I have no idea. Do you mean spiritualism as in contact with spirits of the dead?Does anyone have any opinions on whether Panentheism and Spiritualism are compatible?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I have no idea. Do you mean spiritualism as in contact with spirits of the dead?Does anyone have any opinions on whether Panentheism and Spiritualism are compatible?
Isn't panentheism saying that "god" is integrated with the Universe but, unlike pantheism, also outside it?And this may be embarrassing to admit, but my issue with Panentheism is that I'd rather worship a deity of Yin & Yang or Yin, while the Philosophical concept of God has a whole lot of Yang (in my opinion).
Something like the universe is part of God, but God is so much more than that. How you put it seems to be about my take on it as well.Isn't panentheism saying that "god" is integrated with the Universe but, unlike pantheism, also outside it?
Being online arguing for or against god(s) is, in itself, can't be done without a certain amount of arrogance.I do read their posts and more than a few get annoyed by the frequent attempts of people who have a belief in God to (apparently deliberately because the point has been explained many times) mischaracterize their lack of belief in deities as a positive statement about something they may not even have bothered to think deeply about let alone express an opinion on.
Is it can't? In itself I think it is can't, but if you think it cannot can I agree that maybe it isn't can. Anyway, I wasn't arguing for or against arguing for or against god - god (if there is one) can fight his (if he is a he) own battles as far as I am concerned - I was simply pointing out that it is not appropriate for a non-atheist to decide what an atheist may or may not believe - and especially about things that are clearly not dictated by the presumption or assumption of atheism - such as physicalism for example. Atheism is not about that, it is simply about not believing in god(s). I don't see what that, in itself, can or cannot, has to do with arrogance. Is it?Being online arguing for or against god(s) is, in itself, can't be done without a certain amount of arrogance.
Like anything, arrogance has its good points and bad. Most people think it's negative but what some people call arrogant others would call "confident". On forums, obviously many people here are set in their beliefs (arrogant, confident, potAto, potahto) otherwise they wouldn't discuss it with others.Is it can't? In itself I think it is can't, but if you think it cannot can I agree that maybe it isn't can.
Dunno - are they? As far as beliefs are concerned, the only thing I'm confident about is that I don't know - and I especially don't know the motives/motivations of others - but I am pretty confident about the definition of the word "atheism" and it don't mean what you said...as Errol Brown sang "no-oh, no, no doubt about it..." it simply means "lacking belief in god(s)".Like anything, arrogance has its good points and bad. Most people think it's negative but what some people call arrogant others would call "confident". On forums, obviously many people here are set in their beliefs (arrogant, confident, potAto, potahto) otherwise they wouldn't discuss it with others.
Which makes you in the top 10% of intelligent people.Dunno - are they? As far as beliefs are concerned, the only thing I'm confident about is that I don't know - and I especially don't know the motives/motivations of others - but I am pretty confident about the definition of the word "atheism" and it don't mean what you said...as Errol Brown sang "no-oh, no, no doubt about it..." it simply means "lacking belief in god(s)".
They assert there is no god(s) or anything beyond the physical
Yes, there are, but that's equivocating of them. They don't believe in a "God" yet they believe in an afterlife, ghosts, reincarnation, blah, blah, blah.That is the majority opinion. But, if I understand ( big IF ) there are Atheists who are spiritual, but the god concept is a problem.
@viole , see I learned something from that massive pointless thread.
"Spiritual" is a rather nebulous term and does not necessarily involve a belief in the after life.Yes, there are, but that's equivocating of them. They don't believe in a "God" yet they believe in an afterlife, ghosts, reincarnation, blah, blah, blah.
Now, if they said they don't believe in the Christian God of the Bible, I'd be first in line to agree with them but that doesn't make either one of us atheists. It just means we don't accept the perception of God as written in the OT...or NT for that matter even though the NT was more about Jesus and, later, Paul.
Agreed, but usually it does involve existence beyond the physical."Spiritual" is a rather nebulous term and does not necessarily involve a belief in the after life.
Yes, there are, but that's equivocating of them. They don't believe in a "God" yet they believe in an afterlife, ghosts, reincarnation, blah, blah, blah.
Now, if they said they don't believe in the Christian God of the Bible, I'd be first in line to agree with them but that doesn't make either one of us atheists. It just means we don't accept the perception of God as written in the OT...or NT for that matter even though the NT was more about Jesus and, later, Paul.
Panentheism is the notion that 'the divine' permeates the universe. For positives, one version of the god of the Stoics was said to do this, and thereby imbue it with (and so explain) motion, warmth, order and 'reason'.1. What are the positives and pitfalls of Panentheism?
There are a number of potential positives. In Christian societies they may include freedom from a doctrine that you're innately sinful, freedom from tithes, and freedom from arbitrary moral views like homophobia ─ though equivalents of those things can be found in certain versions of Christianity.2. What are the positives and pitfalls of Atheism?
The positives seem to be that if you do it right, you can make steady bucks out of the gullible. It's claimed that it provides many people with consolation and reassurance, even though the techniques of the Doris Stokeses and John Edwards of the world have long been a matter of public record.3. What are the positives and pitfalls of Spiritualism?
1. Panentheism - God is being tortued by knowing everything that is going on.1. What are the positives and pitfalls of Panentheism?
2. What are the positives and pitfalls of Atheism?
3. What are the positives and pitfalls of Spiritualism?
Agreed, but usually it does involve existence beyond the physical.
Correct and, usually, both are equally right and equally wrong.Yes. And one person's "spiritual" is another person's "nonsense".
Personal experience. I have had one somewhat "spiritual event" in my life. I do not regard it as strong evidence for the spiritual, but when I ran into a person that did believe in the so called spiritual he merely scoffed. Which is the reaction everyone else had to his claims. Personally I think that we attach to much importance to some events in our lifetimes just because they are not understood. I won't say that the spiritual does not exist. Just that the evidence for it is very very poor.Correct and, usually, both are equally right and equally wrong.
All three have the same pitfall. In fact all beliefs and non-beliefs have the same pitfall. All of them need to be coupled with simple "do no harm" morality.1. What are the positives and pitfalls of Panentheism?
2. What are the positives and pitfalls of Atheism?
3. What are the positives and pitfalls of Spiritualism?
Does anyone have any opinions on whether Panentheism and Spiritualism are compatible?
Whoopee! I had no idea that not knowing was a sign of intelligence (actually that's not true - I knew it all along - which is why I have determined to remain as ignorant as I can about as many subjects as I can not know anything about for as long as possible) - I am also going to use the phrase "I have no bloody idea" much more frequently in conversation - no doubt I'll soon be declared a genius.Which makes you in the top 10% of intelligent people.
There are no "various forms of atheism" - atheism is simply a word that denotes a lack of belief in god(s) - is this interminable conversation turning into an obsessive-compulsive disorder for me I wonder - or is it just too difficult a concept to grasp? There is nothing in the definition of atheism that prevents someone who doesn't believe in god from believing in (for example) idealism or mind/body dualism of some kind...and it doesn't have to be 'supernatural' to be non-physical - someone might believe that 'ideas' or 'consciousness' or 'mind' are non-physical realities and still not believe in the existence of deities...a physicalist would declare them to be realities that 'emerge from' or 'supervene upon' fundamental physical realities, whilst an idealist would say that it is the other way round - that the real world is fundamentally immaterial and that the physical emerges from a fundamentally non-physical reality. Indeed that view has enjoyed a resurgence among prominent scientists in recent decades - partly as a result of the extraordinary success of mathematics and quantum mechanics in explaining how the underlying levels of physical reality seem to work. You don't have to believe in God to accept that the world is fundamentally mathematical rather than material. Either view (materialism or idealism) or even both (dualism) is compatible with atheism because atheism says nothing about whether the fundamental reality is physical or immaterial. I don't think it is 'silly' to hold such a view at all - whether or not I happen to agree.Feel free to define the various forms of atheism. FWIW, think it's silly for a person to declare themselves an atheist yet believe in the supernatural.