If atheistic evolution is true .....

[Danyc]

Hahah, can you say failure of OP?

 

[Gracchus]

What is the difference between an atheist and a pantheist anyway?

"a·the·ist (

th

-

st)n. One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods."

"pan·the·ism (p

n

th

-

z

m) n.1. A doctrine identifying the Deity with the universe and its phenomena.
2. Belief in and worship of all gods."

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.


"Panentheism (from Greek πᾶν (pân) "all"; ἐν (en) "in"; and θεός (Theós) "God"; "all-in-God") A panentheistic belief system is one which posits that the one God interpenetrates every part of nature, and timelessly extends beyond as well. Panentheism is distinguished from pantheism, which holds that God is synonymous with the material universe."

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Panentheist

An atheist can define the universe as God and that shouldn't be a problem for him.

Except an atheist would see no need to define anything as god.

Isn't pantheism just that?

Yes, which is how atheists differ from pantheists. On the other hand, panentheists believe that there is more to reality than the observable universe. In this belief they are supported by both physics and mathematics.

What I mean to say is that if you basically define reality as God, you're simply adding a label to what everyone agrees exists.

Of course what pantheist calls god is very unlike what the Christian calls god. "Reality" is not the same as "magic sky-daddy".

And then again, there is much reality that not everyone agrees exists. Some folks even deny clearly and multiply demonstrated facts, such as biological evolution, plate tectonics, and an Earth that is billions of years old.

Even experts can disagree. Einstein just could not bring himself to accept quantum entanglement. But it has been demonstrated.

 

[RichardT]

"a·the·ist (

th

-

st)n. One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods."

"pan·the·ism (p

n

th

-

z

m) n.1. A doctrine identifying the Deity with the universe and its phenomena.
2. Belief in and worship of all gods."

Except an atheist would see no need to define anything as god.

And the pantheist seems to define the universe as God for no good reason.

Yes, which is how atheists differ from pantheists.

So the label is the only difference.

Of course what pantheist calls god is very unlike what the Christian calls god. "Reality" is not the same as "magic sky-daddy".

Obviously. What the pantheist calls God is what the atheist calls the universe.

And then again, there is much reality that not everyone agrees exists.

I agree. I apologize, I should have said "what the science agrees exist"

Some folks even deny clearly and multiply demonstrated facts, such as biological evolution, plate tectonics, and an Earth that is billions of years old.

Yes.

Even experts can disagree. Einstein just could not bring himself to accept quantum entanglement. But it has been demonstrated.

Yes.

I'm not a fundy. Quit waving at me as if I were. You seem like an intelligent guy, please respond here since I'm not even sure if you disagree with me or not anymore.



Hold on, I think you just agreed with me, sorry I misunderstood you.

 

[Gracchus]

And the pantheist seems to define the universe as God for no good reason.

A pantheist is often a former atheist who has experienced the numinous.

So the label is the only difference.

No, because Hindus, for instance, are pantheists, but not atheists.

I agree. I apologize, I should have said "what the science agrees exist"

Many scientists don't believe that we can ever know or understand everything about the universe.

I'm not a fundy. Quit waving at me as if I were. You seem like an intelligent guy, please respond here since I'm not even sure if you disagree with me or not anymore.

The wave is my default signoff. If I seriously disagreed with you I might use a different smiley. (e.g. , , or )

Hold on, I think you just agreed with me, sorry I misunderstood you.

Well, I don't agree that atheists and pantheists are just using different terminology for the same thing. Hindus pray, perform rituals, burn incense, build temples, et alia. Atheists, having a different world-view, do not.

 

[DuckPhup]

Then absolutely everything we say is ultimately meaningless so why even discuss it? Why not leave the rest of us to our "wild imaginings" and "pointless ramblings" and quit these boards?

Hilarious. Why stop at evolution. The theory of gravity is atheistic. Germ theory is atheistic. Relativity is atheistic. Quantum mechanics is atheistic. Cosmology is atheistic. Biology is atheistic. Genetics is atheistic. Physics is atheistic. Geology is atheistic. Archeology is atheistic. Meteorology is atheistic. Astronomy is atheistic.

So... if there is any truth in ANY of those theories or areas of inquiry... we should just leave you to your "wild imaginings" and "pointless ramblings."

Brilliant.

Come to think of it... all branches of science and ALL scientific theories are atheistic.

That's funny... all 'atheistic'. Hmmmm... what does that actually mean?

Well... I guess it means that nothing in science... in any branch of science... in any scientific theory... requires one to postulate the existence and the intervention of an invisible, magical, all-powerful, supernatural sky-fairy in order to arrive at a credible explanation.

In fact, many of the things that are explained via the above disciplines and theories used to REQUIRE the existence and intervention of an invisible, magical, all-powerful, supernatural sky-fairy... but that sky-fairy (god) was kicked to the curb hundreds of years ago... over and over and over... and over... again.

So... you religious delusionists should be used to having god kicked to the curb by knowledge, by now. I wonder why you fear the Theory of Evolution so much?... the explanation for HOW the genetic makeup of populations of organisms changes, over time (an observed fact)?

 

[UncleHermit]

If atheistic evolution is true then this is ultimatey meaningless... why bother to respond?

Ignoring the fact that this has nothing to do with evolution...

"Ultimate meaning" is not the only kind of meaning there is.

Do you really think that something not being eternal makes it pointless?

 

[USincognito]

I was going to comment that this thread is meaningless, but apparently the word meaningless is meaningless too.

Remember folks, please turn your inony meters off before reading Crevo threads on CF.

 

[Cleaver611]

I said just that at least twice already. Of course everything is meaningless given enough time. Unfortunately, this universe isn't that concerned about making us feel good as you obviously want it to be, and wishing for something really hard doesn't make it any more real.

Typical atheistic evolutionist remark. You reveal an arrogance and ignorance equal to that of the most "fundamental" "christian" that your kind rail against.

 

[UncleHermit]

Typical atheistic evolutionist remark. You reveal an arrogance and ignorance equal to that of the most "fundamental" "christian" that your kind rail against.

If that's the case, perhaps you could correct the ignorance by addressing what was said, rather than posting a personal attack.

 

[Danyc]

Typical atheistic evolutionist remark. You reveal an arrogance and ignorance equal to that of the most "fundamental" "christian" that your kind rail against.

What's with the quotation marks?

 

[Naraoia]

What's with the quotation marks?

Maybe Cleaver is trying to say that fundies are not Christians

 

[LewisWildermuth]

Still waiting for an answer Cleaver...

So, what is the meaning of your life? What would God be missing if you were not born?

 

[Vene]

Typical atheistic evolutionist remark. You reveal an arrogance and ignorance equal to that of the most "fundamental" "christian" that your kind rail against.

 

[Naraoia]

I love that picture.

 

[USincognito]

I was going to comment that this thread is meaningless, but apparently the word meaningless is meaningless too.

Remember folks, please turn your inony meters off before reading Crevo threads on CF.

Typical atheistic evolutionist remark. You reveal an arrogance and ignorance...

Aaaaand there's validation for the advice I offered in the bolded part above.

 

[AintNoMonkey]

Picture saved.

 

[Pwnzerfaust]

Epic motivational. Saved.

By the way, Cleaver, it's infinitely more arrogant to claim that the entire universe of hundreds of billions of galaxies, each with up to hundreds of billions of stars, each which could possibly have planets with life, was made entirely for humanity, than to claim that in the long run, everything we do is meaningless. We are a single species that happens to be sentient on a small rocky planet orbiting a smallish yellow star. Nothing we do can possibly last beyond the four billion years from now until the Sun becomes a red giant and swallows the inner planets whole. And, in fact, I don't expect humanity to last nearly that long.

 

[Morcova]

Typical atheistic evolutionist remark. You reveal an arrogance and ignorance equal to that of the most "fundamental" "christian" that your kind rail against.

What do you expect? Most of us get past the whole "the world revolves around me" thing when we become adults.

 

[moogoob]

I just found this thread...

Cleaver611, I think that you are mistaking atheism for nihilism.

 

[Psudopod]

Cleaver611, I think that you are mistaking atheism for nihilism.

I think he's mistaking athiesm for something to get grumpy about.