Whateverist
Active Member
I sometimes get grief from Christians for saying I do not think God can be a being in its own right or anything like a human. To my mind, doing so seeks to give honor to God but actually exalts ourselves beyond our merit.
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do all Pan-ists hold "God" as a placeholder name for something beyond our reckoning, as I do?
- Thread starter Whateverist
- Start date
vulcanlogician
Well-Known Member
I personally don't.
But, I do admit that there are things beyond our reckoning. And, if I have my Spinozist hat on at a given moment, I might agree that those "unreckonable things" are a part of God. But I want to say that even the "reckonable" things are God if I might be allowed to be a saccharine pantheist for a moment. "The moon, the stars, and the sun," for example.
(I feel like I gotta quote Lennon 'cause I don't want to keep bringing up Thoreau and Walt Whitman.)
But, I do admit that there are things beyond our reckoning. And, if I have my Spinozist hat on at a given moment, I might agree that those "unreckonable things" are a part of God. But I want to say that even the "reckonable" things are God if I might be allowed to be a saccharine pantheist for a moment. "The moon, the stars, and the sun," for example.
(I feel like I gotta quote Lennon 'cause I don't want to keep bringing up Thoreau and Walt Whitman.)