Quelltext der Seite Benutzer:Pandeist/Pandeism

This is a draft page


{{About|a synthesis of deism and pantheism}}
{{God}}
'''Pandeism''' (or '''pan-deism''') is a [[Theology|theological]] [[doctrine]] which combines aspects of [[pantheism]] and [[deism]].<ref name="Lataster"/> It holds that the [[creator deity]] [[God becomes the Universe|became the universe]] and ceased to exist as a [[Transcendence (religion)|separate]] and [[conscious]] entity.<ref>{{cite book
|title= The History of Science: A Beginner's Guide
|author = Sean F. Johnston
|year = 2009
|ISBN = 1-85168-681-9
|page = 90
|quote = In its most abstract form, deism may not attempt to describe the characteristics of such a non-interventionist creator, or even that the universe is identical with God (a variant known as pandeism).}}</ref><ref>{{cite book
|title= This Strange Eventful History: A Philosophy of Meaning
|author = Paul Bradley
|year = 2011
|ISBN = 0875868762
|page = 156
|quote = Pandeism combines the concepts of Deism and Pantheism with a god who creates the universe and then becomes it.}}</ref><ref name="Dawe">{{cite book
|title= The God Franchise: A Theory of Everything
|author = Alan H. Dawe
|year = 2011
|ISBN = 0473201143
|page = 48
|quote = Pandeism: This is the belief that God created the universe, is now one with it, and so, is no longer a separate conscious entity. This is a combination of pantheism (God is identical to the universe) and deism (God created the universe and then withdrew Himself).}}</ref><ref>{{cite book 
|title= Mere Mormonism: Defense of Mormon Theology 
|author = Ronald R. Zollinger 
|year = 2010 
|ISBN = 1-46210-585-8 
|chapter = 6
|page = 
|quote = Pandeism. This is a kind of pantheism that incorporates a form of deism, holding that the universe is identical to God but also that God was previously a conscious and sentient force or entity that designed and created the universe.}}</ref> Pandeism is proposed to explain, as it relates to deism, why God would create a universe and then abandon it,<ref name="Fuller">{{cite book
|title= Thought: The Only Reality
|author = Allan R. Fuller
|year = 2010
|ISBN = 1608445909
|page = 79
|quote = Pandeism is another belief that states that God is identical to the universe, but God no longer exists in a way where He can be contacted; therefore, this theory can only be proven to exist by reason. Pandeism views the entire universe as being from God and now the universe is the entirety of God, but the universe at some point in time will fold back into one single being which is God Himself that created all. Pandeism raises the question as to why would God create a universe and then abandon it? As this relates to pantheism, it raises the question of how did the universe come about what is its aim and purpose?}}</ref> and as to pantheism, the origin and purpose of the universe.<ref name="Fuller"/><ref>{{cite book
|title= Ultimate Truth, Book 1
|author = Peter C. Rogers
|year = 2009
|ISBN = 1438979681
|page = 121
|quote = As with Panentheism, Pantheism is derived from the Greek: '[[wikt:pan-|pan]]'= all and '[[God|theos]]' = God, it literally means “God is All” and “All is God.” Pantheist purports that everything is part of an all-inclusive, indwelling, intangible God; or that the Universe, or nature, and God are the same. Further review helps to accentuate the idea that natural law, existence, and the Universe which is the  sum total of all that is, was, and shall be, is represented in the theological principle of an abstract 'god' rather than an individual, creative Divine Being or Beings of any kind. This is the key element which distinguishes them from Panentheists and Pandeists. As such, although many religions may claim to hold Pantheistic elements, they are more commonly Panentheistic or Pandeistic in nature.}}</ref>

The word pandeism is a [[hybrid word|hybrid]] [[blend word|blend]] of the [[root (linguistics)|root words]] pantheism and deism, combining {{lang-grc|πᾶν|[[wikt:pan-|pan]]|[[The All|all]]}} with {{lang-la|[[deus]]}} which means "[[god]]". It was perhaps first coined in the present meaning in 1859 by [[Moritz Lazarus]] and [[Heymann Steinthal]].<ref name="LS">{{cite book
|title = Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie und Sprachwissenschaft
|trans_title = Journal of Social Psychology and Linguistics
|author = [[Moritz Lazarus]] and [[Heymann Steinthal]]
|year = 1859
|ISBN = 
|page = 262
|quote = Man stelle es also den Denkern frei, ob sie [[Theist]]en, [[Pan-theist]]en, [[Atheist]]en, [[Deist]]en (und warum nicht auch Pandeisten?)..." ''Translation'': "Man leaves it to the philosophers, whether they are Theists, Pan-theists, Atheists, Deists (and why not also Pandeists?)...}}</ref>

==A pantheistic form of deism==
Pandeism falls within the [[tradition]]al [[hierarchy]] of [[Monism|monistic]]<ref>{{cite book
|author = Theresa J. Morris
|title = Knowing Cosmology: Ascension Age
|year = 2014
|ISBN = 1495254119
|page = 85
|quote = Not all monists are pantheists. Exclusive monists believe that the universe, the God of the pantheist, simply does not exist. In addition, monists can be Deists, pandeists, theists or panentheists; believing in a monotheistic God that is omnipotent and all-pervading, and both transcendent and immanent.}}</ref> and [[Nontheistic religions|nontheistic]] [[philosophy|philosophies]] addressing the nature of God.<ref>{{cite book
|author = [[Charles Brough (author)|Charles Brough]]
|title = The Last Civilization
|year = 2010
|ISBN = 1426940572
|page = 246
|quote = Deism and pan-deism, as well as agnosticism and atheism, are all Non-Theisms.}}</ref> For the history of the root words, pantheism and deism, see the [[Deism#Overview|overview of deism section]], and [[Pantheism#History|history of pantheism section]]. The earliest use of the actual term, pandeism, appears to have come as early as 1787,<ref name="Große">{{cite book
|author=[[Gottfried Große]]
|title=Naturgeschichte: mit erläuternden Anmerkungen
|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=6ro9AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA165&dq=pandeisten&cd=2#v=onepage&q=pandeisten&f=false|year=1787
|page=165
|quote= Beym Plinius, den man, wo nicht Spinozisten, doch einen Pandeisten nennen konnte, ist Natur oder Gott kein von der Welt getrenntes oder abgesondertes Wesen. Seine Natur ist die ganze Schöpfung im Konkreto, und eben so scheint es mit seiner Gottheit beschaffen zu seyn." ''Translation'': "In Pliny, whom one could call, if not a Spinozist, then perhaps a Pandeist, Nature is not a being divided off or separated from the world. His nature is the whole of creation, in concrete, and the same appears to be true also of his divinity.}}</ref> with another use related in 1838,<ref name="Ferrarese">{{cite book
|author = [[Luigi Ferrarese]]
|title=Memorie risguardanti la dottrina frenologica
|year=1838
|page=15
|quote=Dottrina, che pel suo idealismo poco circospetto, non solo la fede, ma la stessa ragione offende (il sistema di {{smallcaps|Kant}}): farebbe mestieri far aperto gli errori pericolosi, così alla Religione, come alla Morale, di quel psicologo franzese, il quale ha sedotte le menti ({{smallcaps|Cousin}}), con far osservare come la di lui filosofia intraprendente ed audace sforza le barriere della sacra Teologia, ponendo innanzi ad ogn'altra autorità la propria: profana i misteri, dichiarandoli in parte vacui di senso, ed in parte riducendoli a volgari allusioni, ed a prette metafore; costringe, come faceva osservare un dotto Critico, la rivelazione a cambiare il suo posto con quello del pensiero istintivo e dell' affermazione senza riflessione e colloca la ragione fuori della persona dell'uomo dichiarandolo un frammento di Dio, una spezie di pandeismo spirituale introducendo, assurdo per noi, ed al Supremo Ente ingiurioso, il quale reca onda grave alla libertà del medesimo, ec, ec.}}</ref> a first appearance in a [[dictionary]] in 1849 (in [[German language|German]], as 'Pandeismus' and 'Pandeistisch'),<ref>{{cite book
|title = Heilmittel gegen einen Krebsschaden der Deutschen Literatur: Erläuternde Bemerkungen
|trans_title = 
|author = Christian Ferdinand Fleissbach
|year = 1849
|ISBN = 
|page = 31
|quote = Pantheismus, Pantheistisch, n. Pandeismus, Pandeistisch. Gebildet aus dem Griech. πᾶν und θεός.)}}</ref> and an 1859 usage of "pandeism" possibly in contrast to both pantheism and deism by [[Moritz Lazarus]] and [[Heymann Steinthal]].<ref name="LS"/> Physicist and philosopher [[Max Bernhard Weinstein]] in his 1910 work ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature"), presented the broadest and most far-reaching examination of pandeism written up to that point. Weinstein noted the distinction between pantheism and pandeism, stating "even if only by a letter (''d'' in place of ''th''), we fundamentally differ Pandeism from Pantheism."<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 227: "Wenn auch nur durch einen Buchstaben (''d'' statt ''th''), unterscheiden wir grundsätzlich Pandeismus vom Pantheismus."</ref> But it has been noted that some pantheists have identified themselves as pandeists as well, to underscore that "they share with the deists the idea that God is not a personal God who desires to be worshipped".<ref>Alex Ciurana, M.T.S., "[https://web.archive.org/web/20111115210601/http://actsforgod.org/downloads/acts_dec07.pdf The Superiority of a Christian Worldview]," ''ACTS Magazine'', Churches of God Seventh Day, December 2007, Volume 57, Number 10, page 11: "Sometimes pantheists will use the term "pandeism" to underscore that they share with the deists the idea that God is not a personal God who desires to be worshipped."</ref>

==Progression==

===The ancient world===
[[File:Xenophanes in Thomas Stanley History of Philosophy.jpg|thumb|right| Physicist and philosopher [[Max Bernhard Weinstein]] wrote that [[6th century BC]] philosopher [[Xenophanes of Colophon]] spoke as a pandeist in stating that there was one god which "abideth ever in the selfsame place, moving not at all" and yet "sees all over, thinks all over, and hears all over."]]
The earliest seeds of pandeism coincide with notions of [[monotheism]], which generally can be traced back to the [[Atenism]] of [[Akhenaten]], and the [[Babylonia]]n-era [[Marduk]]. Weinstein in particular identified the idea of primary matter derived from an original spirit as found by the [[ancient Egyptians]] to be a form of pandeism.<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''[http://archive.org/details/WeinsteinWeltUndL Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis]'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 155: "So wird es sich wohl um eine Urmaterie in Verbindung mit einem Urgeist handeln, was der pandeisierenden Richtung der ägyptischen Anschauungen entspricht"; page 228: "Aber bei den Ägyptern soll sich der Pandeismus auch vollständiger ausgedrückt finden."</ref> Weinstein similarly found varieties of pandeism in the religious views held in [[China]]<ref name="Weinstein-China">Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 121: "Es ist also nicht richtig, wenn die Anschauungen der Chinesen denen der Naturvölker gleichgesetzt werden, vielmehr gehören sie eigentlich dem Pandeismus statt dem Pananimismus, an, und zwar einem dualistischen."</ref> (especially with respect to [[Taoism]] as expressed by [[Lao-Tze]]),<ref name="Weinstein-Taoism">Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 234-235: "Pandeistische Andeutungen finden sich selbstverständlich auch bei vielen anderen Völkern. So könnte man den Taoismus der Chinesen, in der ihm von Lao-tse gegebenen Form, hierher rechnen, wenn er nicht auch dem Naturalismus zuzuzählen wäre, da bei ihm mehr die Natur als die Gottheit in den Vordergrund gestellt wird. Die Erwähnung an dieser Stelle muß genügen, zumal mit solchen Sätzen wie: "aus Tao ist alles hervorgegangen, in Tao kehrt alles zurück" nicht viel für unsere Frage anzufangen ist."</ref> [[India]], especially in the [[Hinduism|Hindu]] [[Bhagavad Gita]],<ref name="Weinstein-India">Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 213: "Wir werden später sehen, daß die Indier auch den Pandeismus gelehrt haben. Der letzte Zustand besteht in dieser Lehre im Eingehen in die betreffende Gottheit, Brahma oder Wischnu. So sagt in der Bhagavad-Gîtâ Krishna-Wischnu, nach vielen Lehren über ein vollkommenes Dasein"; page 229: "Entschiedener tritt Pandeismus bei den Indiern hervor."</ref> and among various [[ancient Greece|Greek]] and [[Ancient Rome|Roman]] philosophers.

Specifically, Weinstein wrote that 6th century BC philosopher [[Xenophanes of Colophon]] spoke as a pandeist in stating that there was one god which "abideth ever in the selfsame place, moving not at all" and yet "sees all over, thinks all over, and hears all over."<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 231: "Pandeistisch ist, wenn der Eleate Xenophanes (aus Kolophon um 580-492 v. Chr.) von Gott gesagt haben soll: "Er ist ganz und gar Geist und Gedanke und ewig", "er sieht ganz und gar, er denkt ganz und gar, er hört ganz und gar."</ref> He similarly found that ideas of pandeism were reflected in the ideas of [[Heraclitus]], and of the [[Stoicism|Stoics]].<ref name="Weinstein-Greece">Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 233: "Dieser Pandeismus, der von Chrysippos (aus Soloi 280-208 v. Chr.) herrühren soll, ist schon eine Verbindung mit dem Emanismus; Gott ist die Welt, insofern als diese aus seiner Substanz durch Verdichtung und Abkühlung entstanden ist und entsteht, und er sich strahlengleich mit seiner Substanz durch sie noch verbreitet. Daß Gott als feurig gedacht wird (jedoch auch als Atem oder Äther) ist dem Menschen entnommen, dessen Wärme sein Lebensprinzip bedeutet; eine Idee, die sich schon bei den ersten griechischen Philosophen und namentlich bei Heraklit findet. Der stoische Pandeismus ist namentlich darin ein erklärter Emanismus, daß auch die Götter sich nur als Äußerungen und Ausflüsse des Welt-Gott (Zeus) darstellen wie die Seelen. Und damit kam er der Volksreligion durchaus entgegen, die ja von einer Theogonie ausging. Da die Gottheit die ganze Welt durchstrahlt und ihrerseits ein Materielles ist, so war es ganz folgerichtig von den Stoikern, wenn sie auch den leblos scheinenden Körpern vom göttlichen Odem mitteilten; sie betrachteten die Eigenschaften der Körper als materiell und hauchartig."</ref> Weinstein also wrote that pandeism was especially expressed by the later students of the 'Platonic [[Pythagoreans]]' and the 'Pythagorean [[Platonists]].'<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 234: "Die späteren Schüler der platonisierenden Pythagoreer und der pythagorisierenden Platoniker schlossen sich zum Teil diesem Pandeismus an. "</ref> and among them specifically identified 3rd century BC philosopher [[Chrysippus]], who affirmed that "the universe itself is God and the universal outpouring of its soul,"<ref name="cicerodenati15">Cicero, ''De Natura Deorum'', i. 15</ref> as a pandeist as well.<ref name="Weinstein-Greece"/> [[Religious studies]] professor, [[F. E. Peters]], however, found with respect to the [[Milesians (Greek)|Milesians]] that "[w]hat appeared... at the center of the [[Pythagoreanism|Pythagorean]] tradition in philosophy, is another view of ''[[Psyche (psychology)|psyche]]'' that seems to owe little or nothing to the pan-vitalism or ''pan-deism'' that is the legacy of the Milesians.<ref>{{cite book
|title= Greek Philosophical Terms: A Historical Lexicon
|author = [[Francis Edwards Peters]]
|year = 1967
|ISBN = 0814765521
|publisher = NYU Press
|page = 169
}}</ref> [[Gottfried Große]] in his 1787 interpretation of [[Pliny the Elder]]’s [[Natural History (Pliny)|Natural History]], describes Pliny, a first-century figure, as "if not a [[Baruch Spinoza|Spinozist]], then perhaps a Pandeist."<ref name="Große"/>

===From medieval times to the Enlightenment===
Weinstein examines the philosophy of 9th century theologian [[Johannes Scotus Eriugena]], who proposed that "God has created the world out of his own being," and identifies this as a form of pandeism, noting in particular that Eriugena's vision of God was one which does not know what it is, and learns this through the process of existing as its creation.<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 283-84: "[[Johannes Scotus Eriugena|Johannes Scotus Erigena]] (um das 9. Jahrhundert in Irland geboren) läßt in einer seiner mehreren Ansichten alles von Gott emaniert sein. Gottes Klarheit, welche mit Recht auch Dunkelheit genannt wird, breite sich über alles aus. Die ungeformte Materie soll nur das Unendliche bedeuten, welches, da es formlos sei, alle Formen in sich enthalte. Gott hat die Welt aus seinem eigenen Wesen gebildet. Jedes Geschöpf ist eine Theophanie, ein Sichoffenbarmachen Gottes. Gott sei an sich vorhanden wie ein Gedanke im Menschen bestehe; er manifestiere sich in der Welt durch sich selbst, wie ein Gedanke, der sich denkt, sich selbst zur Erkenntnis komme. So sei Gott ohne die Welt absolut negativ. Es klingt wie eine Blasphemie, wenn gesagt wird, Gott wisse nicht, was er sei, und er werde erst geschaffen mit der Schöpfung, indem er sich in seiner Schöpfung offenbart, die Schöpfung so aus Nichts hervorbringend. Das ist auch fast so abstrakt wie die indische Tad-Anschauung. Freilich bleibt es bei diesem absoluten, und ja auch nicht zu durchdringenden, Pandeismus nicht. Wie der Indier muß Scotus Gott doch etwas zuschreiben, Willen, und die Geschöpfe sind dann Willensakte. Der Wille ist persönlich als Emanation Gottes (als Christus) gedacht, wie wohl auch die Ursachen (zusammengefaßt als Heiliger Geist), die Scotus von Gott ausgehen läßt, Emanationen sind, und die Wirkungen, die wieder von ihnen ausgehen, Emanationen ihrer selbst darstellen."</ref> In his great work, ''[[De divisione naturae]]'' (also called ''Periphyseon'', probably completed around 867 AD), Eriugena proposed that the nature of the universe is divisible into four distinct classes:

:1 – that which creates and is not created;
:2 – that which is created and creates;
:3 – that which is created and does not create;
:4 – that which neither is created nor creates.
 
The first stage is God as the ground or origin of all things; the second is the world of [[Platonic idealism|Platonic ideals]] or [[Theory of forms|forms]]; the third is the wholly physical manifestation of our Universe, which "does not create"; the last is God as the final end or goal of all things, that into which the world of created things ultimately returns to completeness with the additional knowledge of having experienced this world. A contemporary statement of this idea is that: "Since God is not a being, he is therefore not intelligible... This means not only that we cannot understand him, but also that he cannot understand himself. Creation is a kind of divine effort by God to understand himself, to see himself in a mirror."<ref>[[Jeremiah Genest]], ''[http://www.granta.demon.co.uk/arsm/jg/eriugena.html John Scottus Eriugena: Life and Works]'' (1998).</ref>

Weinstein also found that thirteenth century Catholic thinker [[Bonaventure]]—who championed the [[Platonic idealism|Platonic]] doctrine that ideas do not exist in ''rerum natura'', but as ideals exemplified by the Divine Being, according to which actual things were formed—showed strong pandeistic inclinations.<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 303: "Andere Ganz- oder Halbmystiker, wie den Alanus (gegen 1200), seinerzeit ein großes Kirchenlicht und für die unseligen Waldenser von verhängnisvoller Bedeutung, den Bonaventura (1221 im Kirchenstaate geboren), der eine Reise des Geistes zu Gott geschrieben hat und stark pandeistische Neigungen zeigt, den Franzosen Johann Gersan (zu Gersan bei Rheims 1363 geboren) usf., übergehen wir, es kommt Neues nicht zum Vorschein."</ref> Of [[Nicholas of Cusa]], who wrote of the enfolding of creation in God and the unfolding of the divine human mind in creation, Weinstein wrote that he was, to a certain extent, a pandeist.<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 306: "Er ist bis zu einem gewissen Grade Pandeist. Gott schafft die Welt nur aus sich (de nullo alio creat, sed ex se); indem er alles umfaßt, entfaltet er alles aus sich, ohne doch sich dabei irgend zu verändern."</ref> And, as to [[Franciscus Mercurius van Helmont]], who had written ''A Cabbalistical Dialogue'' (Latin version first, 1677, in English 1682) placing matter and spirit on a continuum, and describing matter as a "coalition" of monads, Weinstein also found this to be a kind of pandeism.<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 338: "Wie er die Seele stoisch betrachtet, so hat er sich im Grunde auch eine Art Pandeismus zurecht gelegt, indem Gott zwar von allen Dingen verschieden, aber doch nicht von allen Dingen abgetrennt oder geteilt sein soll."</ref> Weinstein found that pandeism was strongly expressed in the teachings of [[Giordano Bruno]], who envisioned a deity which had no particular relation to one part of the infinite universe more than any other, and was [[Immanence|immanent]], as present on Earth as in the Heavens, subsuming in itself the multiplicity of existence.<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 321: "Also darf man vielleicht glauben, daß das ganze System eine Erhebung des Physischen aus seiner Natur in das Göttliche ist oder eine Durchstrahlung des Physischen durch das Göttliche; beides eine Art Pandeismus. Und so zeigt sich auch der Begriff Gottes von dem des Universums nicht getrennt; Gott ist naturierende Natur, Weltseele, Weltkraft. Da Bruno durchaus ablehnt, gegen die Religion zu lehren, so hat man solche Angaben wohl umgekehrt zu verstehen: Weltkraft, Welt seele, naturierende Natur, Universum sind in Gott. Gott ist Kraft der Welt kraft, Seele der Weltseele, Natur der Natur, Eins des Universums. Bruno spricht ja auch von mehreren Teilen der universellen Vernunft, des Urvermögens und der Urwirklichkeit. Und damit hängt zu  sammen, daß für ihn die Welt unendlich ist und ohne Anfang und Ende; sie ist in demselben Sinne allumfassend wie Gott. Aber nicht ganz wie Gott. Gott sei in allem und im einzelnen allumfassend, die Welt jedoch wohl in allem, aber nicht im einzelnen, da sie Ja Teile in sich zuläßt."</ref> This was reiterated by others including ''[[Discover (magazine)|Discover]]'' editor [[Corey S. Powell]], who wrote that Bruno's [[cosmology]] was "a tool for advancing an animist or Pandeist theology."<ref>Corey S. Powell, "[http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/outthere/2014/03/13/cosmos-giordano-bruno-response-steven-soter/#.Uy-qafldUdl Defending Giordano Bruno: A Response from the Co-Writer of “Cosmos”]," ''[[Discover (magazine)|Discover]]'', March 13, 2014: "Bruno imagines all planets and stars having souls (part of what he means by them all having the same “composition”), and he uses his cosmology as a tool for advancing an animist or Pandeist theology."</ref><ref>David Sessions, "[http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/23/how-cosmos-bungles-the-history-of-religion-and-science.html How ‘Cosmos’ Bungles the History of Religion and Science]," ''[[The Daily Beast]]'', 03.23.14: "Bruno, for instance, was a “pandeist,” which is the belief that God had transformed himself into all matter and ceased to exist as a distinct entity in himself."</ref>

[[File:Giordano Bruno Campo dei Fiori.jpg|thumb|left|Italian theologian [[Giordano Bruno]] was charged with heresy and burned at the stake for propounding what has been deemed by some commentators to be a pandeistic ideology.]]
[[Literary critic]], [[Hayden Carruth]], said of 18th century figure [[Alexander Pope]] that it was "Pope's rationalism and pandeism with which he wrote the greatest mock-epic in English literature"<ref>{{Cite book |title = [[Suicide]]s and [[Jazz]]ers |author = [[Hayden Carruth]] |year = 1992 |ISBN = 047209419X |page = 161 }}</ref> In 1834, publisher Giovanni Silvestri published a volume of sermons of [[Italian people|Italian]] padre Filippo Nani of Lojano, who criticized Pandeism, declaring, "To you, fatal Pandeist! the laws that create nature are contingent and mutable, not another being in substance with forces driven by motions and developments."<ref>Filippo Nani da Lojano, in ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=QqV75cGMYsoC&pg=PA286&dq=pandeista&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9dfQUsTcMYvaoASCkoHYBw&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=pandeista&f=false Sermons and Panegyrics of the Father Filippo Nani of Lojana]'', Giovanni Silvestri, publisher, 1834, p. 286, Sermon XVIII: Miracles: "A te, fatal Pandeista! le leggi della creata natura son contingenti e mutabili; non altro essendo in sostanza che moti e sviluppi di forze motrici."</ref> And in 1838, another Italian, [[phrenologist]] [[Luigi Ferrarese]] in ''Memorie Riguardanti la Dottrina Frenologica'' ("Thoughts Regarding the Doctrine of Phrenology") critically described [[Victor Cousin]]'s philosophy as a doctrine which "locates reason outside the human person, declaring man a fragment of God, introducing a sort of spiritual pandeism, absurd for us, and injurious to the Supreme Being."<ref name="Ferrarese"/> The 1859 [[German language|German]] work, ''Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie und Sprachwissenschaft'' by philosophers and frequent collaborators Moritz Lazarus and Heymann Steinthal, stated, "Man stelle es also den Denkern frei, ob sie [[Theist]]en, [[Pan-theist]]en, [[Atheist]]en, [[Deist]]en (und warum nicht auch Pandeisten?)...<ref name="LS"/> ("Man leaves it to the philosophers, whether they are Theists, Pan-theists, Atheists, Deists (and why not also Pandeists?)..."

According to ''American Philosophy: An Encyclopedia'', "later [[Unitarianism|Unitarian]] Christians (such as [[William Ellery Channing]]), [[transcendentalists]] (such as [[Ralph Waldo Emerson]] and [[Henry David Thoreau]]), writers (such as [[Walt Whitman]]) and some pragmatists (such as [[William James]]) took a more pantheist or pandeist approach by rejecting views of God as separate from the world."<ref>{{Cite book |title = American Philosophy: An Encyclopedia |author = [[John Lachs]] and [[Robert Talisse]] |year = 2007 |ISBN = 0415939267 |page = 310 }}</ref> The [[Belgian]] poet [[Robert Vivier]] wrote of the pandeism to be found in the works of Nineteenth Century novelist and poet [[Victor Hugo]].<ref>[[Robert Vivier]], "[http://www.arllfb.be/bulletin/bulletinsnumerises/bulletin_1952_xxx_03.pdf La Poésie de Victor Hugo]," in ''[[:fr:Académie Royale de Langue et de Littérature Françaises]]'', BULLETIN TOME XXX-No. 3, Décembre 1952 pp. 203-214, p. 211: "Tout cela culmine dans le pandéisme affirmé éloquemment aux dernières pages de Dieu : « Il est éperdûment », et on ne peut rien en dire d'autre sans le diminuer mais cela on peut, on doit le dire et le redire indéfiniment."</ref> Similarly in the Nineteenth Century, poet [[Alfred Tennyson]] revealed that his "religious beliefs also defied convention, leaning towards [[agnosticism]] and pandeism".<ref>{{cite book |title= Omnibus IV: The Ancient World |author = Gene Edward Veith, Douglas Wilson, and G. Tyler Fischer |year = 2009 |ISBN = 1932168869 |page = 49 |quote = Alfred Tennyson left the faith in which he was raised and near the end of his life said that his 'religious beliefs also defied convention, '. leaning towards agnosticism and pandeism.' }}</ref> [[Friedrich Engels]] has also been described by at least one historian as having pandeistic views.<ref>[[Tristram Hunt]], ''Marx's General: The Revolutionary Life of Friedrich Engels'', Page 43, 2010, ISBN 080509248X.</ref>

===Post-Enlightenment philosophy===

====In Asian philosophy====
Weinstein asserted the presence of pandeism in [[China]],<ref name="Weinstein-China"/> including in [[Lao-Tze]]'s [[Taoism]],<ref name="Weinstein-Taoism"/> and in [[India]], especially in the [[Hinduism|Hindu]] [[Bhagavad Gita]].<ref name="Weinstein-India"/> Other philosophers have also pointed to pandeism as having a presence in the cultures of Asia. In 1833, religionist [[Godfrey Higgins]] theorized in his ''[[Anacalypsis]]'' that "Pandeism was a doctrine, which had been received both by [[Buddhism|Buddhists]] and [[Brahmanism|Brahmins]]."<ref>{{cite book 
|title= [[Anacalypsis|Anacalypsis: An Attempt to Draw Aside the Veil of the Saitic Isis: Or an Inquiry into the Origin of Languages, Nations and Religions]] 
|author = [[Godfrey Higgins]] 
|year = 1833
|ISBN =  1-56459-273-1
|page = 439 
|quote = I am induced to think that this Pandeism was a doctrine, which had been received both by Buddhists and Brahmins.}}</ref> In 1896, historian [[Gustavo Uzielli]] described the world's population as influenced "by a superhuman [[idealism]] in Christianity, by an anti-human [[nihilism]] in Buddhism, and by an incipient but growing pandeism in Indian Brahmanism."<ref>{{cite book|author=[[Gustavo Uzielli]]|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=b_QDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR35&dq=pan-deismo&client=firefox-a&cd=1#v=onepage&q=pan-deismo&f=false|title=Ricerche Intorno a Leonardo da Vinci|year=1896|page=xxxv|quote = Certo è che quel concetto forma una delle basi morali fondamentali di religiosi i cui segnaci sono oltre i due terzi della popolazione del globo, mentre è influenzato dall'indole speciale di ciascuna di esse, cioè da un idealismo sovrumano nel Cristianesimo, da un nichilismo antiumano nel buddismo, e da un pandeismo eclettico nell'incipiente ma progrediente Bramoismo indiano; e a queste credenze che ammettono il principio ideale della fratellanza universale..." ''Translation'': "It is certain that this concept forms a fundamental moral bases of religious whose cable markers are more than two-thirds of the world's population, while special influence on the capacities of each of them, by a superhuman idealism in Christianity, by an anti-human nihilism in Buddhism, and by an incipient but growing pandeism in Indian Brahmanism; and those who admit the principle ideal of universal brotherhood...}}</ref> But the following year, the Reverend [[Henry Grattan Guinness]] wrote critically that in [[India]], "God is everything, and everything is God, and, therefore, everything may be adored. ... Her pan-deism is a pandemonium."<ref>[[Henry Grattan Guinness]], "[[s:First Impressions of India|First Impressions of India]]," in [[John Harvey Kellogg]], and the International Health and Temperance Association's, ''The Medical Missionary'' (1897), pages 125-127.</ref> Likewise, twenty years earlier, in 1877, [[Peruvian]] scholar and historian [[Carlos Wiesse Portocarrero]] had written in an essay titled ''Philosophical Systems of India'' that in that country, "[[Metaphysics]] is pandeistic and degenerates into [[idealism]]."<ref>[[Carlos Wiesse Portocarrero]], ''[http://es.wikisource.org/wiki/Sistemas_filosóficos_de_la_India Sistemas filosóficos de la India]'' (''Philosophical Systems of India''), November 1877, Part V: "Metafísica es pandeista y degenera en el idealismo."</ref> German political philosopher [[:de:Jürgen Hartmann (Politikwissenschaftler)|Jürgen Hartmann]] observes that Hindu pandeism has contributed to friction with monotheistic [[Islam]].<ref>{{cite book
|title = Religion in der Politik: Judentum, Christentum, Islam
|trans_title = Religion in politics: Judaism, Christianity, Islam
|author = [[:de:Jürgen Hartmann (Politikwissenschaftler)|Jürgen Hartmann]]
|year = 2014
|ISBN = 3658047313
|page = 237
|quote = Mochten die Muslime in der großen Stadt auch ihre geschlossenen kleinen Welten aufbauen, kam es doch immer wieder zu Reibungen mit der hinduistischen Mehrheitsgesellschaft: Kastensystem vs. Egalität der Muslime, Fleischverzehr der Muslime vs. Vegetarismus der Hindus, Monotheismus der Muslime vs. Pandeismus und Heiligenverehrung unter den Hindus." ''Translation'': "They want to build up their closed little worlds in the great city of the Muslims, but they came again and again into friction with the Hindu majority society: caste system vs. egalitarianism of the Muslims, meat consumption of the Muslims vs. vegetarianism of Hindus, monotheism of the Muslims vs. Pandeism and veneration of saints among the Hindus."}}</ref>

Pandeism (in [[Chinese language|Chinese]], '''泛自然神论''')<ref>[http://www.mdbg.net/chindict/chindict.php?wdrst=1&popup=1&wdqchid=%E6%B3%9B%E8%87%AA%E7%84%B6%E7%A5%9E%E8%AB%96 Definition of '''泛自然神論'''] ('''泛自然神论''', '''fànzìránshénlùn''') from [[CEDICT]], 1998: "pandeism, theological theory that God created the Universe and became one with it."</ref> was described by Wen Chi, in a Peking University lecture, as embodying "a major feature of Chinese philosophical thought," in that "there is a harmony between man and the divine, and they are equal."<ref>{{cite book 
|title= 在北大听讲座: 思想的灵光 (''Lectures at Peking University: Thinking of Aura'') 
|author = 文池 (Wen Chi) 
|year = 2002 
|ISBN = 7800056503 
|page = 121 
|quote = 在这里,人与天是平等和谐的,这就是说,它是泛自然神论或是无神论的,这是中国人文思想的一大特色。" ''Translation'': "Here, there is a harmony between man and the divine, and they are equal, that is to say, it is either Pandeism or atheism, which is a major feature of Chinese philosophical thought. 
}}</ref> Zhang Dao Kui (张道葵) of the [[China Three Gorges University]] proposed that the art of China's  [[Three Gorges]] area is influenced by "a representation of the romantic essence that is created when integrating rugged simplicity with the natural beauty spoken about by pandeism."<ref>{{cite book 
|title= 文化研究 (''Cultural Studies''), Issues 1-12 
|author = 张道葵 (Zhang Dao Kui), University of Three Gorges, College of Humanities, Department of Chinese, Hubei Province 
|year = 2001 
|id = unknown ID: DHgyAQAAIAAJ <!--It claimed it was an ISBN, but clearly that is not the case-->
|page = 65 
|quote = '''泛自然神论'''的浪漫精神三峡文化的艺术原素是一种独特的理想浪漫精神,是纯朴粗犷、绚丽诡竒的.又是精萃的、理想的、充满对理想生活的憧憬与追求。 
}}</ref> Literary critic Wang Junkang (王俊康) has written that, in Chinese folk religion as conveyed in the early novels of noted folk writer Ye Mei (叶梅),<ref>[http://www.chinawriter.com.cn/fwzj/writer/252.shtml Abstract of writer 叶梅 (Ye Mei)].</ref> "the romantic spirit of Pandeism can be seen everywhere."<ref>{{cite book |title= 叶梅研究专集 (''Ye Mei Special Collection'') |author = 王俊康 (Wang Junkang) |year = 2007 |ISBN = 7811083159 |page = 188 |quote = 在叶梅的早期小说里那种'''泛自然神论'''的浪漫精神随处可见,其目的是在张扬人性, 张扬'''泛自然神论'''下人性的自由。" ''Translation'': " In the early novels of Ye Mei the romantic spirit of Pandeism can be seen everywhere, aimed at advocating for humanity, advocating for individual human freedom under Pandeism. }}</ref> Wang Junkang additionally writes of Ye Mei's descriptions of "the worship of reproduction under Pandeism, as demonstrated in romantic songs sung by village people to show the strong impulse of vitality and humanity and the beauty of wildness."<ref>{{cite book |title= 叶梅研究专集 (''Ye Mei Special Collection'') |author = 王俊康 (Wang Junkang) |year = 2007 |ISBN = 7811083159 |page = 177 |quote = 在《撒忧的龙船河》里的撒忧文化, "撒忧"又叫"撒阳"、"撒野"、"撒尔嗬" ,就是生长在泛自然神论文化下的生殖崇拜符号, 撒野现象就是指土家情歌中那些强烈的生命冲动和人性张扬中所表现出来的野性美。" ''Translation'': "In "Spreading Worry on the Dragon Boat River", ''san yu'', also known as ''san yang'', ''san ye'', and ''san er hu'', are the words used to refer to the worship of reproduction under Pandeism, as demonstrated in romantic songs sung by village people to show the strong impulse of vitality and humanity and the beauty of wildness.}}</ref> Weinstein similarly found the views of 17th century [[Japan]]ese [[Neo-Confucianism|Neo-Confucian]] philosopher [[Yamazaki Ansai]], who espoused a cosmology of universal mutual interconnectedness, to be especially consonant with pandeism.<ref>Max Bernhard Weinstein, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") (1910), page 235: "Von den Japanern soll einer ihrer bedeutendsten Philosophen, Yamazaki-Ansai, um die mitte des siebzehnten Jahrhunderts, entwickelt haben: “Gott ist das Wesen aller Dinge und durchdringt den Himmel und die Erde.” Das klingt pandeistisch, kann jedoch auch metaphorisch gemeint sein, wie wir ja ähnliche Aussprüche von Gott tun.</ref>

====In Western philosophy====
[[File:Universum.jpg|thumb|right|Pandeism has been proposed to be a traditional religious view that accords with modern science.]]
In ''[[s:The Pilgrimage from Deism to Agnosticism|The Pilgrimage from Deism to Agnosticism]]'', [[Moncure Daniel Conway]] stated that the term, "Pandeism" is "an unscholarly combination."<ref>[[Moncure Daniel Conway]], “The Pilgrimage from Deism to Agnosticism,” published in ''The Free Review'', Vol. I. October 1, 1893, pages 11 to 19. Edited by Robertson, John Mackinnon and Singer, G. Astor.</ref> A similar critique of Pandeism as an 'unsightly' combination of Greek and Latin was made in a review of Weinstein's discussion of Pandeism.<ref name="Kirn">Otto Kirn, reviewer, ''Welt- und Lebensanschauungen, Hervorgegangen aus Religion, Philosophie und Naturerkenntnis'' ("World and Life Views, Emerging From Religion, Philosophy and Nature") in [[Emil Schürer]], [[Adolf von Harnack]], editors, ''Theologische Literaturzeitung'' ("Theological Literature Journal"), Volume 35, column 827 (1910): "Dem Verfasser hat anscheinend die Einteilung: religiöse, rationale und naturwissenschaftlich fundierte Weltanschauungen vorgeschwebt; er hat sie dann aber seinem Material gegenüber schwer durchführbar gefunden und durch die mitgeteilte ersetzt, die das Prinzip der Einteilung nur noch dunkel durchschimmern läßt. Damit hängt wohl auch das vom Verfasser gebildete unschöne griechisch-lateinische Mischwort des ,Pandeismus' zusammen. Nach S. 228 versteht er darunter im Unterschied von dem mehr metaphysisch gearteten Pantheismus einen ,gesteigerten und vereinheitlichten Animismus', also eine populäre Art religiöser Weltdeutung. Prägt man lieh dies ein, so erstaunt man über die weite Ausdehnung, die dem Begriff in der Folge gegeben wird. Nach S. 284 ist Scotus Erigena ein ganzer, nach S. 300 Anselm von Canterbury ein, halber Pandeist'; aber auch bei Nikolaus Cusanus und Giordano Bruno, ja selbst bei Mendelssohn und Lessing wird eine Art von Pandeismus gefunden (S. 306. 321. 346.)." ''Translation'': "The author apparently intended to divide up religious, rational and scientifically based philosophies, but found his material overwhelming, resulting in an effort that can shine through the principle of classification only darkly. This probably is also the source of the unsightly Greek-Latin compound word, 'Pandeism.' At page 228, he understands the difference from the more metaphysical kind of pantheism, an enhanced unified animism that is a popular religious worldview. In remembering this borrowing, we were struck by the vast expanse given the term. According to page 284, Scotus Eriugena is one entirely, at p. 300 Anselm of Canterbury is 'half Pandeist'; but also Nicholas of Cusa and Giordano Bruno, and even in Mendelssohn and Lessing a kind of Pandeism is found (p. 306 321 346.)".</ref> The reviewer further criticises Weinstein's broad assertions that [[Scotus Eriugena]], [[Anselm of Canterbury]], [[Nicholas of Cusa]], [[Giordano Bruno]], [[Moses Mendelssohn|Mendelssohn]], and [[Gotthold Ephraim Lessing|Lessing]] all were Pandeists or leaned towards Pandeism.<ref name="Kirn"/> Towards the beginning of [[World War I]], an article in the ''Yale Sheffield Monthly'' published by the [[Yale University]] [[Sheffield Scientific School]] commented on speculation that the war "means the death of [[Christianity]] and an era of Pandeism or perhaps even the destruction of all which we call modern civilization and culture."<ref>Louis S. Hardin, '17, "The Chimerical Application of Machiavelli's Principles", ''[[Yale Sheffield Monthly]]'', pp 461–465, [[Yale University]], May 1915, p. 463: "Are we virtuous merely because we are restrained by the fetters of the law? We hear men prophecy that this war means the death of Christianity and an era of Pandeism or perhaps even the destruction of all which we call [[modern era|modern]] [[civilization]] and [[culture]]. We hear men predict that the ultimate result of the war will be a blessing to [[human]]ity."</ref> The following year, early 19th-century German philosopher [[Paul Friedrich Köhler]] wrote that Pantheism, Pandeism, [[Monism]] and [[Dualism]] all refer to the same God illuminated in different ways, and that whatever the label, the human soul emanates from this God.
<ref>{{cite book
|title= Kulturwege und Erkenntnisse: Eine kritische Umschau in den Problemen des religiösen und geistigen Lebens
|author = [[Paul Friedrich Köhler]]
|year = 1916
|ISBN = 
|page = 193
|quote = Pantheismus und Pandeismus, Monismus und Dualismus: alles dies sind in Wirklichkeit nur verschiedene Formen des Gottschauens, verschiedene Beleuchtungsarten des Grundbegriffes, nämlich des Höchsten, von dem aus die verschiedenen Strahlungen in die Menschenseele sich hineinsenken und hier ein Spiegelbild projizieren, dessen Wahrnehmung die charakteriologische Eigenart des Einzelindividuums, die durch zeitliches, familiäres und soziologisches Milieu bedingte Auffassungsgabe vermittelt.
}}</ref>

Pandeism was noted by literary critic [[Martin Lüdke]] as a philosophy expressed by early Twentieth-Century [[Portugal|Portuguese]] poet [[Fernando Pessoa]], especially as to those writings made under the pseudonym of [[Alberto Caeiro]].<ref>[[Martin Lüdke]], "Ein moderner Hüter der Dinge; Die Entdeckung des großen Portugiesen geht weiter: [[Fernando Pessoa]] hat in der Poesie Alberto Caeiros seinen Meister gesehen", ("A modern guardian of things; The discovery of the great Portuguese continues: Fernando Pessoa saw its master in the poetry of Alberto Caeiros"), ''[[Frankfurter Rundschau]]'', August 18, 2004. "Caeiro unterläuft die Unterscheidung zwischen dem Schein und dem, was etwa "Denkerge-danken" hinter ihm ausmachen wollen. Die Dinge, wie er sie sieht, sind als was sie scheinen. Sein Pan-Deismus basiert auf einer Ding-[[metaphysics|Metaphysik]], die in der modernen Dichtung des zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts noch Schule machen sollte." ''Translation'': "Caeiro interposes the distinction between the light and what "philosopher thoughts" want to constitute behind him. The things, as he sees them, are as they seem. His pandeism is based on a metaphysical thing, which should still become a school of thought under the modern seal of the twentieth century."</ref> Pandeism was likewise noted by authors like Brazilian journalist and writer [[Otávio de Faria]], and [[British people|British]] scholar and translator of Portuguese fiction [[Giovanni Pontiero]], among others, to be an influence on the writings of noted mid-Twentieth-Century [[Brazilian people|Brazilian]] poet [[Carlos Nejar]],<ref>{{cite book 
|title= Carlos Nejar, poeta e pensador 
|author = [[Giovanni Pontiero]] 
|year = 1983 
|ISBN = 
|page = 349 
|quote = [[Otávio de Faria]] póde falar, com razão, de um pandeísmo de [[Carlos Nejar]]. Não uma poesia panteísta, mas pandeísta. Quero dizer, uma cosmogonia, um canto geral, um cancioneiro do humano e do divino. Mas o divino no humano". ''Translation'': "[[Otávio de Faria]] spoke of the pandeism of [[Carlos Nejar]]. Not a pantheist poetry, but pandeist. I want to say, a cosmogony, one I sing generally, a [[chansonnier]] of the human being and the holy ghost. But the holy ghost in the human being.}}</ref><ref name="Faria">[[Otávio de Faria]], "Pandeísmo em Carlos Nejar", in Última Hora, Rio de Janeiro, May 17, 1978. Quote: "Se Deus é tudo isso, envolve tudo, a palavra andorinha, a palavra poço o a palavra amor, é que Deus é muito grande, enorme, infinito; é Deus realmente e o pandeismo de Nejar é uma das mais fortes ideias poéticas que nos têm chegado do mundo da Poesia. E o que não pode esperar desse poeta, desse criador poético, que em pouco menos de vinte anos, já chegou a essa grande iluminação poética?" ''Translation'': "If God is all, involves everything, swallows every word, the deep word, the word love, then God is very big, huge, infinite; and for a God really like this, the pandeism of Nejar is one of the strongest poetic ideas that we have reached in the world of poetry. And could you expect of this poet, this poetic creator, that in a little less than twenty years, he has arrived at this great poetic illumination?"</ref> of whom de Faria wrote that "the pandeism of Nejar is one of the strongest poetic ideas that we have reached in the world of poetry."<ref name="Faria"/>

Pandeism was also examined by theologian [[Charles Hartshorne]], one of the chief disciples of [[process philosophy|process philosopher]] [[Alfred North Whitehead]]. In his [[process theology]], an extension of Whitehead's work, Hartshorne preferred pandeism to pantheism, explaining that "it is not really the [[God (word)|theos]] that is described".<ref name="Hartshorne">{{Cite book
|title = Man's Vision of God and the Logic of Theism
|author = [[Charles Hartshorne]]
|year = 1941, republished in 1964
|ISBN = 0-208-00498-X}}</ref>{{rp|347}} However, he specifically rejected pandeism early on, finding that a God who had "absolute perfection in some respects, relative perfection in all others" was "able consistently to embrace all that is positive in either deism or pandeism."<ref name="Hartshorne"/>{{rp|348}} Hartshorne accepted the label of panentheism for his beliefs, declaring that "panentheistic doctrine contains all of deism and pandeism except their arbitrary negations".<ref name="Hartshorne"/>{{rp|348}}<ref>Donald Luther Jackson, ''Religious Lies&nbsp;– Religious Truths: It's Time to Tell the Truth!'', page 175 (2012), ISBN 1475243987 : "Charles Hartshorne introduced his process theology in the 1940s, in which he examined, and discarded pantheism, deism, and pandeism in favor of panentheism, finding that such a doctrine contains all of deism and pandeism except their arbitrary negative aspects."</ref>

[[Charles Anselm Bolton]] states in a 1963 article, ''Beyond the Ecumenical: Pan-deism?''<ref name="Bolton">[[Charles Anselm Bolton]], "Beyond the Ecumenical: Pan-deism?", ''Christianity Today'', 1963, page 21.</ref> that he "first came upon this extension of [[ecumenism]] into pan-deism among some [[Roman Catholic]] [[scholar]]s interested primarily in the 'reunion of the churches,' [[Roman Catholic Church|Roman]], [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Orthodox]], [[Anglican]]," and wondered, "what is the ultimate aim of the Curia in promoting the pan-deist movement."<ref name="Bolton"/>

[[Robert A. Heinlein]] especially enjoyed this idea, and raised it in several of his works. Literary critic [[Dan Schneider (writer)|Dan Schneider]] wrote of Heinlein's ''[[Stranger In A Strange Land]]'' that [[Jubal Harshaw]]'s belief in his own [[free will]], "which Mike, Jill, and the Fosterites misinterpret as a pandeistic urge, '[[Thou art God]]!'"<ref>[[Dan Schneider (writer)|Dan Schneider]], [http://www.hackwriters.com/strangerH.htm ''Review of Stranger In A Strange Land (The Uncut Version), by Robert A. Heinlein''] (7/29/05).</ref> Heinlein himself, in his "Aphorisms of [[Lazarus Long]]," in his 1973 book "[[Time Enough for Love]]" wrote, "God split himself into a myriad parts that he might have friends. This may not be true, but it sounds good—and is no sillier than any other theology."<ref>[[Robert A. Heinlein]], Aphorisms of [[Lazarus Long]], in "[[Time Enough for Love]]" (1978 [1973]), page 216.</ref>

A 1995 [[news]] [[Article (publishing)|article]] quoted this use of the term by Jim Garvin, a [[Vietnam veteran]] who became a [[Trappist monk]] in the [[Holy Cross Abbey, Virginia|Holy Cross Abbey]] of [[Berryville, Virginia]]. Garvin described his spiritual position as "'pandeism' or 'pan-en-deism,' something very close to the [[Native Americans in the United States|Native American]] concept of the all- pervading [[Great Spirit]]..."<ref>''Albuquerque Journal'', Saturday, November 11, 1995, B-10.</ref> The following year, Pastor Bob Burridge of the Geneven Institute for Reformed Studies wrote that: "If God was the proximate cause of every act it would make all events to be "God in motion". That is nothing less than pantheism, or more exactly, pandeism."<ref name="Burridge">Bob Burridge, "[http://www.genevaninstitute.org/syllabus/unit-two-theology-proper/lesson-4-the-decrees-of-god/ Theology Proper: Lesson 4 – The Decrees of God]", ''Survey Studies in Reformed Theology'', Genevan Institute for Reformed Studies (1996).</ref> Burridge rejects this model, observing that in Christianity, "The Creator is distinct from his creation. The reality of secondary causes is what separates Christian theism from pandeism."<ref name="Burridge"/> Burridge concludes by challenging that "calling God the author of sin demand[s] a pandeistic understanding of the universe effectively removing the reality of sin and moral law."<ref name="Burridge"/>

===Twenty-first century developments===
More recently, pandeism has been classed as a logical derivation of German philosopher [[Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz]]'s proposition that ours was the [[best of all possible worlds]].<ref name="Lane">{{Cite journal | last = Lane | first = William C. | date = January 2010 |title = Leibniz's Best World Claim Restructured | url = http://apq.press.illinois.edu/47/1/lane.html | journal = American Philosophical Journal | publisher = | volume = 47 | issue = 1 | pages = 57–84 | doi = | accessdate = 9 March 2014}}</ref> In 2010, author William C. Lane contended that:

{{quote|If divine becoming were complete, God's ''[[kenosis]]''--God's self-emptying for the sake of love--would be total. In this ''pandeistic'' view, nothing of God would remain separate and apart from what God would become. Any separate divine existence would be inconsistent with God's unreserved participation in the lives and fortunes of the actualized phenomena."<ref name="Lane"/>{{rp|67}}}}

Acknowledging that American religious philosopher [[William L. Rowe|William Rowe]] has raised "a powerful, evidential argument against ethical theism," Lane further contended that pandeism offers an escape from the [[evidential argument from evil]]:

{{quote|However, it does not count against pandeism. In pandeism, God is no superintending, heavenly power, capable of hourly intervention into earthly affairs. No longer existing "above," God ''cannot'' intervene from above and cannot be blamed for failing to do so. Instead God ''bears'' all suffering, whether the fawn's<ref>[[William L. Rowe|William Rowe]] used, as an example of needless suffering, a fawn horribly burned in a forest fire and unable to move, yet suffering for additional days before its death.</ref> or anyone else's.

Even so, a skeptic might ask, "Why must there be ''so'' much suffering,? Why could not the world's design omit or modify the events that cause it?" In pandeism, the reason is clear: to remain unified, a world must convey information through transactions. Reliable conveyance requires relatively simple, uniform laws. Laws designed to skip around suffering-causing events or to alter their natural consequences (i.e., their consequences under simple laws) would need to be vastly complicated or (equivalently) to contain numerous exceptions.<ref name="Lane"/>{{rp|76–77}}}}

In 2011, social scientist Niall Douglas wrote that in pandeism, "God ''is'' growth, God ''is'' structure/knowledge, God ''is'' everything and nothing simultaneously. And, rather heretically for the Abrahamic religions, to perceive i.e. to cognate i.e. to be of matter i.e. to be structured energy generating a gravimetric field is an aspect of God relating to another aspect of God through light, which is of course God. In this, the underlying metaphysics are most definitely Pandeist."<ref>{{cite book
|author= Niall Douglas
|title= Freeing Growth - A Neo-Capitalist Manifesto
|page= 8
|year= 2011
|ISBN= 9781466463578}}</ref> Alan Dawe's 2011 book ''The God Franchise'', though mentioning pandeism in passing as one of numerous extant theological theories,<ref name="Dawe"/> declines to adopt any "[[-ism]]" as encompassing his view, though Dawe's theory includes the human experience as being a temporarily segregated sliver of the experience of God. This aspect of the theology of pandeism (along with [[pantheism]] and [[panentheism]]) has been compared to the Biblical exhortation in [[Acts]] [[17:28]] that "In him we live and move and have our being,"<ref>{{cite book
|author= David Michael Wylie
|title= Just Stewardship
|page= 24
|year= 2011
|ISBN= 9781257739622}}</ref> while the ''[[Wycliffe Bible|Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia]]'' had in 1975 described the religion of [[Babylon]] as "clearly a type of pan-deism formed from a synthesis of [[Christianity]] and [[paganism]]".<ref>{{cite book
|author= Charles F. Pfeiffer, Howard Frederic Vos, John Ream
|title= Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia
|page= 190
|year= 1975
|ISBN= 0802496970}}</ref> Pandeism has also been described as one of the "older spiritual and religious traditions" whose elements are incorporated into the [[New Age movement]],<ref>{{cite book
|author= Henry Harrison Epps, Jr. 
|title= End times Organizations, Doctrines and Beliefs
|page= 220
|year= 2012
|ISBN= 1477515836
|quote= The New Age movement includes elements of older spiritual and religious traditions ranging from atheism and monotheism through classical pantheism, naturalistic pantheism, pandeism and panentheism to polytheism combined with science and [[Gaia philosophy]]; particularly [[archaeoastronomy]], [[astronomy]], [[ecology]], [[environmentalism]], the [[Gaia hypothesis]], [[psychology]], and [[physics]].}}</ref><ref>{{cite book
|author= Thomas Vanleer
|title= I'm Just Say'n
|page= 85
|year= 2013
|ISBN= 1479765279}}</ref> but also as among the handful of spiritual beliefs which "are compatible with modern [[science]]."<ref>{{cite book
|author= [[Charles Brough (author)|Charles Brough]]
|title= Destiny and Civilization: The Evolutionary Explanation of Religion and History
|page= 295
|year= 2008
|ISBN= 1438913605}}</ref> In 2013, [[Australia]]n [[religious studies]] scholar Raphael Lataster proposed that "Pandeism could be the most likely God-concept of all."<ref name="Lataster">{{cite book
|author= Raphael Lataster
|title= There was no Jesus, there is no God: A Scholarly Examination of the Scientific, Historical, and Philosophical Evidence & Arguments for Monotheism
|page= 165
|year= 2013
|ISBN= 1492234419
|quote= This one god could be of the deistic or pantheistic sort. Deism might be superior in explaining why God has seemingly left us to our own devices and pantheism could be the more logical option as it fits well with the ontological argument's 'maximally-great entity' and doesn't rely on unproven concepts about 'nothing' (as in 'creation out of nothing'). A mixture of the two, pandeism, could be the most likely God-concept of all.}}</ref>

==Notes==
{{Reflist|2}}

==See also==
* ''[[Creative Evolution (book)|Creative Evolution]]'', by [[Henri Bergson]], Chapter IV
* [[Deus otiosus]]
* ''[[God's Debris]]'', by [[Scott Adams]]
* [[Lila (Hinduism)]]
* [[Omnism]]
* [[Panentheism]]
* ''[[Tat Tvam Asi]]''

==External links==
{{wikiquote}}
{{Wiktionary}}
*[http://sites.google.com/site/pandeists/ Institute for Pandeism Studies]
*[http://web2.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/Philosophy/god_theorem/god_theorem/node6.html The Pandeist Theorem] by Robert G. Brown (excerpt from ''A Theorem Concerning God)''
*[http://www.bernardokastrup.com/2010/03/consciousness-and-pandeism.html The Parallels of Pandeism] by Bernardo Kastrup
*[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/bergson/#5 Discussion of ''Creative Evolution''] (from the [http://plato.stanford.edu/ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]).
*[http://www.koilas.org/ Koilas – A Pandeistic Religion]

{{Theism}}
{{philosophy of religion}}
{{Theology}}
{{Philosophy topics}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Pandeism}}
[[:Category:Conceptions of God]]
[[:Category:Deism]]
[[:Category:Pantheism]]
[[:Category:Metatheory of religion]]