>2016-1
>not being polydeist
What's your excuse?
>and then he said he's a polydeist
There is no heaven in polytheism, why spend your life kissing ass?
>>413301
Serious question: why are you a polydeist? What convinced you?
>>413309
I am not exactly polydeist, but it describes my beliefs more accurately than any other word. This is why:
http://pastebin.com/LaSJY0CM
>>413327
I believe pretty much the same thing, though the reasoning and concepts are a bit different. Panentheism ftw
>>413340
Interesting, I hadn't heard the term panentheism before. It definitely seems better than pantheism.
>>413327
How about you just explain what is the point of believing in multiple gods that don't even do shit to you. Whether you insult them or give them shit, they still don't care. The point of being a deist is the idea that a god had to create the universe, but he doesn't matter beyond that. How does that idea apply to multiple gods?
>>413350
>the point
You clearly don't understand the concept of belief. It's not about having a point, it's not about obtaining something or getting anything out of it. Rather, it's what appears to be the most likely scenario to be the truth -- whether good, bad, or neutral.
>The point of being a deist is the idea that a god had to create the universe, but he doesn't matter beyond that.
Not really. That is what deism has been made out to be by theists but deists are not necessarily opposed to the possibility of God (or in the case of polydeism, gods) influencing the universe even now.
>>413350
>How does that idea apply to multiple gods?
The same way it would apply to a single god.
>>413373
Okay, let me rephrase: one becomes a deist because they believe that there had to have been a Prime Mover, a first cause. Why would one believe that first cause was multiple independent entities?
>>413377
Because it is clear that the universe is not a result of chance and there is no reason to believe that a responsible being is the only existant being of its type.
en.wikipedia.org/polydeism
