Talk:Transtheism

message: the article needs to be reworked: there are too many quotes, its not exactly neutral (among others: "transtheism is <<(...) each of these doctrines being a more accurate description than the others under various conditions, but none being completely accurate on a consistent basis. (...)>>"; "(...) is absurd and unacceptable.")--Unkn0wn 22:38, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: what is the history of transtheism and who 'created it' I mean, who are the theologians behind it, and also... I think that us not being god is too much of an asumption since we can't be sure of that.--Cosmic girl 02:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In the unending process between thought and matter, if one end is God, we are far but not so different. Note that that end is unknowable and that plenty of time is spent trying, which already means that we are nearer than we think.--Harvestman 21:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: Okay, I took some time to clean this article up back into headerings and what not without really altering the content. Please not that this is how an article should look like for future reference (headings are nice...) Thanks! (oh, and restored the "See also" section as there was no reason to delete it) Sasquatch  t|c 06:25, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: The initial gist I got was "the gods' nature (biological/spiritual makeup) is such that it is syncretic toward theism and atheism" which is how it is beyond theism and atheism. An oversimplification perhaps, but it is clear, unlike the article, about what exactly we're dealing with. The article as it stands is clear that transtheism is beyond theism and atheism but is not clear about what puts it there. It's a crucial detail. I may be taking away the wrong definition here since I'm not familiar with it otherwise but it still stands that the article is not clear on this point. On rereading I came away with a completely different gist, that it is beyond by being irrelevant to a/theism, and on a third reading concluded that it is simply any theism or atheism that holds something else as above and beyond gods or a set of gods. Which, if any, of these actually describe transtheism, and is really too much to ask someone who knows to make it clear in the article? PrincessPimpernel (talk) 09:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear 

message: User:Editor2020 did and undo to my last revision claiming that I "messed it up" when my action was precisely the contrary: 
# the note in the new place is more plausible since it talks about only the specific claim "Transtheism is a term coined by philosopher Paul Tillich or Indologist Heinrich Zimmer", having nothing to do with the sequel "referring to a system of thought or religious philosophy which is neither theistic, nor atheistic"; 
# the term "impossible" is totally innapropriate (good, old philosophy and also good sense teaches us that): it could very well be the case that a letter left by one of the writers has just the answer or just any other perfectly plausible way for us to know the real creator of the word. Just because we don't have such thing now doesn't make it "impossible" in any sensible meaning of that word, only "difficult" or words close to this. 
Momergil (talk) 03:01, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undo by Editor2020 

message: Both metatheism and transtheism are open to metaphysics, and open to processes not accepted neither acceptable by physics. A metatheist might claim "I don't care so much about paranormal activities outside physics". Not carrying isn't a neural stance in a global society with so many migrants who flee also because of sect violence. Not thinking and not caring allows space for those who care, and they're plenty! That's the mistake of metatheism and transtheism; they don't acknowledge that blur opinions or not supporting reason or myth, have an impact on society because allow those with clear opinions to expand. Many articles have a controversy section. Especially this entry, this article is "controversial for mainstream society" thus avoiding speaking about the main issue is unwise!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2149:8405:BA00:3131:9048:7A55:5364 (talk) 14:29, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metatheism is usually a soft Transtheism, a little less metaphysical