(11-23-2011, 01:50 PM)Diana Wrote: Good points. But the observer (or some sort of direction/focus/intention) is needed to manifest from the infinite potential. This is where you can lead the discussion from infinite potential to a prime instance of manifestation.
David Bohm's Wholeness and the Implicate Order talks about the implicate and explicate (unmanifest and manifest) universe. The idea that there is an explicate universe presupposes that some intention or focus caused something explicate.
That's how I see it..there must exist a creative potential that leads to manifestation.
(11-23-2011, 01:59 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: This is an interesting topic.
I've never been an "atheist". Although, nowadays, my view could probably be classified under atheism. If the definition is solely "belief in a God", then I am atheist. At the same time, my perception of "oneness" falls into the same perception of what I originally thought of as God. I absolutely never viewed a God outside of existence that created our earth. Even when I was classified as Christian, I would get into arguments about that. To me, all the "omni-words" clearly defined "god" as everything. It still does, but as I've developed along my way, I don't have "god" in my spectrum anymore.
One disagreement I've had is with someone who literally thinks god is an alien. Like some ET that made us.
You're basically saying that there are no deities, which seems to be the main point that atheists spend most of their energy on without going any further. A logical conclusion. So the focus should then shift to a more transcendent view such as pantheism or monism, which I don't think many atheists look into based on what I'm hearing.