Forum
#Topics
+Start a topic
?Search __________________________________

-Log In
-Register
Atheism
Log In to post a reply
141 messages
View: flat \ threaded
________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

hito
hito
1745 posts

Re: Atheism

Kazak wrote:
hito wrote:
Both pantheism and theism are perfectly compatible with evolution, just not Old Testament style fundamentalist Christianity.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theism

"Life on Earth originated and then evolved from a universal common ancestor approximately 3.7 billion years ago." is not compatible with "God as personal, present and active in the governance and organization of the world and the universe." Is God present, or isn't God? BTW, before you even go there, I do not dispute deism and never have, I don't think we'll ever know, it does preclude theism though.


Why is the idea that life evolved from a common ancestor incompatible with an interventionist god. Suppose that interventionist god planted the seed 3.7 billion years ago. Hey presto, you have a god and evolution.
I can make a cake and leave it to go mouldy. It will eventually take a course of its own but I made it. I can come back to that cake and pull a piece off, squash it, set it on fire, whatever. Do you suppose to claim I didn't create the cake? Do you suppose to claim that I didn't set it on its course when I knew that it would go mouldy?
And who are you to set the limits of intervention? It is sure that some Christian claims of a benevolent god are certainly challenged by rape, famine, war, flood etc. but that is not all theism. All one needs is a creator and some capacity to intervene.

The Greatest wrote:


I'm not talking about pantheism. I'm talking about panentheism. And it is different than supernatural theism (man in the sky), which is probably what Kazak means when he says "theism." Each kind of theism is an alternative to the others. You can't lump them together. They mean totally different things.


As for the panentheism or pantheism stuff, it is still some belief in a supernatural power. It is just a subspecies of theism (belief in a god). It seems to get a cushy ride from people who care about the environment because god is in the trees and seas and bees but it is not more plausible than a god sitting on a chair in the clouds. It is not as widely condemned as monotheism - I suspect - because monotheism is linked with nasty Christian bigots, Islamic terrorists and Jewish land grabbers. As it is, many monotheists believe that god is omnipresent (meaning everywhere) and omniscient (all knowing) and omnipotent (all powerful) so it is very similar to these pan theories. Unless you reduce panentheism down to simply being a biological life force, it is still a supernatural belief in a god that is as valid and invalid as any other theism.

Jun 26, 2012, 04:11



________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Topic Outline: