NeoTheism?

[Sha'irullah]

It is not a term because nobody with widespread publication and influence has coined it yet.

We are speaking in hypotheticals missy

...Mew

 

[Sha'irullah]

Also an interesting side effect to this topic, is that there is very little information relative to the words "new"or "neo" combined with the word "Theism". So, this topic is going to come up in the search engines with these words in a search. And who knows, maybe it will bring in some folks off the web to have a look at the wonderment that is this message board. Maybe

ADVERTISMENT! YAYA! Mew mew mew YAY

...Mew

 

[Sha'irullah]

In a fashion. I think it might be more accurate to say that neo-theism is anathema to fundamentalist religion, which is a relatively narrow subset of all that religion encompasses. Relatively few religions are dogmatic (as in, lays down ideas that are regarded as Absolute Truth). Most of the more flexible than that.

Neo-theism though should be linked to the new theistic movements that are chipping at the traditiona orthodoxy of religious approach.

new theistic movements all have:

• anti-dogmatism
• anti-religion
• anti-clergy
• pro-science
• pro-human rights

...aspects in common. I think it is best to acknowledge what it is that makes it new in opposition to traditional religious and theistic perceptions.

I'm not sure what to make of the term "neo-theism" overall, though. My default understanding of theism includes something like neo-theism in its framework anyway, so I don't feel as much of a need for an extra label. I'm certainly not part of any organized social movement revolving around it, and that's where I could see the term being more useful?

Sociologist would want this era of theism labelled no doubt. It has nothing to do with the theistic community as I am surely not involved in it. I just see the merit of acknowledging the current flux of theisms that are popping out. Very old stuff like polytheism is coming back thanks to the "neo" pagans even.

...Mew

 

[Quintessence]

Neo-theism though should be linked to the new theistic movements that are chipping at the traditiona orthodoxy of religious approach.

new theistic movements all have:

• anti-dogmatism
• anti-religion
• anti-clergy
• pro-science
• pro-human rights

...aspects in common. I think it is best to acknowledge what it is that makes it new in opposition to traditional religious and theistic perceptions.

I'd think we want to clarify more precisely what each of the things on this list mean. I think it gets a sense of the overall patterns present in the article Cynthia cited earlier, but leaves some room for interpretations that could be off-base. For example, "anti" language seems somewhat problematic to describe a theistic angle that is supposed to be about freer theology. I know that I would not identify myself as "anti" any of these things; I have no problem with dogmatic religions, I certainly have no problem with religion as a whole seeing as how I have one myself, and I actually bemoan the fact that my religion barely has any supported clergy or infrastructure. While pro-science, I'm not pro-science for frivolous pursuits, and I do not support the "rights" of humans at the expense of the rest of the planet.

Sociologist would want this era of theism labelled no doubt. It has nothing to do with the theistic community as I am surely not involved in it. I just see the merit of acknowledging the current flux of theisms that are popping out. Very old stuff like polytheism is coming back thanks to the "neo" pagans even.

...Mew

Mew?

I'll leave the classification schemes to the academics. We change the stories we tell about things over time. Different people see different patterns and different trends. I think it's worth pointing out that countercultural religion and theology isn't really new at all and has happened on a routine basis throughout history. You mentioned Neopaganism - that movement grew out of one of those counterculture movements. Although it's perhaps difficult to think about them this way, Evangelicals also were countercultural for their time, as were their larger Protestant grouping. Being a touch of an academic, I do find these things fascinating to ponder, but when it comes to being who I am and walking my path, I try to leave the labeling fuss at the door.

 

[mystic64]

Neo-theism though should be linked to the new theistic movements that are chipping at the traditiona orthodoxy of religious approach.








new theistic movements all have:

• anti-dogmatism
• anti-religion
• anti-clergy
• pro-science
• pro-human rights

...aspects in common. I think it is best to acknowledge what it is that makes it new in opposition to traditional religious and theistic perceptions.



Sociologist would want this era of theism labelled no doubt. It has nothing to do with the theistic community as I am surely not involved in it. I just see the merit of acknowledging the current flux of theisms that are popping out. Very old stuff like polytheism is coming back thanks to the "neo" pagans even.

...Mew

Well Philotech , in an attempt to stay within the "spirit" of things , "All theistic movements originated as "Neo-Theisms"." And "Dogmatic" is Human nature and really has nothing to do with religion as a unique aspect of human behavior.

Dictionary: "theism": n. Belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world.

Dogmatic is an attempt to maintain a "set pattern" reality and "new" is an attempt to change an established "set pattern" reality. Theism could be considered a set pattern reality and atheism could be considered an attempt to change that set pattern reality. But because atheism is no longer new and it has an established following, it can no longer be considered, as a concept, a "Neo-Theism". As with all "set pattern" realities, and standard established atheism is no different, there are folks that are attempting to change the concept of standard atheism and those folks are being called or calling themselves, "Neo-Atheist".

Now Philotech, you are saying that old theism is being challenged by new theism by new theism's attempt to remove the "dogmic" approach (along with some other things), which is the attempt of old religion to maintain an established "set pattern". And generally speaking this attempted movement seems to be falling under the classification of "New Age".

Humm? Well Philotech, I admit that you might have me cornered because the definition of "theism" is pretty absolute. Which then creates the approach to the study of "Neo-Theism" as to a possible definition, "The study of or the state of being of, the attempting to change the "set pattern" of an established religion." Which would actually amount to a different "approach" to a belief in a god or gods, including God as the creator and ruler, than what is generally considered established.

Originally the Protestant movement was a Neo-Thesim to the established Catholic Church. And now that Protestant has become an establishment, the Jehovah Witness movement is now a "Neo-Theism" to the Protestant establishment. Just as the Neo Atheists are a new approach (Neo-Atheism) to established Atheism.

Maybe (mew?)