Welcome to a problem-identifying node of the Pandeism index!!
To be a Pandeist and speak of the
philosophy of
Pandeism is, too often, to invite the
scorn of Antipandeists, be they from the
theistic or
atheistic end of the
theological spectrum. A number of common
errors tend to characterize antipandeistic commentary.
Firstly, the antipandeist may ponder loudly that pandeism must have to do with worship of
panda bears, or
frying pans, or the
Greek satyr-god
Pan.
"What's your religion?" they ask.
"Well, I'm a Pandeist, which--"
"A Pandeist? What, you worship Pandas? Hahahahaha, that's dumb."
"No, Pandeism is the belief--"
"Hey Larry, this guy worships Pandas. Hahahahaha!! How dumb is that!!"
Now, to be sure, Pandeism has something to do with pandas and frying pans and the Greek satyr-god Pan, for Pandeists believe that our Creator became our Universe, and that all things -- including these things -- exist within our Creator, and are of our Creator, just as we are. And there are solid grounds in
physics (most recently in
light theory), and
philosophy and
mysticism alike for believing as such. But attempting to explain as much often elicits a second kind of error, a close cousin of the first error outlined above. And this is the sort of conflationary error of assuming that since Pandeists believe all things are part of our Creator, that Pandeists must '
worship' all things in the true "pan" sense, must treat all things indiscriminately (though this is most often framed in the sense that pandeists "worship"
brooks and
birds and
rocks and
trees, and such).
There is certainly a point of view which welcomes this sort of attack, as it shows that the disparager can muster no argument of of substance against Pandeism, that the best they can do is avoid the fundaments of it with
wordplay and
misdirection. Though one would prefer to engage in an actual addressing of the essences assigned, it is heartening to know that so many opponents simply have no objection based in anything resembling the logic and reason from which Pandeism itself arises.
Now, there are errors which tend to be peculiar to the ideology of the one seeking to judge Pandeism. Atheists immediately label Pandeism as theism and trot out attacks against peculiar theistic notions not shared by Pandeism, such as the idea (denied by Pandeism) that there is a Creator who at the same time knows all of the outcomes before it creates and yet treats sentient beings who simply fulfill these outcomes as if they have '
free will.' And theists immediately label it as atheism, and suppose that Pandeists believe that the incredible fortuity of the circumstances of our existence is merely a matter of random chance. And yet,
Pandeism sets forth an explanation at the outset as to how it fully accounts for the things theists believe, and for the things atheists believe as well; indeed, it would be folly to exclude either theism or atheism from examination under the pandeistic model, for theism is constrained from providing a logically complete accounting of the diversity of belief, while atheism does not actually explain anything so much as assert that the ultimate explanation, though unknown, is not or can not be theological -- this is what divides the starkness of atheism from the explanatory power of the pandeistic model.
Further down the line, intentionally or ignorantly, many confuse Pandeism with its component element of Pantheism, or with its component element of Deism. They presume that Pandeism incorporates the pantheistic failure to explain the origin of our Universe (it does not; it explains it deistically); and they presume that Pandeism incorporates the characterization oft given deistic thought, which is that our Creator has abandoned us. Though this misrepresents most deistic beliefs, it is peculiarly innaccurate with respect to Pandeism, wherein it is understood that our Creator
became our Universe,
became (in some tiny part) us, and so is more intimately connected with us than a Creator can otherwise be imagined to be. And finally, in some instances, people who are aware that certain strains of
Hinduism are pandeistic will seek to conflate Pandeism with Hinduism, including the theistic and
polytheistic aspects of Hinduism.
But the Pandeist must not, and does not shy from addressing these
misunderstandings. For no matter what
persecution may be leveled against our harsh conformance to a logical theology, in correcting the errors of antipandeism we slowly move our fellows towards the day when Pandeism brings about an era of
World Peace,
transhumanistic advancement,
interstellar travel, and mastery over the nature of our Universe itself.
----
FERRASSIC