firedragon
Veteran Member
This is no new question, and many in the past have tried to answer it in their own way. I would like to see how our colleagues here would be able to address this as a logical problem.
Pantheism in its very simplest idea is "God and nature are one". Philosophically there are very lengthy definitions and explanations but we can keep it short.
Predominantly, Hindu's have this as their metaphysical, religious stand. To a lesser degree, Muslim & Jewish thinkers, and others have also thought about it and embraced it as their theological position although there maybe variants in their propositions. Sufi's are Muslims who take this position.
The problem is this.
1. God is nature.
2. God created nature.
3. Thus God had to have existed before creating nature.
4. Thus God cannot be nature.
I know there are responses to this problem available right now but I believe that would change pantheism into something else. I would like to hear your thoughts.
This is not an internal criticism of pantheism but an external criticism of creationists who adopt pantheism.
Peace.
Pantheism in its very simplest idea is "God and nature are one". Philosophically there are very lengthy definitions and explanations but we can keep it short.
Predominantly, Hindu's have this as their metaphysical, religious stand. To a lesser degree, Muslim & Jewish thinkers, and others have also thought about it and embraced it as their theological position although there maybe variants in their propositions. Sufi's are Muslims who take this position.
The problem is this.
1. God is nature.
2. God created nature.
3. Thus God had to have existed before creating nature.
4. Thus God cannot be nature.
I know there are responses to this problem available right now but I believe that would change pantheism into something else. I would like to hear your thoughts.
This is not an internal criticism of pantheism but an external criticism of creationists who adopt pantheism.
Peace.
Last edited: