Infidelettante

In the sense that we are part of the universe and are conscious the universe is conscious. Is the universe a disrete consciousness as we each are? No, I don't think so. I do not think there is any reason to rule out the possibility of a conscious universe however. I just don't require it as part my present belief system.

JV

Spider

I always found panetheism a more agreeable theology than pantheism.

While pantheism states "Everything is God, and God is Everything." (Much like the "Thou art God" talk in Stranger in a Strange Land by Heinlein, panetheism states "God is within everything and everything is within God."

I consider myself a panetheistic Christian mystic. Three books that could help you understand my viewpoint are Original Blessing by Matthew Fox, and Why Christianity Must Change or Die and A New Christianity for a New Millenium by John Shelby Spong.

Without wax,
Spider

Supergirl

The difference between the two is that in pantheism god is not an entity. While panetheism god is an entity with omnipotence and infinity. Big difference! An analogy used by panetheists is: all is in God; somewhat as if God were the ocean and we were fish.

Theists uphold panetheism (as you so rightly call yourself a xian mystic), while pantheists tend to be more atheistic inclined. Interesting to note, panetheists always think that panetheism is "superior" to pantheism. LOL I just think it is an ideology once again created by someone (Karl C. F. Krause (1781-1832)) that does not want to be classified as a xian fundi.

Spider

You know, I have never seen it that way. I really do not feel that "God" is a being, entity or anything that resembles a theistic deity. While I do feel that "God" is inifite, as I feel the universe is as well, I certainly do not feel that "God" is omnipotent becaue omnipotence implies a being able to do things. A panetheist doesn't understand "God" as a being, a deity.

Theists uphold panetheism (as you so rightly call yourself a xian mystic), while pantheists tend to be more atheistic inclined.

Atheism is not the only alternative to theism for those of us who shed its trappings. Spong, in is last book, made a great quote (He probably is quoting someone else and since I do not have the book in front of me, I can't confirm), "God isn't a being. God is being." This is very different from theism, very different from pantheism and definitely not atheism.


The theist says "God created all there is and is separate from it." The atheist says, "There is no God or gods." An pantheist would say that "God is all that is and all that is, is God". And the panetheist would just say that "God is the IS." The Is isn't an entity, it is pure potential, it is existence not an existance. At the same time, it isn't a deification of that idea because that would be theism.

Vastly different.

Supergirl

You claim that god is potential. That would mean that life has "meaning". Why would life need to have meaning?

If you need to define/ describe god, you are a theist. Maybe not classical, that I can respect, but still a theist.

The simple answer is usually the right one and panetheism tries its best not to be simple!