If a pantheistic God were admitted to .... (divine, meaning, famous)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nonsense . My point is that pantheists insisting that agnostics must agree a pantheist God exists is meaningless, on the basis that it changes nothing for the agnostic . If a pantheist finds pantheism meaningful , then good for him . My posts addressed the issue of pantheists insisting that others accept their views, and the meaningless of an agnostic agreeing to do so because it wouldn't alter anything .
I've done all I can do to help you understand , and won't waste any more time on a lost cause . Maybe you should get someone to read it for you and explain it slowly to you .
I would suggest no one waist anymore time, wallflash. He obviously can't grasp what the topic is, and is doing like some others we know on here, and saying what he wants to say, regardless of whether or not it addresses the topic.
Nonsense . My point is that pantheists insisting that agnostics must agree a pantheist God exists is meaningless, on the basis that it changes nothing for the agnostic . If a pantheist finds pantheism meaningful , then good for him . My posts addressed the issue of pantheists insisting that others accept their views, and the meaningless of an agnostic agreeing to do so because it wouldn't alter anything .
I've done all I can do to help you understand , and won't waste any more time on a lost cause . Maybe you should get someone to read it for you and explain it slowly to you .
rotf lmao ... yeah. A lost "toss out observation when it doesn't match my personal opinion" cause.
I am "lost" because I don't follow your religion.
I heard it all before.
Not at all . You are lost because you cannot grasp the point I make , no matter how simply it is explained .Im not sure what language you need me to say " I'm fine if people want to embrace pantheism " in for you to grasp it , but evidently English isn't it .
Not at all . You are lost because you cannot grasp the point I make , no matter how simply it is explained .Im not sure what language you need me to say I'm fine if people want to embrace pantheism in for you to grasp it , but evidently English isn't it .
then its simple.
Its pointless to you and it doesn't have to be pointless for everybody. That its a problem when people push a personal emotional meaning on others like its more valid; that is wrong.
About sums up what we have been saying all this time.
Yes it is real simple , and what you WANT me to accept is exactly what I have already said .
So again, GET someone who can read and understand better than you to explain it to you . I've only said I have no issue with people being pantheist if they wish a dozen times or so . I have little hope that another 20 will get it through you head.
My debate has been about pantheists insisting that others must believe as they do, which somehow seems totally lost on you no matter how patiently explained .
Yes it is real simple , and what you WANT me to accept is exactly what I have already said .
So again, GET someone who can read and understand better than you to explain it to you . I've only said I have no issue with people being pantheist if they wish a dozen times or so . I have little hope that another 20 will get it through you head.
My debate has been about pantheists insisting that others must believe as they do, which somehow seems totally lost on you no matter how patiently explained .
Pantheism is different than Religious Beliefs, and Deities, and hocus-pocus stuff...that are speculative at best.
ALL/EVERYTHING does objectively exist. It irrefutably comports definitively as "G-O-D" by certainly being "Something of Supreme Value".
So....I'm not asking you to accept beliefs about what I have faith in, and that my speculative hopes rely on...stuff I can't otherwise substantiate empirically.
I am stating the facts as to what I know and can objectively verify with evidence that proves it.
You can dismiss Religious Deities & OmniDudes as GOD and claim "no substantiation"...but you can't put ALL/EVERYTHING in that same category.
Pantheism is different than Religious Beliefs, and Deities, and hocus-pocus stuff...that are speculative at best.
ALL/EVERYTHING does objectively exist. It irrefutably comports definitively as "G-O-D" by certainly being "Something of Supreme Value".
So....I'm not asking you to accept beliefs about what I have faith in, and that my speculative hopes rely on...stuff I can't otherwise substantiate empirically.
I am stating the facts as to what I know and can objectively verify with evidence that proves it.
You can dismiss Religious Deities & OmniDudes as GOD and claim "no substantiation"...but you can't put ALL/EVERYTHING in that same category.
I've made my point about the relevancy of your version with the analogy on the designated driver . Nothing more really need be said about your version .
You are free to believe what you will, but the relevancy of your version has been exposed .
Yes it is real simple , and what you WANT me to accept is exactly what I have already said .
So again, GET someone who can read and understand better than you to explain it to you . I've only said I have no issue with people being pantheist if they wish a dozen times or so . I have little hope that another 20 will get it through you head.
My debate has been about pantheists insisting that others must believe as they do, which somehow seems totally lost on you no matter how patiently explained .
dude, don't flatter yourself, your easy. easier than most. You're only talking about fundy-mentals, they are all crazy. Even atheist ones. But you can't see that, you are stuck in your way as the way. as we said since the first post. I think it was shortly after that you started with the name calling. typical fundy-mental stuff.
now you can get back to
"I don't see how anything that describes the universe as meaningful to me until I want/need it to."
dude, don't flatter yourself, your easy. easier than most. You're only talking about fundy-mentals, they are all crazy. Even atheist ones. But you can't see that, you are stuck in your way as the way. as we said since the first post. I think it was shortly after that you started with the name calling. typical fundy-mental stuff.
now you can get back to
"I don't see how anything that describes the universe as meaningful to me until I want/need it to."
lmao @ fundy-mentals.
Since I am neither a fundy Christian nor an avowed atheist your rant is typically nonsensical for you .
But nice try . It doesn't alter your obvious inability to understand the point , and obviously doesn't help you understand how many times I have said that I have no issue with people being pantheists.
I do wish you would get someone with a better command of the English language to explain it all for you and put an end to your nonsense .
I've made my point about the relevancy of your version with the analogy on the designated driver . Nothing more really need be said about your version .
You are free to believe what you will, but the relevancy of your version has been exposed .
Yeah...your bogus analogy that basically was you telling those that hold the Pantheist perception of GOD what THEY think and feel.
It was explained to you, by a Pantheist, in #155.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
