Interesting Story

[ghostlighter]

Well I don't know exactly where I would fall in the spectrum. I do NOT believe in any way shape or form that God as espoused by any of the major religions exists. No way. No how. I am absolutly certain that God, in man's preconceived notion, does NOT exist. Now the universe as a whole I believe is an amazing and vast, very vast place. And I entertain the notion that maybe one great (spiritual?) mystery lies behind all of it. Maybe there are forces greater than we can comprehend that links the farthest galaxies in the universe with the way we feel in our bedroom at 3 o' clock on a given Thursday afternoon. So I guess I'd be agnostic. I said in a different post that I DO believe in God as a state of conciousness. But I would more accuratly say that I believe in that state of conciousness that people CALL God, but I don't believe that that state of consciousness IS God. Hopefully I didn't lose you. I am trying to be as clear as I can about a subject that is vague and nebulous. So given what I've said, how would you label me?

[Edwardo Piet]

Well it depends how you define God.

God as a 'state of consciousness' I wouldn't call God I would just call it some kind of spiritual and/or supernatural 'higher order'. As with belief in souls and the afterlife (you can, in theory - have both of those things without a "God" too).

But this comes down to how you define God...and how am I defining God then? Well I define God(s) as the supernatural creator(s) of the universe(s). Of existence itself - God came before everything else. He/she/it is the eternal and 'the creator' he is a supernatural superbeing, an intelligent designer of the universe.

If you don't believe in that then I would define what you are calling God as a 'state of consciousness' as just some kind of spiritual and/or supernatural 'higher order' or 'deeper meaning' of some kind or something like that..

I myself wouldn't call that "God(s)" how I myself, at least define God(s).

E.G I don't believe in God so I'm an atheist. But if I STILL didn't believe in God but believed in eternal solves and the afterlife and a 'higher order' of consciousness within us and the unviverse and some kind of supernatural or spiritual 'deeper meaning' in existence itself... - I woulds still define myself as an atheist because I still wouldn't believe in God(s) as in a supernatural creator(s).

We could, in theory be eternal have an afterlife and have eternal souls and a 'higher consciousness' with 'deeper meaning' might be involved, at work in the universe and/or nature... - but WITHOUT a "GOd" as in a supernatural creator attached to it. So belief in those things would perhaps make you a spiritual atheist of some kind by my definition - or something to that effect.

Perhaps a pantheist? Although with pantheism it's basically atheism only God is used as a metaphor for EVERYTHING - so really there's no difference to God being nothing. As Steven Weinberg said, to paraphrase: "If you can say "God is energy" then you can find God in a lump of coal" - it kind of loses all meaning if EVERYTHING is God - it makes no difference than if NOTHING is. Because basically all you'd be doing is replacing the word 'energy' or 'matter' with God when you felt like it

I don't think I'd call you a pantheist though because you do seem to believe there is a 'deeper meaning' and it isn't simply a metaphor. So I'd stick with saying that I would probably define you as something like a 'spiritual atheist' or something like that - something to that effect. Up to you whether you agree or like the label or not of course...

EvF