe.  We are part of God, and our intelligence is important to the ongoing evolution of God/The-Universe.

Some may, however, have New Age ideas.

A pantheist will see the divine in the connections that exist within nature.

Per Google: "pan·the·ism: 1. a doctrine which identifies God with the universe, or regards the universe as a manifestation of God.  2. worship that admits or tolerates all gods."

Also: "God: 1. (in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.  2. (in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity.

So as long as you are using the words "pantheism" and "God," and are going by standard definitions, you are going to have to consider the pantheistic God as a superhuman being rather than a series of mechanical laws running the universe.

Of course, people will still believe whatever they want.

Here are a few more related terms from Wikipedia:

Panentheism was formally coined in Germany in the 19th century in an attempt to offer a philosophical synthesis between traditional theism and pantheism, stating that God is substantially omnipresent in the physical universe but also exists "apart from" or "beyond" it as its Creator and Sustainer.  Thus panentheism separates itself from pantheism, positing the extra claim that God exists above and beyond the world as we know it. The line between pantheism and panentheism can be blurred depending on varying definitions of God, so there have been disagreements when assigning particular notable figures to pantheism or panentheism.

Pandeism is another word derived from pantheism, and is characterized as a combination of reconcilable elements of pantheism and deism. It assumes a Creator-deity that is at some point distinct from the universe and then transforms into it, resulting in a universe similar to the pantheistic one in present essence, but differing in origin.

Panpsychism is the philosophical view held by many pantheists that consciousness, mind, or soul is a universal feature of all things. Some pantheists also subscribe to the distinct philosophical views hylozoism (or panvitalism), the view that everything is alive, and its close neighbor animism, the view that everything has a soul or spirit.

[HappySkeptic]

Per Google: "pan·the·ism: 1. a doctrine which identifies God with the universe, or regards the universe as a manifestation of God.  2. worship that admits or tolerates all gods."

Also: "God: 1. (in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.  2. (in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity.

So as long as you are using the words "pantheism" and "God," and are going by standard definitions, you are going to have to consider the pantheistic God as a superhuman being rather than a series of mechanical laws.

Of course, people will still believe whatever they want.

There is no "standard" definition of God.  A Pantheist does not believe in the Christian God, or the Hebrew God, or Norse Gods, or any standard superhuman concept of God.

Pantheism isn't that far different from "a reverence for nature".  It sees divine in the connections between all things, and sees intelligence as a particularly special expression of the universe.

Whether a Pantheist adds other attributes to the Universe such as "it listens to me", or "it responds to desires and prayer" is beyond the requirements of being a Pantheist.  As I said, some may have New Age ideas given by woo-peddlers such as Eckhart Tolle, but not all.

[The Grand Nudger]

That's like saying whether or not a given christian believes in a literal christ is beyond the requirements of christianity. True in practice, but not in categorization.

There very much are standard definitions and terms for different types of gods that people have posited. Pantheism. If the universe is not godlike in the manner shared by, say, monotheism and henotheism and polytheism and atheism then we're not talking pantheism - but a simple religion of nature. That's why people confuse pantheists for atheists, because they've confused themselves for pantheists.

The word literally means that everything amounts to a capital g God. As opposed to panentheism, which means that everything - plus x- amounts to, or deism, with it's little g god that isn't presently active in the world. Pantheism is the notion that theistic gods can be made of a series of mechanical laws. As a postulate, it's not wildly off base. We're beings, and we're made of a series of mechanical laws, after all. All that it rounds down to is whether or not a person believes that the whole universe can amount to an entity like us.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I don't think I could ever be a pan-theist. I mean, I like and appreciate my cookware, but it'd be a stretch to call it 'worship'.

Boru

[Angrboda]

I don't think I could ever be a pan-theist. I mean, I like and appreciate my cookware, but it'd be a stretch to call it 'worship'.

Boru

You're apparently not buying the right cookware.

[vulcanlogician]

I don't think I could ever be a pan-theist. I mean, I like and appreciate my cookware, but it'd be a stretch to call it 'worship'.

Boru

You're apparently not buying the right cookware.

Boru might not be buying the right cookware. But he has impeccable taste when it comes to taco holders.

[Ferrocyanide]

There is no "standard" definition of God.  A Pantheist does not believe in the Christian God, or the Hebrew God, or Norse Gods, or any standard superhuman concept of God.

Pantheism isn't that far different from "a reverence for nature".  It sees divine in the connections between all things, and sees intelligence as a particularly special expression of the universe.

Whether a Pantheist adds other attributes to the Universe such as "it listens to me", or "it responds to desires and prayer" is beyond the requirements of being a Pantheist.  As I said, some may have New Age ideas given by woo-peddlers such as Eckhart Tolle, but not all.

I agree.
A god is many things to many people.
One guy says that it is a brain and transcends nature.
Another guy says he is love.
Another guy says he is peace.
Another guy says that we are all pieces of the god and all together, we are the god.

The list goes on.

I think this happens because no observation is made. There is just a vague concept.

For example, if a person is walking around the forest, they might encounter a tree.
This tree might have a certain fruit.
The fruit has a roundish shape and is orange so he decides to call it an orange.
If another guy calls this fruit by another name, it doesn’t matter since it is possible for both to observe the same fruit and these 2 people can synchronize.

They write a report about this plant. They bring a sample to their homebase. It gets cataloged and other experts look into as well.
The word orange gets added to your dictionaries, encyclopedias, with pictures.

There is no confusion about what an orange is, even when thousands of years have past.
Everyone, from multiple generations synchronize as to what an orange is.

But when it comes to gods, people can’t synchronize, since no observation is being made.

[Alan V]

Per Google: "God: 1. (in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.  2. (in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity.

There is no "standard" definition of God.

Of course there are standard definitions. I just offered two for "God" as well as several for "Pantheism". Look them up.

However, if by this you mean people have all sorts of additional attributes they include in their God-concepts, that is most certainly true. But "God" is a family-resemblance term that requires a certain number of shared characteristics, even if it is entirely imaginary, like a vampire.