-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Non-Theist
- Thread starter Nakosis
- Start date
Yup.
You still haven't explained (that I've seen) how being against "gods" somehow means you have to know all gods.
I'm still curious.
So, centipedes creep me out. I am against the existence of centipedes. Do I have to know every centipede there is in order to truly be against centipedes?
I don't get the argument. I'd truly like to.
I have many times, actually.
No, you just have to have an idea of what a centipede is.
What's a god?
Let's say I'm forgetful. (Not that it's a lie.)
I have an idea of what a god is.
I shouldn't have to share it with you to be able to say I'm an atheist.
The best description of god that I've encountered, though it was no doubt non-unique, was Leonard Cohen describing it as the nameless. Picture Adam, going around the Garden naming things. They have existence because of names. Names are synonymous with their concepts, giving them unique identity. We humans (Adam) with our mental capacities go around naming all the things we encounter, and as they are named they take on solid existence. But behind our conscious dividing, partitioning, classifying and assigning of names, there is a unified and undivided world that works cohesively despite us. Any words we could assign to it automatically divide it. They spoil it, or as Nietzsche would say, to believe in the words more than it is to kill it. And we do believe in words more than we believe in it.
So I'm handing out a description of god. How does that somehow imply that I have to know all gods?
So I'm handing out a description of god. How does that somehow imply that I have to know all gods?
Last edited:
Samantha Rinne
Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist
There is a difference between meaning and connotation.
Non- usually has a connotation of "not having" such as nonfat yogurt.
A- usually has a connotation of "not (and slightly at odds with)" such as anarchy.
That is to say, an atheist, I would consider more likely to get in religious debates, while a nontheist doesn't care. But maybe that's just me.
No, but you'll have to share it with me if you want to believe that you really do have one.
dfnj
Well-Known Member
In a post atheist World many people are becoming anatheists:
https://www.amazon.com/Religion-Ath...s=religion+for+atheists&qid=1585367538&sr=8-2
dfnj
Well-Known Member
Denotation? Is this a trick question?
Again, why do I have to be familiar with all centipedes to say I disbelieve (metaphorically) in centipedes? I've yet to hear the argument.
Martin
Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
Isn't a deist effectively a type of theist? A different idea about God?
As for the OP, non-theist most often seems to be used as a euphemism for atheist. It could also mean agnostic, I think, but why not just use that word?
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Something else.
Of course, a lot of words have more than one meaning, what defines which definition is how it is used. But by definition, a theist at minimum, can believe in just a creator god just like ypurs. So since it's possible for a theist to believe a god just like yours.....
So your statement here is illogical because it contradicts itself. Here, the bare minimum definition of theist (my definition, by the way) must me be used because it strictly refer to all theists. Being a theist and not a theist at the same time is a contradiction, hence illogical.
So now that you have this knowledge, especially in regards to logic, you can see why I laughed at your funny statement.
Once again, you are said....
And translating that it reads, "a non-theist can still believe in a creator god, not just a creator god."
Or it can be read as this, "a non-theist can still believe in a theistic god, just not a creator god."
And using another definition of theist there is no contradiction.
Regards
Mikkel
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
It depends for the definition of theist and deist. In some cases yes, in others no.
Regards
Mikkel
Martin
Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
According to the Wiki article, deism is just a different way of establishing the existence of a supreme being (observation as opposed to revelation). Deism - Wikipedia
So it looks like "non-theism" would include "non-deism".
Anyway, non-theist sounds very vague to me, somewhere between atheist and agnostic.
stvdv
Veteran Member
Yes, all of them Gods
RedDragon94
Love everyone, meditate often
Some people in general choose not to react to others in general.
We have bigger things to worry about besides the "right" religion.
How does someone do that, exactly?Yes, all of them Gods
I'm using the normal definitions of the words.
But yes: if you make up your own definitions, words can mean whatever you want.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
I am not making up my own definitions of the words. I am just using other sources of the words. But if it makes you feel better to think they are solely mine feel free to think so.
Regards
Mikkel