Category talk:Pantheists

It looks like Paul Vogel snuck in his version of the cosmotheism article here, and no one noticed. Shouldn't what is below be removed? I don't think that this is appropriate for "Category Talk:Pantheism" --Nat 02:23, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Vogel is hard-banned, so yeah, anything he writes may be removed by anyone. —No-One Jones 02:24, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Criteria for inclusion[edit]

I tagged the category with {{cleancat}} and {{clarify}} as requiring inclusion criteria. The article Pantheism does not really help when deciding whether a person is a member or not, because it appears to cover a range from atheism to theism. What might be usable improvements for this category?

inclusion criteria to require a reliable source stating that subject X is a naturalistic pantheist?
split category into three (each with stated criteria as above): Classical pantheists, Biblical pantheists and Naturalistic pantheists?
abandon category as being too difficult to reliably assign members, and/or merge to List of pantheists where each member's beliefs can be sourced and qualified?

I have posted short notices at Talk:List of pantheists and Talk:Pantheism. Does anyone have better ideas? -84user (talk) 15:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above issue no longer applies as the article - which previously was highly inaccurate, sabotaged with OR and POV - has now been radically edited for accuracy and neutrality. A Pantheist is someone for whom the Universe is the only "God" - this is clearly the case for Hawking (see below) and Einstein (who accepted "Spinoza's God". --Naturalistic (talk) 23:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure the Pantheism types as found on the pantheism article are appropriate. For example biblical pantheism, if it actually ever existed, has no internet presence at all. The few things I could find were basically christians saying the (very few) bits in the bible that could be mistaken as pantheism are in fact god's omniscience, which isn't pantheism. The only form of pantheism that seems to survive today is scientific (naturalistic?) pantheism. Classical pantheism shouldn't have been merged with that article, it created a big mess. Naturalistic ✉ 23:13, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'd like to keep only people who identified themselves as pantheists. I'm not sure that Hawking claims to be pantheist in saying he believes in god "if by God is meant the embodiment of the laws of the universe.", and the same could probably go for Einstein. I mean, I believe in god too, if by god is meant Jimi Hendrix... I wouldn't like being categorized by other people (especially after my death) when all I do is appreciate good music. Naturalistic ✉ 23:22, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Classifying people as pantheists even if they did not/do not use the term is very similar to classifying people as pacifists, socialists etc who did not use those terms. A Pantheist is someone with Pantheistic beliefs, which means the Universe/Nature is their only God or "God." Such people existed before 1710, when "pantheistic" was first defined. Such people existed and exist after that word was invented, even though they did not/do not use the term. Naturalistic ✉ 19:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]