I don’t know how rare this is (Scott?), but our librarian just dropped a copy of the 1935 Beacon Song and Service Book on my desk. I’m really enjoying thumbing through it. It’s a shame Singing the Living Tradition doesn’t have some short orders of worship in it. I miss that from the UMC’s hymnal and book of worship.

Honestly, this is too much. Professional atheist Richard Dawkins has started a social network for atheists on his own website, at richarddawkins.net/social.

Okay, I get it that someone wants to start a social network for atheists. Not a bad idea. Why not? But putting it on your own, named domain as a subdirectory? Doesn’t exactly smack of confidence. (Exception here.)

Shouldn’t it be at something like atheists.com?

Dawkins is going to have to buy me another couple of drinks before I give him my number. When I checked it out, there were 4241 total members, and over two of them were online. (Click the photo for the screenshot.) The night is still young, but it looks like I’m not the only one who feels that way.

A quick search didn’t turn up Dawkins as a member of his own network.

I swear to god, it’s not all about him. It just looks that way.

Welcome to the social. The demo is free.

(Hat tip to ATLmalcontent.)

This grim reaper of a feline better not snuggle up to me!

After browsing some gnostic bloggers, I went and picked up a copy of VALIS, one of Phil K. Dick’s last novels. It’s a trip.

He writes: “They ought to make it a binding clause that if you find God you get to keep him.”

Assuming they do let you keep God, the problems come when you misplace him. It’s not that you lost God. It’s just that you don’t remember where you put him.

So where is God? Click to continue reading “Finding and misplacing god”

Check it out.

In the comments, Hafidha asks me to spell out how I can say I’m not a theist or atheist but then say I’m something of a panentheist. My answer: there’s theism and then there’s theism.

By “theism,” most folks usually mean monotheism, with one god who is all-knowing, all-powerful, all-present, and all-loving. Different flavors of the supernatural can come into play here.

But, yeah, different forms of belief in god(s) can be lumped in together under the blanket term “theism.” There are dozens of flavors under that broad sort of “theism.” My agnostic panentheism is just one of them. There can be one god or many. Some of them use the same name(s), which is confusing. The different gods that can fall under this broader theism aren’t necessarily all-knowing, all-powerful or all-present, so there isn’t necessarily an element of the supernatural for the various flavors.

It’s been my experience that most atheists have rejected the first theism—traditional monotheism—but haven’t looked into the other theisms much. Maybe they’d be better described as “amonotheists.”

It’s as though they’ve tried Coke and go around saying they reject all carbonated drinks. Sure, Coke is the most common. In some parts of the country, Coke stands for all carbonated beverages. (“I’d like a Coke.” “Which kind?”)

But drinkers of Diet 7-Up or Red Bull don’t have to take guff of them when an a-Coke-ists doesn’t know anything about Diet 7-Up or Red Bull. Click to continue reading “Response to Hafidha: Atheism is all about Coke”