I do not understand how it is not a choice. You are saying I am born to believe in god which is why I am a Deist? So no such thing as belief exists?
No. I am saying that belief, specifically belief in some concept of God, is something that some people can't very well avoid, while others shouldn't even attempt to have. And there is a whole spectrum in between.
I have no idea how anyone could bring himself into believing that belief "is a choice". That is not only patently untrue, but also a disrespectful notion to hold.
Maybe your definition of choice is different, I do not understand how believing in god is a choice based upon one's believes.
For many, perhaps even most people, belief in a God of some kind is not in any meaningful sense a choice. It is more like a vocation, really.
And as for what is the point of a "theist only religion"? All religions require belief in god or the supernatural at least, if you don't then how would it be a religion?
By actually being religions, of course. Which is to say, by dealing with the spiritual needs of people, with the need to bridge the mundane reality with the craving for higher purposes and values.
Belief in God in not only not always a need for that; often enough it is a full hindrance, even a source of utter corruption.
Name me an actual religion that permits atheists to be deemed adherent of it.
Shinto, Confucionism, Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, arguably Jainism. Even Humanistic Judaism. More are sure to follow once we reach enough of a social development.
How can an atheist believe in god and still be an atheist?
Beats me.
Atheists do not have religions.
Really? One would think I would know...
That ruins the purpose of being an atheist
Generally speaking, there is no purpose to being an atheist. It just happens.
It is no big deal, either. Nor is being a Theist.
Belief in God is, by any reasonable evaluation, a minor detail of either the individual or his religious practice.
Just because religion is meant for theists does not mean atheists are shunned.
Actually, it does. But that is only important if people choose to value such a definition of religion, which of course I will not.
It just means that to be in a religion of any kind you have to believe in god, nothing more than that.
So you don't realize that it is a classical example of discrimination? Or that it doesn't even have a point?
You might as well decree, with just as much justification, that a "true" religion must be practiced in a specific language, or only in a certain geographical territory, or just by people of a certain descendency. It is simply way too arbitrary.
Come to think of it, discrimination on any of those other grounds is less arbitrary. They at least involve factors of actual relevancy. "God", in practice, is a common name shared by various concepts, not all of them compatible or consistently defined, some of them very much at odds with each other. That is sometimes helpful in making theistic beliefs
popular, but it does not help in keeping them clear in purpose.
Also what are you considering universal? We are referring to a universal religion which means that god, the supernatural and spirituality must be present in it. Somehow you are equating a religion to a club of sorts letting literally everybody in.
That is what an universal religion means, isn't it?
A universal religion is not universal in this sense. A universal religion is like universal remote, it only applies for televisions and not garage door remotes. I am only using religion in the definitive sense that it is used in and not in a social context of some sorts.
Let's just say that I can't bring myself to agree with your understanding of what a religion is.
