Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Dave Thomas Would Be Proud

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Luis Hamburgh on September 29, 2001 21:11:10 UTC


It's not the holism so much as it is the primitives. If I am right, then we cannot pursue a fair debate on this issue.

1) Because it claims God and we are one -- instead of maintaining God is separate from us –- many theologians reject Pantheism.

2) Because it cannot rationally accommodate both the uncertainty principle and causality, numerous scientists reject Pantheism.

3) Enter Panentheism. As a convenient way out of both of these problems, it enhances Pantheism with nonfalsifiability, thereby avoiding any critical exposure to deduction and induction.

In Panentheism, God has established the rules that govern our universe, but does not have to conform to these rules, as God is greater than the universe. I’m sorry, but this Western Monotheism-meets-Eastern Pantheism approach just seems to be a fancy way of saying, “If we can explain a phenomenon, then it is in perfect harmony with our belief; and if we cannot explain a phenomenon, then it also is in perfect harmony with our belief.”

It’s ‘God works in mysterious ways’ all over again. :(


Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins