Deism! (and pantheism and Pandeism, and polypanendeism...)

[Darth]

DP and Cinjin. Questions:

Agnostic deism: So it's a gut/intuition/instinct thing, I get that. And you're agnostic in that you conceed we can't (yet?) know. It would then be reasonable to assume that we can't know the attributes of the deity either. But again, the belief, what do you guys believe is the case in regards to its power (infinite, or only powerful enough to create this universe), location (watching the universe, gone off elsewhere...) and it's motives? Or at least your speculations on what you think is most likely, assuming deism of some sort is true.

What are you open to in terms agnosticism and belief in regards to the more specific variants like Polydeism, pandeism, panendeism polypandeism & polypanendiesm...? (pandeism = the creator deity created the universe by becoming it, pan- = the whole (nature/universe); -en- means the whole universe, plus some; poly- of course means multiple deities; so polypanendeism would be the belief that multiple creator deities created the universe by becoming it, but not entirely, there was x amount of the deities which didn't become the universe)*. I personally found panendeism and polypanendeism to be the most convincing (still do, but don't believe it. Agnostic adeist [and apandeist...] gnostic atheist)

Hows acceptance of deists wherever it is that you are? Better than atheists no doubt, but still...

*explanations won't be for DP and Cinjin I wouldn't think.

What's you're thoughts on pantheism?

edit: Sorry for misspelling your name =(. If it makes you feel better I never remember anybodies name, so to have remembered it well enough to have misspelled it is actually a great honour!

[DeistPaladin]

But again, the belief, what do you guys believe is the case in regards to its power (infinite, or only powerful enough to create this universe),

Powerful enough to get the ball rolling. An all powerful deity wouldn't need to rely on the mechanic of evolution but could create everything as desired. Then again, the "omni" words are so prone to paradox.

location (watching the universe, gone off elsewhere...)

Not sure. I don't think that God has a personal relationship with us or is watching us now. The scale of the universe is such that the Creator might not be aware of us on an individual level (see my cultivated bacteria cell in the dish analogy).

and it's motives? Or at least your speculations on what you think is most likely, assuming deism of some sort is true.

Perhaps reflecting our own motivations to create. Maybe we're a chip off the old block in that we're not content with just existing. We want to create things almost for its own sake.

What are you open to in terms agnosticism and belief in regards to the more specific variants like Polydeism, pandeism, panendeism polypandeism & polypanendiesm...?
Regarding pantheism and pandeism, there are actually two variants I've encountered:

"Scientific pantheists" believe the God is the universe but this "god" isn't conscious. This seems like atheism with category confusion to me.

Traditional pantheists (or whatever the proper term is) believe that the universe does have a collective conscious will. I have two problems with this view. First, how can you have consciousness without a brain or a brain analog? Also, how does the collective will differ from the will of the component parts, like you or me?

Hows acceptance of deists wherever it is that you are? Better than atheists no doubt, but still...

Christians can't tell the difference any more than I can distinguish different brands of Protestantism. I'm to the point where I don't even correct anyone who says I'm an atheist.

[Cinjin]

As usual, I'm in agreement with Paladin. Although he's more eloquent than I, I have found that our deistic views are nearly identical on many levels. That being the case, all I can really respond with is:

What he said.

[Anymouse]

But again, the belief, what do you guys believe is the case in regards to its power (infinite, or only powerful enough to create this universe),

Powerful enough to get the ball rolling. An all powerful deity wouldn't need to rely on the mechanic of evolution but could create everything as desired. Then again, the "omni" words are so prone to paradox.

But all-powerful doesn't mean such a being couldn't rely on evolution if that deity wanted to.

[Ashendant]

Maybe he was just bored and decided that he wanted some DRAMAS, if i was god i would totally make this world to laugh at all the DRAMA in it

[DeistPaladin]

Maybe he was just bored and decided that he wanted some DRAMAS, if i was god i would totally make this world to laugh at all the DRAMA in it

Being all powerful would have to make existence boring.

[Darth]

Maybe he was just bored and decided that he wanted some DRAMAS, if i was god i would totally make this world to laugh at all the DRAMA in it

Being all powerful would have to make existence boring.

Unless you had the power to make it otherwise.

Oooooooooh! Mind blown!

Were those complaints just about pantheism, or pandeism as well?

[Cinjin]

Maybe he was just bored and decided that he wanted some DRAMAS, if i was god i would totally make this world to laugh at all the DRAMA in it

Being all powerful would have to make existence boring.

So true.
On that note. I once met another agnostic deist who had a theory that God was actually the result of the creation of the Universe, rather than it's creator. He theorized that God came into realization of his own existence in the same way Artificial Intelligence would - by realizing it's own self. Then of course, finding himself extremely powerful, and bored, he began creating worlds and humans and who knows, civilizations all over the universe.

What I found most interesting about this theory is that it explained a lot of the imperfections that we see in nature, it made evolution far more compatible with a deity, and of course, allows the believers to credit God with the occasional amazing spectacle of nature. Obviously, this theory is as improvable as any other, but I found it interesting. He elaborated more, but at this point I will digress - as I am not sure that anyone even cares.

[Arcos Plage]

I have been summoned to this thread by Google Alerts to speak of Deism and Pantheism and Pandeism, and possibly Panendeism -- and why not?

---

But again, the belief, what do you guys believe is the case in regards to its power (infinite, or only powerful enough to create this universe),

Powerful enough to get the ball rolling. An all powerful deity wouldn't need to rely on the mechanic of evolution but could create everything as desired. Then again, the "omni" words are so prone to paradox.

I think there is necessarily a bigger picture here, my friend. Naturally, if we presume a created Universe, we must assume that its Creator was powerful enough to bring it into being; and we can not logically assume that it had one jot more power than that (the typical theistic arguments supposing an 'infinite' deity with all manner of paradoxically unlimited powers amount to so much intellectual masturbation; sadly the payoff is only in their minds). But once we establish the supposition of sufficient power and intellect to create that which is observed, we must move to motivation, for an entity capable of creating a rational Universe must possess some degree of rationality, and so may be presumed to possess a rational motivation for so creating, esentially a need which is fulfilled by the effort. Hence, Pandeism, which builds the need back into the act, supposing that whatever need an entity of that sort would possess would be one best met by its existence as a Universe in which the sort of things go on which go on in ours -- natural processses leading to the creation of heavy elements, complex chemicals, life, evolution, intelligence, technology, and perhaps some greatly advanced future stages along our own path which we can not yet have an inkling of. Since an omnipotent being would not need to create anything to achieve any ends, and a lone superpotent being of the sort capable of creating a Universe would sorely lack the knowledge of being other than a lone being, this seems the most logical motivation for Creation (and is surprisingly reflected in some of the most ancient religious texts, those of Hinduism).

[Darth]

I have been summoned to this thread by Google Alerts to speak of Deism and Pantheism and Pandeism, and possibly Panendeism -- and why not?

---

But again, the belief, what do you guys believe is the case in regards to its power (infinite, or only powerful enough to create this universe),

Powerful enough to get the ball rolling. An all powerful deity wouldn't need to rely on the mechanic of evolution but could create everything as desired. Then again, the "omni" words are so prone to paradox.

I think there is necessarily a bigger picture here, my friend. Naturally, if we presume a created Universe, we must assume that its Creator was powerful enough to bring it into being; and we can not logically assume that it had one jot more power than that (the typical theistic arguments supposing an 'infinite' deity with all manner of paradoxically unlimited powers amount to so much intellectual masturbation; sadly the payoff is only in their minds). But once we establish the supposition of sufficient power and intellect to create that which is observed, we must move to motivation, for an entity capable of creating a rational Universe must possess some degree of rationality, and so may be presumed to possess a rational motivation for so creating, esentially a need which is fulfilled by the effort. Hence, Pandeism, which builds the need back into the act, supposing that whatever need an entity of that sort would possess would be one best met by its existence as a Universe in which the sort of things go on which go on in ours -- natural processses leading to the creation of heavy elements, complex chemicals, life, evolution, intelligence, technology, and perhaps some greatly advanced future stages along our own path which we can not yet have an inkling of. Since an omnipotent being would not need to create anything to achieve any ends, and a lone superpotent being of the sort capable of creating a Universe would sorely lack the knowledge of being other than a lone being, this seems the most logical motivation for Creation (and is surprisingly reflected in some of the most ancient religious texts, those of Hinduism).

Pretty much why I went for panendeism over deism. The pandeistic god/s's motives are easier to explain, and any motive suggested for deism would be better explained by pandeism. (IMO!!!)