egotheistic pantheism revealed...

This is a crazy statement that makes absolutely no sense.Scottness, I would have thought you would have rewritten this part.

Ok sorry I was in a hurry and did not have time to explain. When discussing exclusivity within the realm of religion what is usually meant is that a religious view is considered exclusive if its core doctrine claims that it is the only way to God and that they worship the "One True God". A religion that is exclusive, views competitor religions as false and that they are a deliberate distortion or counterfeit under the influence of the anti-god.There are religions that are not exclusive in that they allow for other ways to know God (ie many paths to the top of the mountain). That does not necessarily mean they would welcome and tolerate you going to their meetings, standing up on a chair spouting your exclusive view that they are going to hell to burn.Now down to this statement.... They may reject the exclusive point of view that any contemporary religion can claim to have the complete truth. I dunno I am not a student of pantheism - I know others are so i suspect you will get an earfull here. Evil can be very true.Genocide is evil but true.Child pornography is evil but sadly true.Rape is evil but true.I can call those evil and not exclude them from being true.Finally you say "the heart of evil ... is falsehood". I would say the heart of evil is opposed to life.

Sure and so. First does pantheism dictate that *all* paths lead to god. Do pantheist believe that all aspects of all other religions are valid?A non-exclusive religious philosophy would by definition exclude exclusive religious philosophies.I read your quote by Ravi Zacharius and laughed because he builds stawmen just like you do. Does pantheism claim that all "religions are right"? I just read the wiki on Pantheism and see (like Christianity and other religions) has many different flavors.I did not see "all religions are right". There is in the definition "All is God" but that does not equate to all is true. Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

Can you back this up with a references. I dunno you may be right I have not looked. However, I sense that you may be busy building a staw man again.Staw man Fallacy: Assuming and misrepresenting or overstating an opponent's position so that you can easy dismantle it and refute. As is usually the case the world does not not boil down to a set of "either this", "or that" dichotomy.If a religious philosophy states that there are other paths to God they are considered nonexclusivist. A nonexclusivist religion is not required to be inclusive of *all* other religions. There are a number of religions that do not claim a exclusive hold on spiritual truth. This is in conflict with several OT quotations - you do know that right?I think your religious ideological plumbing has a few leaks - is it time to call a plumber.

Rob are you sure about that.... Does that sound like Jesus?

You are massively diverging from the point and not answering the questions.Again for the 3rd time a religion can be nonexclusivist and not accept every religious thought as valid. A nonexclusive religion just does not state dogmatically that it is the only path to the one true God. You are avoiding that.Next I asked for a reference to your claim You avoided that. Rob, I am addressing the very first line in your OP. You have built a straw man that pantheist believe that all religious paths are valid and "will lead to where the pantheists are".You need this because then you get to play your imaginary trump card that they exclude your exclusive-whacked-out philosophy so that makes them "especially" exclusive.You also seem to take a bit a pride in that Christianity is exclusive, which somehow lends it credibility. Many other religions are exclusive. And even many Christian sects are exclusive. So.

There is nothing in your quotes that justifies the delight and blessedness of dashing little ones (innocent babies) against the rock.Do you have another volley scriptures to show how this dovetails with "love your enemies".

And yet your statement This is my second request for references that pantheist believe all paths "will lead to where the pantheists are".This straw claim is key to your leading statement in the OP. And now you provide scripture quotes to prove your religion is exclusive. We already know that. Edited by iceage, : No reason given.Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

Your OP leads with And to substantiate this you want to be able to claim that an inclusive religious ideology has to include your whacked out views and since your whacked out views cannot logically fit in an inclusive framework you win - na na na na.Your straw logic includes this assertion.... I have asked you to backup this assertion several time and you are not able to.You so desperately want to use your imaginary trump card so you could smuggle demolish a competing religious system, using interesting enough logic.I would say this thread is done, cooked, stick a fork into it.

OK so you have no reference to attribute this to. So you OP title should be

quote:

---

Pantheism (err maybe egotism or whatever i dunno) revealed! at least as it was relayed to me by someone once, I think.... I am pretty sure.... maybe.

---

With a subtitle: I don't know what I am saying you go figure it out, but nonetheless I have a really great come back. Yes since it is your central premise, yessssh.I quit.

In another thread you mentioned one of your weakness was wasting time "throwing pearls before swine".Is this one of your pearls?A more fitting analogy might be flinging feces at the zoo visitors.

Like pressing you for a reference to your premise? And the best you can come up with is you talked to someone once. Maybe that someone was as confused as you.

Very good.I learned this last night after wasting way too much time.Rob started out eager to apply a pat answer (The law of Non-Contradiction) to the illogical nature of a religious ideology that is *all* inclusive.He had no idea what this inclusive religion was called or who practices it, but his response was so brilliant that he created this religion from straw and set it aflame for us all to warm ourselves.When pushed for a reference to this inclusive religion he finally responded that he had talked to some people at one time that held to this belief. And if someone suggested a label for this inclusive religious ideology he jumped at it without doing one scrap of research.He also implied that since his exclusive position is logically it is reasonable and obviously true (ignore the fact that most religions are exclusive).However I did learn some thing of pantheism, panentheism, egotheims, etc. along the way from others. I hope Rob learned something too... but I wonder.

Think about this.You are so stuck on your literal religious self-righteousness extremism you may very well have been the type that would have helped crucify the brazen radical and blasphemous heretic known as Yeshua. You could have rattled of your list of scripture, as given by god, as proof that this Yeshua was a heretic.

I was looking for critical attribution (the baby) that formed the thesis of your OP. You still have not provided that.I am not even sure that egotheism holds that "all path lead to where they are". I am not sure egotist would reject/accept your narrow view. All you have said to date is that you have talked to someone that holds that belief.You have not done your homework.You are attacking a windmills with all the same imagined nobility of Don Quixote and comparing yourself to the martyrs. If you want to be a martyr go preach the gospel somewhere in the middle east, not anonymously on the internet. Edited by iceage, : No reason given.