As far as deism being a path of reason, and if one predominantly uses reason they must be a deist, this is a bit of an illusion.
Well, that's not exactly what I meant, I was meaning that if one predominantly uses reason and
experience, to explore spirituality and these two things trump any and all religious doctrine for that individual, the individual may be a Panendeist...and we are talking about Panendeism here, not Deism.
Deism as defined on deism.com:
"Deism is the recognition of a universal creative force greater than that demonstrated by mankind, supported by personal observation of laws and designs in nature and the universe, perpetuated and validated by the innate ability of human reason coupled with the rejection of claims made by individuals and organized religions of having received special divine revelation."
Panendeism on wikipedia:
"Panendeism combines deism with
panentheism, the belief that the universe is part of God, but not all of God. A component of panendeism is "experiential metaphysics" – the idea that a mystical component exists within the framework of panendeism,
allowing the seeker to experience a relationship to Deity through meditation, prayer or some other type of communion.
[69] This is a major departure from classical deism."
Deism Defined, Welcome to Deism, Deist Glossary and Frequently Asked Questions
To conclude God in any form requires something existential going on, a sense if you will of the Divine, and what follows is a series of supporting arguments to support that sense that came before, or outside reason and logic. The experience of God is non-rational, like the sense of being itself. To me, God only enters into reason, once one has experienced God or the Absolute, either before or after.
No, I agree. Panendeism seems to be specifically identified by a tendency to defer to both
experience and reason over any form of religious teachings.
At the point of the Absolute all reason and logic break down in paradoxes, such as saying God is impersonal and personal, existent and non-existent, the One and the Many, formless and form, and so forth. Personally, that's why I like panentheism because it allows for and embraces that nondual paradox. It embraces reason and the non-rational, fully. God transcends God.
I agree, that's why I think that this label may suit me better. It specifies certain things that Panentheism does not.
That's exactly how I view reality, and I have experienced the Absolute. I was just wondering if this might be a more suitable label for me. Obviously, any label like this ultimately fails to perfectly identify what it is pointing to. It seems to me that Panendeism is more specific in it's description than Panentheism.
I was basing this partly on this site:
http://panendeism.webs.com/
and partly through the wiki article here
Deism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As I said at the beginning though, labels are just labels. My beliefs and views have not changed, I simply might have found a more appropriate label for them. Thank you for your input.