Pantheism: a doctrine that equates God with the forces and laws of the universe (Merriam-Webster Dictionary).Mine is a reason-driven religious philosophy, not faith-driven. I built my worldview from the fruits of my personal investigations of the reality which surrounds me, not being content to rely on folklore.
There is that prickly concept: God. The absolute, the ultimate, that which is greater than anything else, the ground of all being, the creator of everything.
But the question presents itself: Is God a person(s) or a metaphor?
Here the reason versus faith dichotomy is fundamental.
There are ancient, time-honored traditions that a deity (or deities) created the universe and man and rules over both. Many traditions, in fact. And they are hopelessly contradictory.
We have the well documented fact that throughout history humans have excelled in both imagination and creativity - the ancient religious traditions and myths being but one testament of that fact.
That not one of these imagined deities throughout all the millennia of human history has bothered to reside among and directly communicate with all his creatures and forever set the record straight seems to me - if a not a proof, then at least - an indication that we are dealing with non-entitites.
Humans have always been in awe of their natural surroundings and at the mercy of the terrible forces of nature. These are and always have been recognized as greater than humans.
The same evolving and advancing intelligence that learned to make and use tools, that learned to work along with nature in order to cultivate gardens, orchards, and vineyards for food, that tamed fire and invented the art of cooking, soon and quite naturally imposed those same ideas about design and intention upon those greater forces of nature and the universe that surrounded him. The human mind was obviously personal, and it was no great stretch for pre-scientific man to extend a similar personality to the forces of nature.
Therefore, I understand the stronger postulate to be that man created God(s) rather than the other way around.Of course the sun and rain were understood to be divine blessings that allowed the nourishing crops to grow. Earthquakes, volcanoes, floods, and thunderstorms were surely signs of displeasure among the deities. Diseases seemed to be of divine origin, and the best treatments, slowly developed over long centuries of trial and error, were those provided by the gods of nature, such as healing herbs, fresh air and sunshine. But to this day we have not conquered the ravages of disease.
Humans throughout history continuously studied nature and learned more and more about her ways. Science slowly emerged as an alternative to mythological theology, although to this day some attempt to keep a foot in each camp.
For me, the scientific method is the true theology or study of God. And with the embracing of the scientific method comes the humbling confession that we don't know everything, and that all our scientific "facts" are provisional facts. The more the universe is studied, the more secrets she yields, and the possibility that certain facts may need to be revised frequently becomes a reality. Still - despite its incompleteness - the scientific method is the best handle on reality we have.
If there is a creator "God" it must the laws of physics that organize the raw elements into this wonderful cosmos. This ability of the elements to self-organize and display apparent design is the divine spark or Logos. It is that from which we came and to which we must eventually return. In addition to that, God can be well employed as a metaphor for the highest of human ideals, especially with regard to ethics. The understanding that all of us are Citizens of the Cosmos and stand side by side in inherent equality give the greatest impetus to and proper ground for true religious practice and spiritual idealism.
I am a pantheist because, as a part of nature's intelligence, I stand together with my brothers and sisters in awe of the greatest intelligence, which is the well ordered Cosmos as a whole.
15 comments:
Thank you for writing this and explaining what you mean by Pantheist and also what, at least some of, your spiritual views are. I agree with most of what you've written here. I think some things are unknowable. We must operate om the facts and in the reality of what we do know. I'm no longer inclined to operate on a philosophy faith, but one of reason.
I'm with you, brother!
Amen.
I'm interested in knowing what made you describe yourself as a pantheist rather than simply atheist. How do you see the difference, if any?
Me too, brother!
@ D'Ma - You are quite welcome. And I am interested in the parts you didn't agree with, if you care to share it.
@ Georgia Mountain Man, Sylvia, and Diane - I'm so glad to have your company on this journey.
@ DoOrDoNot - These questions are dealt with in my next post. And thanks for asking.
Disagreement would be a rather strong word to use. It's more that I'm still formulating my opinion about it.
I stand together with my brothers and sisters in awe of the greatest intelligence, which is the well ordered Cosmos as a whole.
Some would use the well ordered Cosmos as an indication of a "first cause" because we don't know the first cause. However I tend to think that if there were a "creator" in that sense it would be more orderly than it is. I find a lot of aspects of what is to be very chaotic.
@ D'Ma - I wish you continued success in the formulation of your opinions. I'm so happy to have you as a reader and hope to be helpful by offering encouragement and perhaps some occasional thought stimulus.
Fascinating post!
"This ability of the elements to self-organize and display apparent design is the divine spark or Logos."
It is interesting to read this today. By coincidence, I have been planning a blog post on one aspect of the subject -- the physics of how the random movements of elements and molecules are exchanged for order in the universe. And of course, life itself is a form or order or organization. I will be dealing with the topic on a superficial level, but I hope not an inaccurate one.
I see now what you mean by "God as metaphor". It's quite an interesting idea, isn't it?
I have long wondered whether I am an atheist or a hesitant pantheist. Most days, I can't make up my mind about that.
@ Paul Sunstone - The label "atheist" just doesn't go far enough in explaining who I am. Actually, when a person tells me they are an atheist, I really haven't learned much about them besides that they reject (as do I) the common notions of a personal god. But always I wonder, what else motivates that person?
In sometimes describing myself as an atheist, Doug, I loosely follow Dawkins' 1-7 scale where 1 represents absolute theism and 7 represents absolute atheism. Like Dawkins, I place myself as a 6 on the scale. That is, I think there is a possibility of deity, but that it is highly unlikely. That's where I'm coming from on my atheist days.
Someone once said I was really an apatheist. They had to explain that word to me. It's a combination apathy plus theist. And the meaning is you just don't really care whether or not there's deity. I think he was right insofar as I usually don't feel strongly enough about it to finalize my opinion on the subject.
@ Paul Sunstone - I understand what you are saying and have no problem whatsoever with it.
For me - and I'm willing to admit that some of this, as with most folks, goes back to my upbringing - the concepts of God and spirituality still are useful.
I can't be apatheist because too much of my life has revolved around theism, earlier as a believer and now as an unbeliever.
The United States (and much of the world for that matter) is made up largely of spiritually minded people.
I can either interact with these people and attempt to understand better where they are coming from, or I can draw a line between us and do combat with them and attempt to defeat them for being enemies of progress.
What I can't do is be apatheist. Too many people, especially those closest to me, care about the God issue, too much of the history of humankind is entangled with religious ideas, for me to ignore the subject. I'm just too curious.
I've given the matter much thought, have developed some definite opinions on the subject - which motivates a lot of my posts here - and so lay claim to a chair at the table.
But I've no stones to throw at those who don't want to join us.
I'm interested in all sorts of things about religion. The only thing I'm ever apathetic about is the question of whether or not deity exists. And then I'm only really bored with my own thoughts on the subject. Other people's thoughts usually interest me. I've had a life long interest bordering on fascination with just about all other aspects of religion apart from what I myself should or should not believe about the existence of deity. I don't know why that is, but it just is.
Post a Comment