Dao Hao Now
Active Member
If the question was about what kind of stamps do you collect…..
First class stamps
Foreign stamps
Commemorative stamps
Rare stamps
Etc.
What would you call somebody who doesn’t collect stamps?
-
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!
What Type of Theologies Do You Believe In?
- Thread starter Exaltist Ethan
- Start date
If the question was about what kind of stamps do you collect…..
First class stamps
Foreign stamps
Commemorative stamps
Rare stamps
Etc.
What would you call somebody who doesn’t collect stamps?
Ignorant, uncaring, or lacking the resources of stamp collecting.
What would you call someone who collects stamps that have no image on them?
Edit: I collect stamps that have no image on them. I'm an atheist in that sense.
Dao Hao Now
Active Member
If by “uncaring” you meant uninterested, I would agree.
The “ignorant” and “lacking the resources” would be attributing unknown presumed reasoning without due cause, or projecting what you might conceive as a reason that you might personally not do so at best.
It could also be considered ad hominem.
In answer to your question:
A blank stamp collector?
QuestioningMind
Well-Known Member
It's a lack of belief and a lack of belief certainly isn't a theology. Just like a Christians lack of belief in Odin isn't a theology.
I spoke rhetorically. I didn't mean that you necessarily need to attach a name to it.
Agnostic Agnosticism.
rational experiences
Veteran Member
My natural conscious teacher brother taught his chosen subject as the tree of life.
Versus.
Evil Satan lying king lord theism of civilisation status man only. God products of earth as dusts and gases.
Human chooses both topic and subject. As a human. Who sees all things created. The status created creation with human exists first.
Owns no human argument legally.
Human looks at natural life as observed.
Says I name the observation a tree. My subject to prove Satanists wrong.
The tree is the name I use as it begins observed as a tree. Ends as tree. By type it's wood.
That exact subject stated why you are wrong theorising gases of earths rock dusts. God theism by human liars.
Tree direct rooted into ground. No change to remove it's topic position subjective teaching.
Atmosphere exact present.
Ground mass exact present.
The tree rooted in ground mass exact life.
Basic you cannot make electricity out of the air I breathe.
Also the tree is not a piece of coal.
If a tree liar can be burnt whilst living.... to still live as a tree and also part coal. Then origin lifes nature as did your machines found itself destroyed. It became layered embedded in stone mass as the ground began falling into sink holes.
Shifting in release of ground fusion as it oscillated into huge carpenter tectonic earth quaking origin science history. Opened earth mass.
By your giant pyramid collider. You liar. You saw it before you died. It's a part of man's science mind human memory.
Why coal was found with a human artefact inside of it.
Versus.
Evil Satan lying king lord theism of civilisation status man only. God products of earth as dusts and gases.
Human chooses both topic and subject. As a human. Who sees all things created. The status created creation with human exists first.
Owns no human argument legally.
Human looks at natural life as observed.
Says I name the observation a tree. My subject to prove Satanists wrong.
The tree is the name I use as it begins observed as a tree. Ends as tree. By type it's wood.
That exact subject stated why you are wrong theorising gases of earths rock dusts. God theism by human liars.
Tree direct rooted into ground. No change to remove it's topic position subjective teaching.
Atmosphere exact present.
Ground mass exact present.
The tree rooted in ground mass exact life.
Basic you cannot make electricity out of the air I breathe.
Also the tree is not a piece of coal.
If a tree liar can be burnt whilst living.... to still live as a tree and also part coal. Then origin lifes nature as did your machines found itself destroyed. It became layered embedded in stone mass as the ground began falling into sink holes.
Shifting in release of ground fusion as it oscillated into huge carpenter tectonic earth quaking origin science history. Opened earth mass.
By your giant pyramid collider. You liar. You saw it before you died. It's a part of man's science mind human memory.
Why coal was found with a human artefact inside of it.
Sedim Haba
Outa here... bye-bye!
Non-Abrahamic Monotheism (Noachideism)
That's not on the list, but then neither is Zoroastrianism.
Noahidism is bound up with Judaism so it's Abrahamic.
Monotheism. I'm just another God of Abraham kinda guy.
The original source: Spectra of Religion and Magic
Upon my research for theology spectrums I came across an article detailing eight distinct theologies abroad a wide range of differing viewpoints regarding God. This includes: transtheism, atheism, agnosticism, panentheism, pantheism, monotheism, henotheism and polytheism.
Human-Focused Theologies Include...
Transtheism is the belief that if God or Gods do exist, they are irrelevant to the development of humans.
Atheism is the disbelief in God or Gods.
Agnosticism is the belief that God or Gods are unknowable, at least to a certain degree.
Material-Focused Theologies Include...
Panentheism is the belief that God is greater than the Universe and includes it.
Pantheism is the belief that God is identical to the Universe, or nature.
God-Focused Theologies Include...
Monotheism, where there is only one God. Note: Includes trinitarianism.
Henotheism, where there are many Gods but one central God.
Polytheism, where there are many Gods on similar standing.
Before anyone asks about my beliefs, syntheism, or simply humans creating God/Gods, is a type of transtheism. Ignosticism, which believes theism is an irrelevant subject matter, and nontheism, which acknowledges that theism is not important, also fit that. Of course there are more specific theologies than this, let's say deism. Most deists believe in one God that does not interfere in the lives of people, but nonetheless created the Universe. That is a type of monotheism.
I am not entirely sure I fully agree with this chart, but it is helpful in understanding the spectrum of theological beliefs nonetheless. There may be other theologies that are not included so I have decided on this poll to include an Other option, provided people who are answering Other give an explanation of their theology. As well, I am opening this poll up for multiple answers from the same person, because theology is a complicated subject and it is entirely possible to combine multiple theologies. I am also making votes public and have people able to change their answers whenever they want. This poll will not close.
Personally, I intend on voting this poll with two answers: transtheism and panentheism. My theology includes The Omniverse as Ultimate Nature, which is a type of panentheism, and my transtheistic beliefs that humankind is evolving their extropy to create and control this deity, which will later become the Synverse.
Alright. Let us know how you answer. What type of theisms are you? Let us know how you think about this topic below.
I think that there is an element of truth (and an element of God) in almost all religions.
The Christian bible makes it clear that worship of mammon can overshadow worship of God.
I believe that worship (or reverence) of human preachers can similarly diminish worship of God. Take, for example, Reverend John Hagee. Overall Reverend Hagee is a very good man. He helped Jews in Israel. Jews were the basis for his religion, but his religion is different. Yet, Reverend Hagee lost sight of God's commandment "thou shalt not kill" and advocated prayer to Jesus to win the war (kill more effectively). It is the bible (God's word) that we should worship, not some human who got a degree in theology.
Thus, adherence to any religion should be secondary to adherence to God.
Even if we don't agree with the way that others practice their religion, we should still respect their worship, unless, of course, it violates God's commandments (like war, for example).
Many Christians disdain Mormons. They claim that it is phony (modern prophet claiming that Europeans settled America, and that there are gold plates with writing, and they assert that the lord visited America). Why not? It makes no sense to have the Lord visit just one small spot on earth. Yet, Mormons are quite definitely Christian.
The original source: Spectra of Religion and Magic
Upon my research for theology spectrums I came across an article detailing eight distinct theologies abroad a wide range of differing viewpoints regarding God. This includes: transtheism, atheism, agnosticism, panentheism, pantheism, monotheism, henotheism and polytheism.
Human-Focused Theologies Include...
Transtheism is the belief that if God or Gods do exist, they are irrelevant to the development of humans.
Atheism is the disbelief in God or Gods.
Agnosticism is the belief that God or Gods are unknowable, at least to a certain degree.
Material-Focused Theologies Include...
Panentheism is the belief that God is greater than the Universe and includes it.
Pantheism is the belief that God is identical to the Universe, or nature.
God-Focused Theologies Include...
Monotheism, where there is only one God. Note: Includes trinitarianism.
Henotheism, where there are many Gods but one central God.
Polytheism, where there are many Gods on similar standing.
Before anyone asks about my beliefs, syntheism, or simply humans creating God/Gods, is a type of transtheism. Ignosticism, which believes theism is an irrelevant subject matter, and nontheism, which acknowledges that theism is not important, also fit that. Of course there are more specific theologies than this, let's say deism. Most deists believe in one God that does not interfere in the lives of people, but nonetheless created the Universe. That is a type of monotheism.
I am not entirely sure I fully agree with this chart, but it is helpful in understanding the spectrum of theological beliefs nonetheless. There may be other theologies that are not included so I have decided on this poll to include an Other option, provided people who are answering Other give an explanation of their theology. As well, I am opening this poll up for multiple answers from the same person, because theology is a complicated subject and it is entirely possible to combine multiple theologies. I am also making votes public and have people able to change their answers whenever they want. This poll will not close.
Personally, I intend on voting this poll with two answers: transtheism and panentheism. My theology includes The Omniverse as Ultimate Nature, which is a type of panentheism, and my transtheistic beliefs that humankind is evolving their extropy to create and control this deity, which will later become the Synverse.
Alright. Let us know how you answer. What type of theisms are you? Let us know how you think about this topic below.
I think that there is an element of truth (and an element of God) in almost all religions.
The Christian bible makes it clear that worship of mammon can overshadow worship of God.
I believe that worship (or reverence) of human preachers can similarly diminish worship of God. Take, for example, Reverend John Hagee. Overall Reverend Hagee is a very good man. He helped Jews in Israel. Jews were the basis for his religion, but his religion is different. Yet, Reverend Hagee lost sight of God's commandment "thou shalt not kill" and advocated prayer to Jesus to win the war (kill more effectively). It is the bible (God's word) that we should worship, not some human who got a degree in theology.
Thus, adherence to any religion should be secondary to adherence to God.
Even if we don't agree with the way that others practice their religion, we should still respect their worship, unless, of course, it violates God's commandments (like war, for example).
Many Christians disdain Mormons. They claim that it is phony (modern prophet claiming that Europeans settled America, and that there are gold plates with writing, and they assert that the lord visited America). Why not? It makes no sense to have the Lord visit just one small spot on earth. Yet, Mormons are quite definitely Christian.
firedragon
Veteran Member
That is 'Jnana" (knowledge, understanding) in Sanskrit. If you want to term it as 'divine', it is your wish.
I didn't know Jain is from Gnana.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
You did not get me quite right, Firedragon. The origin of the word Jain is from 'ji' which means 'to conquer". It is similar to 'jaya'. Sanskrit - Dictionary
"The name Jainism derives from the Sanskrit verb ji, “to conquer.” It refers to the ascetic battle that, it is believed, Jain renunciants (monks and nuns) must fight against the passions and bodily senses to gain enlightenment, or omniscience and purity of soul."
Jainism | Definition, Beliefs, History, Literature, & Facts
"Gnana" (or many a times spelled as 'Jnana', and in Buddhism known as 'jhana') is realization of the truth, understanding, awareness, knowledge, etc. Sanskrit - Dictionary
I was telling @Cosmos-intérieur that those who have "gnana" were believed to be 'omniscient'.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Absolutely correct. Apologies. I misunderstood your statement.
Ji simply means victory. Jina means victor. Yes like Jaya. I guess conquer and conquerer are OK but maybe later the word conquerer was used. It sounds nice.
I don't know much about Jainism.
Exaltist Ethan
Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
If I were to amend this list I probably would include poly-pantheism after agnosticism but before panentheism. Poly-pantheism, or omnitheism, is the belief that each individual and thing itself is a God in its own right. And there are people in this thread who have said that they identify as omnitheistic, however I felt like the current list of eight was sufficient for most people and their variations of theologies. Both pantheism and omnitheism are material-driven theisms, but pantheism identifies the whole as a single God, whereas omnitheists isolate each thing as its own individual God... They are different, and if you consider yourself omnitheistic, such as Cosmos-intérieur, feel free to vote for Other accordingly. I wanted to stay true to the chart I saw and not amend it with countless sub-theologies anyways.
What's funny about "gods" is they are less perfect then the family of Mohammad (s) in my view. I just don't worship the family of Mohammad (s) because they are like an infinitely small bug compared to the Creator, but when I think about "gods", the family of Mohammad (s) are greater then all their descriptions in mythologies, even in sheer power.
I exalt Mohammad (S) and his family (a), don't go beyond it as that be equating them with God nor equate non-exalted and non-chosen people with them.
As God he is exalted and great, and believers are great.
Heck, even Khomeini (q) and Khamenei (h) are more perfect then some of these descriptions of gods in mythologies and they aren't even at the level of exalted ones (they aren't chosen by God like Prophets, Messenger and chosen ladies).
I exalt Mohammad (S) and his family (a), don't go beyond it as that be equating them with God nor equate non-exalted and non-chosen people with them.
As God he is exalted and great, and believers are great.
Heck, even Khomeini (q) and Khamenei (h) are more perfect then some of these descriptions of gods in mythologies and they aren't even at the level of exalted ones (they aren't chosen by God like Prophets, Messenger and chosen ladies).
Sedim Haba
Outa here... bye-bye!
Only if you accept the 'rabbis' as authorities. But, they don't have any real authority outside their
own communities, they don't have real Semikhah as that ended in the 5th century.
I suppose I continue my Karaite ways, which are all one really needs to be a Noahide.
So I 'unbind' Noah from Abrahamic authority outside of the Chumash itself.
Ella S.
Well-Known Member
I voted transtheism, atheism, and pantheism.
I am a transtheist as far as I don't think the existence of the gods described by most religions would really affect my life in a meaningful way, at least not until I am judged after I die.
I am an atheist in the sense that I believe that a Creator God is nomologically impossible and that there are no disembodied agencies, including most traditional conceptions of gods as powerful spirits or sentient forces. This is a positive belief; I am not agnostic on that matter, but I adhere to the more rigid, philosophical definition of atheism which is the belief that no gods exist.
I am a pantheist in the sense that I believe in hard determinism, because time seems to be a dimension and evidence points towards us living in a block universe, and I have chosen to revere this facet of nature. The ancient Stoics personified this form of fate as God, or at least as the "reason of God" demonstrated by the Logos. It ended up inspiring notable pantheists like Spinoza, who in turn inspired Einstein, who in turn inspired Carl Sagan and Stephen Hawking, etc.
This approach is what we know as "scientific pantheism," and it can be seen as a form of "sexed-up atheism." It's what the World Pantheist Movement is mostly preoccupied with. For more information on how pantheism and atheism are compatible, here are two relevant links, because it's a debate that I see crop up a lot:
Pantheism as "Sexed-up Atheism"
Pantheism as "Sexed-up Atheism"
So is scientific pantheism just atheism or humanism in disguise?
Pantheism: FAQs on pantheism, panentheism, paganism etc.
I am a transtheist as far as I don't think the existence of the gods described by most religions would really affect my life in a meaningful way, at least not until I am judged after I die.
I am an atheist in the sense that I believe that a Creator God is nomologically impossible and that there are no disembodied agencies, including most traditional conceptions of gods as powerful spirits or sentient forces. This is a positive belief; I am not agnostic on that matter, but I adhere to the more rigid, philosophical definition of atheism which is the belief that no gods exist.
I am a pantheist in the sense that I believe in hard determinism, because time seems to be a dimension and evidence points towards us living in a block universe, and I have chosen to revere this facet of nature. The ancient Stoics personified this form of fate as God, or at least as the "reason of God" demonstrated by the Logos. It ended up inspiring notable pantheists like Spinoza, who in turn inspired Einstein, who in turn inspired Carl Sagan and Stephen Hawking, etc.
This approach is what we know as "scientific pantheism," and it can be seen as a form of "sexed-up atheism." It's what the World Pantheist Movement is mostly preoccupied with. For more information on how pantheism and atheism are compatible, here are two relevant links, because it's a debate that I see crop up a lot:
Pantheism as "Sexed-up Atheism"
Pantheism as "Sexed-up Atheism"
So is scientific pantheism just atheism or humanism in disguise?
Pantheism: FAQs on pantheism, panentheism, paganism etc.
Last edited: