Pantheism denotes any philosophy which claims that god and the universe are identical.
Keywords: Pantheism, Philosophies, Philosophy, Rational, Justification, Assumption, Presupposition, Contradiction, Reason, Universal Truth.
Pantheistic claims are false .
Humans assume the universal truth that all contradictions are false. Any worldview that does not allow for this assumption to be rationally justified is deductively false.
Premise 1: If absolute ultimacy is shared, then universal truth claims are believed without reason.
Premise 2: Under pantheism, absolute ultimacy is shared by the fundamental elements of the universe.
Conclusion: Therefore, under pantheism, universal truth claims are believed without reason.
If pantheistic claims are true, there is no reason to believe universal truth claims, including universal noncontradiction. There is then no reason to believe that contradictory claims are deductively false, thereby making pantheistic claims themselves deductively false.
This Argument from Reason demonstrates that pantheism is false.
In Printed Form
Along with numerous other authors including Don Landis, Bodie Hodge and Roger Patterson, Timothy McCabe contributes analyses of various world religions and cults in this volume from Master Books.
"How can God be an uncaused cause?"
There is no other logical possibility. Either some things are caused, or nothing is. If nothing is caused, then I never wrote this. But I did write this, so at least some things are caused. If some things are caused, either their causing is the result of a previous cause, or it isn't. In other words, either something caused it to cause, or nothing caused it to cause.
"Did God have to be created? Why or why not?"
God was not created. If something is created, then it is necessarily temporal -- in other words, it changes over time. Specifically, it must begin to exist, and "beginning" is itself a temporal process. However, since the only things that are infinite are things that have no end, and since past time has ended, we can say with certainty that past time is not infinite, which means that past time had a beginning.
"If there is a God, but there is no evidence to be found for his existence except subjective experiences, is it not reasonable to assume that if he does exist, he does not want us to know about it?"
The conclusion does not seem reasonable to me. First, the premise is very unclear, and I will explain what I mean. Second, in the only way I can see that the premise could be considered true, the conclusion does not seem to be reasonably based on it. AN UNCLEAR PREMISE First, the premise seems unclear in that it seems to suggest that evidence is the only way to justifiably be convinced of something. But note that rational thought cannot exist without reason behind it.