Belief statement of the world pantheist movement

[Twinkle]

Originally Posted by *oonagh*

hmmm...well, there are plenty of pantheists participating on this thread. so, what you seek is right in front of you.

it is my understanding, as a pantheist, that pantheism is not an orthodoxy nor is it an orthopraxy. it is a belief system (the belief being that everything that exists *is* god, divinity or source or whatever you would like to call that energy) with its basis in science and philosophy.

it seems to me that people have a tendency, as i know you know, of trying to label things and categorize things.

No one answered until you came along. I thank you for that.

I try to understand, and so it helps me if I have a frame of reference to work with. In this case we have some options like orthopraxy, orthodoxy, philosophy, or as you put it " a belief system with its basis in science and philosophy."

So, would you say then that there is a correct belief in order to be a Pantheist?

I'm guessing that there would need to be a belief that all things are of the Divine. I suppose then that ultimately that would be a *correct belief*.

The difference is what each Pantheist chooses to call the Divine.

Am I getting this so far?

[TygerTyger]

Originally Posted by Twinkle

No one answered until you came along. I thank you for that.

I try to understand, and so it helps me if I have a frame of reference to work with. In this case we have some options like orthopraxy, orthodoxy, philosophy, or as you put it " a belief system with its basis in science and philosophy."

So, would you say then that there is a correct belief in order to be a Pantheist?

I'm guessing that there would need to be a belief that all things are of the Divine. I suppose then that ultimately that would be a *correct belief*.

The difference is what each Pantheist chooses to call the Divine.

Am I getting this so far?

There are other posts that are relevant to what you’re asking.

Pantheism is based upon a very simple principle; everything that exists is god.

The word ‘god’ may be substituted by other such titles as ‘source’, ‘nature’ or ‘divinity’ depending upon an individual’s predilections. Some find the connotations of certain words too problematic to work with.

Despite being a simple principle Pantheism can become very complex when applied to the human experience of existence, which is inevitably subjective and limited.

Some also find the lack of structure within Pantheism confusing too as it would appear to lack the expected norms of other human religious constructs. There is no pope nor bible nor priesthood in Pantheism, which is why some commentators do not recognise Pantheism as a religion but term it a belief system. Ultimately this doesn’t matter as it does not relate to the truth held in the simple principle.

[Twinkle]

I get it.

Thank you so much for your response.

Whatever you want to call it - I think it's beautiful.

[green aventurine]

Originally Posted by TygerTyger

Pantheism is based upon a very simple principle; everything that exists is god.

I'm still working on the morality thing but just to clarify for me is this:

Every single thing that exists is god in its own right?

Or everything that exists as a whole makes/is God?

Thinking about it now and from what Oonagh was saying about the difference between animism and pantheism I'm guessing it is the former although I think I've been getting confused and thinking it was the latter.

[TygerTyger]

For me, everything that exists is god.

God is the universe and the universe is all that exists. There is only one substance from which everything is made and that substance is god.

I can see, however, where the term ‘god’ might lead into misconceptions and hence why some people avoid using it. I don’t see god as an individual person. I’m not even sure if the term ‘being’, as we would understand it, is useful in this context. Indeed, I’m not convinced that god is any more aware of our existence than the average person is aware of the individual skin cell positioned on the end of their big toe.

[green aventurine]

Originally Posted by TygerTyger

For me, everything that exists is god.

Originally Posted by TygerTyger

God is the universe and the universe is all that exists. There is only one substance from which everything is made and that substance is god.

I can see, however, where the term ‘god’ might lead into misconceptions and hence why some people avoid using it. I don’t see god as an individual person. I’m not even sure if the term ‘being’, as we would understand it, is useful in this context. Indeed, I’m not convinced that god is any more aware of our existence than the average person is aware of the individual skin cell positioned on the end of their big toe.

Okay, I'm still trying to put something together. Which of the following (if any) exist in your framework?

• justice
• what orange juice tastes like to me
• alternate universes
• numbers
• individual people/persons
• the scientific method and logic
• tables
• gravity
• brains
• planets
• mass
• space (as in height/width etc)/time

I'm assuming alternate universes (where Hitler won the war or the speed of light is 5 mph) don't exist, for example.

[*oonagh*]

Originally Posted by TygerTyger

For me, everything that exists is god.

God is the universe and the universe is all that exists. There is only one substance from which everything is made and that substance is god.

I can see, however, where the term ‘god’ might lead into misconceptions and hence why some people avoid using it. I don’t see god as an individual person. I’m not even sure if the term ‘being’, as we would understand it, is useful in this context. Indeed, I’m not convinced that god is any more aware of our existence than the average person is aware of the individual skin cell positioned on the end of their big toe.

my dear, tyger, you always type what's in my head

[*oonagh*]

Originally Posted by green aventurine

Okay, I'm still trying to put something together. Which of the following (if any) exist in your framework?

• justice
• what orange juice tastes like to me
• alternate universes
• numbers
• individual people/persons
• the scientific method and logic
• tables
• gravity
• brains
• planets
• mass
• space (as in height/width etc)/time

I'm assuming alternate universes (where Hitler won the war or the speed of light is 5 mph) don't exist, for example.

i know this is for tyger, but i can't help but throw in.

all of it. if it exists, it is god. we are unsure if alternate universes exist. however, if they do they are god.

[green aventurine]

I was going to get back to these later but I will respond to some of them now

Originally Posted by *oonagh*

i understand that. however, i don't agree (shock <g>).

lol! It had to happen sometime


i don't think we are attributes of the universe.

i also think that time, space, matter, energy, thought, etc. is all "stuff" (i'm no scientist and therefore have no idea what *kind* of stuff nor do i care) and all divinity.

I misunderstood what you meant by this - that was my fault. I thought you were saying all these things were made of different kinds of stuff. I take it what you mean is that space, matter, energy, thought etc are all different types of non-reducible properties of a single stuff/substance.

ie you can have (some of) this single substance with just properties of thought or consciousness (ie a 'soul' floating around with no physical properties) or you can have (some of) this single substance with just properties of matter (ie an unthinking or non-conscious piece of aluminium). In other words thought or consciousness aren't reducible to or reliant on or properties of physical matter/substance

[eta: and also properties of thought or consciousness aren't just another way of talking about physical/material properies]

but instead they're a property of this single neutral substance or god.


while scientific attempts to understand it all is very interesting. in the end, it doesn't really matter (no pun intended).

lol I have sympathies with this view but I'll get back on to it when I start going into how we know what we know and these:

7. We honor reality, and keep our minds open to the evidence of the senses and of science's unending quest for deeper understanding. These are our best means of coming to know the Universe, and on them we base our aesthetic and religious feelings about reality.

8. Every individual has direct access through perception, emotion and meditation to ultimate reality, which is the Universe and Nature. There is no need for mediation by priests, gurus or revealed scriptures.

Originally Posted by *oonagh*

i know this is for tyger, but i can't help but throw in.

My posts and this thread are always for anyone who wants to have a serious/genuine discussion and a laugh at the same time like your good self

all of it.

I suspect for Tyger this would be not the same answer.

if it exists, it is god.

I'll come back to this soon.

we are unsure if alternate universes exist. however, if they do they are god.

Yes, that's fair enough.

[green aventurine]

Okay, the ethics bit of this thread has gone over here:

http://mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?t=226970

I'm going to start a new thread soon, I think, on the metaphysical side of it and get back to some of the things I said I would get back to. I need to have a look at some of the recent threads we've had and put some of that stuff into the new thread.