"I am not a Theist & not religious but I believe in

[Zzyzx]

.
Does the following seem self-contradictory?

From ONE post in a current thread –

God speaks through ALL His creation including us men, and just because we deny to hear Him (because of sin) doesn't mean it is lost.

Of course I don't expect you to believe in God just because I do, and that I believe it was His revelation

had very little education, and struggle to express myself, especially with the things God has revealed to me.

This is exactly why God used His Prophets and even His Son to personally talk to us.

I am here to 'reveal by Undeniable Scientific Evidence' our Creator.

Infinity, the origin of the universe, the beginning of life" may be beyond your understanding, or the refusal thereof, but is definitely not mine.

AND

I am not religious, how can I explain this to you?

I will not become a religious theist/atheist just to please you.

I'm serious my friend, since I have told you at least 500 times in debates that I am not a Theist, yet you still keep referring to me as a Theist.

Note: Theism is defined as: Belief in the existence of a god or gods

Religion is difficult to define but generally involves some belief in a supernatural entity that may (or may not) influence human affairs – or perhaps an afterlife


Question for debate: If one believes in God can they NOT be a Theist and NOT be religious?

[arian]

[Replying to arian]

If you believe in a Creator, then you are a theist. It doesn't matter if your beliefs are different from everyone else in every religion, it is still theism.

Read it again help3434, there is our Creator God, which can only be One as I explain in the Undeniable Evidence of our Creator, and then you have all these gods that they study in religions.
Remember, like toy plastic soldiers compared to your dad, a real soldier. If children learn about, exchange toy soldier cards, all about these plastic toys, or ideas of make belief soldiers like Pokémon, doesn't mean they are doing this with real men, real soldiers right? No matter how popular and how long and how many generations they've been doing it, it's not real. Theism and theology is the study of toy god and gods in this same manner. It's time for people to grow up and get real.

[arian]

You don't create, or join a religion to worship god/gods, if anything, we should become religious in helping our fellow man, this is true religion, and common sense. God doesn't need our repetitious prayers, or cutting ourselves, or our sacrifices, but to "Love One another, and do unto others as you would have them do to you!" God will accept that as worship, not your tithes, and church attendance even when you know this church don't care nothing about you.

Then stop fooling around with imaginary creators and become an atheist.

lol, .. that's just it, I did, remember my post "My God I'm an atheist"? But it was just a passing brief thing, leaving my toy make belief god/gods of theism. I wouldn't now join another religion and become a theist-hating atheist now would I?

You hated atheists? How do you feel about us now and how many people do you think hate atheists like you did for no reason at all. I guess it's not surprising because along with organized hope the worlds biggest religions are really just organized hate. If not overt hate then they're always a convenient excuse.

Unfortunately that is true. History is filled and drenched with blood shed by the 'religious'. Either Allah lead them, or the Three-gods-in-one Trinitarian gods the religion called Christian, or ideologies of Deities, Myths, and even Satan/Lucifer himself.

But don't confuse my hate of atheism as if we hated the person, just their ideas. Even now Christians in most part welcome atheists. Matter of fact, it is so open now that even Christian Ministers are atheists and the congregation doesn't mind as long as he gives a good sermon. Gay, hey no problem, Christianity has opened the door to EVERYONE, it's a really, really wide gate now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axxlXy6bLH0

Do I hate theists? No, hate is much too strong a word. My feelings range from disgust for the most violent theists to feelings of sympathy for the rest of the poor lost sheep.

Amen Peter, so help me get the message out, God is real! No more need for religions and their hate, or false pretense of love, and how God will bless them while they beg and ask even the poor for their grocery money as tithes and offerings

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRirh4zTwig

I actually watched this many years ago on TBN, but now I believe they removed the actual broadcast, or just corrupted it. Multi-billion $ businesses can now do anything, it's open season on the public. And of course, the more they steal, the more need they create for the people, and the more need they create, the more the people flock to the promise of wealth, and the promise of being beamed out of here before anything worse happens. (Left Behind blockbusters) and the suckers are piling up, filling Mega church after Mega churches.

The truth is the only way, "seek yea the truth!" by any means available to you.

Take religion and their indoctrination out of science, out of Bible interpretations and you are on your way. It's not easy I can tell you that! I noticed that everything, my prayers, my reading of the Bible, my understanding and distinguishing between true science and billion year old fairytales have been so deeply indoctrinated that I have to watch every word I say, and re-read everything I write many times.

It can be done though because God sees our true intention and helps.

[JonDarbyXIII]

.
Does the following seem self-contradictory?

From ONE post in a current thread –

God speaks through ALL His creation including us men, and just because we deny to hear Him (because of sin) doesn't mean it is lost.

Of course I don't expect you to believe in God just because I do, and that I believe it was His revelation

had very little education, and struggle to express myself, especially with the things God has revealed to me.

This is exactly why God used His Prophets and even His Son to personally talk to us.

I am here to 'reveal by Undeniable Scientific Evidence' our Creator.

Infinity, the origin of the universe, the beginning of life" may be beyond your understanding, or the refusal thereof, but is definitely not mine.

AND

I am not religious, how can I explain this to you?

I will not become a religious theist/atheist just to please you.

I'm serious my friend, since I have told you at least 500 times in debates that I am not a Theist, yet you still keep referring to me as a Theist.

Note: Theism is defined as: Belief in the existence of a god or gods

Religion is difficult to define but generally involves some belief in a supernatural entity that may (or may not) influence human affairs – or perhaps an afterlife


Question for debate: If one believes in God can they NOT be a Theist and NOT be religious?

I know a lot of Christians claim that they are not religious in the sense that they see Christianity as a relationship and not a religion, so I know there's a lot of mincing words when it comes to the term 'religious.' As far as the term 'theist' though, I would have thought it would naturally (by its very definition) mean someone who believed in a god.

I think a lot of the problem comes in people's aversions to labels. I see this a lot in the atheist communities. There is a vast array of terms that many times overlap; however, almost everyone finds themselves gravitating to one label and specifically rejecting others. Furthermore, there are a lot of discrepancies in how people define the labels. Some people, for example will say that technically, we are all agnostics since we don't know of the existence of a god (this is why I have heard many people use the terms 'theistic agnostic' or 'atheistic agnostic'). Others categorically reject this, saying that agnosticism is a middle position, and that by chosing one side or the other, the person can't possibly lay claim agnosticism.

This is why I find labels to be of little importance - I would rather know what someone believes rather than what he calls himself.

[KenRU]

With respect to "Theism", it seems to me that this is a case of definitions, and not labels, interpretations or desires. There is no question about the word's definition and intended use.

Theism (from Dictionary.com)
noun
1. the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation (distinguished from deism ).
2. belief in the existence of a god or gods (opposed to atheism).

There is no wiggle room here. If you believe in a god, you're a theist. End of story.

"Religion" on the other hand has some wiggle room. Arian seems to be fond of using the third most common definition of the word (either purposefully in order to derail conversations, or to distance himself from that which he dislikes).

From Dictionary.com
adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or concerned with religion : "a religious holiday."
2. imbued with or exhibiting religion; pious; devout; godly: "a religious man."
3. scrupulously faithful; conscientious: "religious care."
4. pertaining to or connected with a monastic or religious order.
5. appropriate to religion or to sacred rites or observances.

While four out of the five definitions have to do with religion in its most commonly used version, the one Arian likes to use doesn't. So while he can be technically correct to say that "playing tennis every morning is religious" it would be misleading and deceptive to say (especially in a religious debate forum) that everyone is religious - since most people would not be using or expecting it to be used this way). It would be even more disingenuous to then say "everyone else is religious, but I am not" - especially if he prays - which is a religious practice.

Semantic word games on debate forums are so counter productive, in my opinion. One would think on a site dedicated to debating and exchanging ideas, an honest effort to communicate your ideas and beliefs to others would be the goal.

Just saying,


-all the best,

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 12 by arian]

So let me try and understand this

You believe in the god of the bible?

You believe the bible speaks truly about this god?

You believe you get special revelations from this god?


but you are not a theist and you don't believe in god(s)?but you believe in God.


Trying to see how you are not having your cake and eating it to here.

[Zzyzx]

.
[Replying to post 13 by JonDarbyXIII]

Jon, It is a pleasure to respond to an erudite post. I have ordered and look forward to the electronic edition of your book. Thank you for joining us.

I know a lot of Christians claim that they are not religious in the sense that they see Christianity as a relationship and not a religion, so I know there's a lot of mincing words when it comes to the term 'religious.'

Agreed. Many terms commonly used in these threads have been so broadly "interpreted" that they convey little meaning (or a lot of "wiggle room"). Faith is used to indicate one's belief in God AND to mean confidence that one's car will start or the sun will rise and set (the latter often by Theists to claim "everyone has faith"). God (capitalized or not) can refer to any of thousands of proposed supernatural entities. Religion can mean one's belief in gods OR one's practice of having morning coffee.

As far as the term 'theist' though, I would have thought it would naturally (by its very definition) mean someone who believed in a god.

I agree – unless one is intent upon warping dictionary and common use definitions to make some point (or obscure some point).

I think a lot of the problem comes in people's aversions to labels.

Labels are shortcuts that should convey some meaning. Unfortunately, they are frequently misused. In this Forum the user-groups one chooses to display can give some information about their position.

Perhaps a contributory problem is deliberate misuse (or non-standard use) of labels as a debate tactic. It seems contradictory to claim that one believes in gods but is not a Theist, for example.

If one uses a label for themselves in uncommon or non-standard ways it seems as though they have an obligation to explain their use if their intent is effective communication rather than obfuscation.

I see this a lot in the atheist communities. There is a vast array of terms that many times overlap; however, almost everyone finds themselves gravitating to one label and specifically rejecting others.

I see more misuse of Atheist related labels used by Theists in debate (or in church? – or among themselves?). Many refer to all Non-Believers as "Atheists" – and all Atheists as "god deniers" – even when someone clearly states that they take no such position.

Even my clear statement in signature of a theistic position: "Non-Theist tending toward Ignosticism (not Agnosticism)" is warped by many to mean "god denier." When I further clarify that "any of the thousands of proposed gods MAY exist and MAY influence human affairs, but no compelling / convincing / coherent evidence has been supplied" – many still revert to using "god-denier" assumptions.

Furthermore, there are a lot of discrepancies in how people define the labels. Some people, for example will say that technically, we are all agnostics since we don't know of the existence of a god (this is why I have heard many people use the terms 'theistic agnostic' or 'atheistic agnostic'). Others categorically reject this, saying that agnosticism is a middle position, and that by chosing one side or the other, the person can't possibly lay claim agnosticism.

Yes. Perhaps the Ignostic position is most rational – "We cannot intelligently discuss a god until or unless the term god is defined, described and identified."

So far I have not encountered any such information about the Bible God beyond platitudes such as "God is love" or "God is the creator" that fall far short of adequate in discussion.

If one or more of the thousands of proposed gods exist, it / they are beyond human comprehension; in which case all discussion is based upon conjecture or imagination supplied by worshipers.

This is why I find labels to be of little importance - I would rather know what someone believes rather than what he calls himself.

There is no guarantee that a person can or will coherently describe what they believe – even after pages of text.

I would be interested in your description of your beliefs / theistic position here (I have seen it elsewhere).

[JonDarbyXIII]

Jon, It is a pleasure to respond to an erudite post. I have ordered and look forward to the electronic edition of your book. Thank you for joining us.

I assure you, the honor is mine. Thank you.

Many terms commonly used in these threads have been so broadly "interpreted" that they convey little meaning (or a lot of "wiggle room"). Faith is used to indicate one's belief in God AND to mean confidence that one's car will start or the sun will rise and set (the latter often by Theists to claim "everyone has faith"). God (capitalized or not) can refer to any of thousands of proposed supernatural entities. Religion can mean one's belief in gods OR one's practice of having morning coffee.

Beautifully stated - I have often said as much about the term 'faith,' but I love the example of 'religion' being a morning cup of coffee.

Many refer to all Non-Believers as "Atheists" - and all Atheists as "god deniers" - even when someone clearly states that they take no such position.

Indeed, and I would think that more Christians would understand this fallacy since in the early days of Christian history, they too were labeled as atheists for having rejected the Greco-Roman pantheon.

As for the position of 'denying God,' I don't see that I have categorically rejected him for two reasons: 1) I am certainly willing to believe given reasonable (or I might say, any) evidence of God. As of yet, however, I have not seen it. 2) I've always made it clear that I desperately want to know if I'm wrong. The simple fact is, if I'm wrong, I'm in a huge mess!

So far I have not encountered any such information about the Bible God beyond platitudes such as "God is love" or "God is the creator" that fall far short of adequate in discussion.

One of the biggest problems with theism as I see it is that there is not much of a definition of what God is. If I'm going to say that I don't believe in your god, I first need to know what your god is. If your god is the television, yes, I believe in that. However, most of the definitions on what God is, ironically, seem only to explain what God is not. God is invisible; God is ineffable; God is unknowable; et cetera. However, there is something else that is also not these things: 'nothing.' Therefore, it would seem that God is best likened to a thing that is nonexistent.

I would be interested in your description of your beliefs / theistic position here (I have seen it elsewhere).

The extent of any religious upbringing in my childhood came from the church of 'do-unto-others' as my mom was so keen to express. As far as she was concerned--and I tend to agree--that really covers it. I began studying world religions in general and the Bible in particular about 10 years ago in what was essentially a desire to 1) see what different religions believe and 2) to better understand why people believe as they do. In the end, the more I read, the less I believed--to the extent that eventually I realized that I just do not believe in (g/G)od.

I'm still intrigued by belief (the what and the why), and more than anything I'm just looking for good discussion. Glad to have found that here!

[arian]

With respect to "Theism", it seems to me that this is a case of definitions, and not labels, interpretations or desires. There is no question about the word's definition and intended use.

Theism (from Dictionary.com)
noun
1. the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation (distinguished from deism ).
2. belief in the existence of a god or gods (opposed to atheism).

There is no wiggle room here. If you believe in a god, you're a theist. End of story.

You would hope, but it's not the end of the story. I heard that phrase a thousand times from ministers and elders of many different religious 'faiths', when it comes to their personal and very delicate interpretation of their god/gods, where no matter how incoherent their interpretation (like the trinity three-gods-in-one) after their brief personal explanation, they would always finish with; "End of story!" And many suggested I go to another church; "There are plenty of them out there Odon, maybe you'll find one that doesn't mind you questioning their very foundation of their religion, .. their god/gods!? But we do, so please?"

"Religion" on the other hand has some wiggle room. Arian seems to be fond of using the third most common definition of the word (either purposefully in order to derail conversations, or to distance himself from that which he dislikes).

From Dictionary.com
adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or concerned with religion : "a religious holiday."
2. imbued with or exhibiting religion; pious; devout; godly: "a religious man."
3. scrupulously faithful; conscientious: "religious care."
4. pertaining to or connected with a monastic or religious order.
5. appropriate to religion or to sacred rites or observances.

While four out of the five definitions have to do with religion in its most commonly used version, the one Arian likes to use doesn't. So while he can be technically correct to say that "playing tennis every morning is religious" it would be misleading and deceptive to say (especially in a religious debate forum) that everyone is religious - since most people would not be using or expecting it to be used this way). It would be even more disingenuous to then say "everyone else is religious, but I am not" - especially if he prays - which is a religious practice.

"I walked to my mailbox this morning."

"Oh, so you ran to your mailbox this morning? Hey, I do that too, every morning religiously like the Pope."

"No, I 'walked' to my mailbox this morning, I did not run. I did not pray on the way there either."

"Yea, yea, .. it's the same thing. You walk, .. I run. The main thing is that we do this same thing every morning run, walk, .. some skate, some ride the bike, the main thing here is 'getting to the mailbox', .. how we get there is irrelevant. Case closed, End of Story!"

Semantic word games on debate forums are so counter productive, in my opinion. One would think on a site dedicated to debating and exchanging ideas, an honest effort to communicate your ideas and beliefs to others would be the goal.

Just saying,

Yes, you made your religious comment's clear; "End of story!" right?

Also, you just don't know why Moderators would allow arian on "a site dedicated to debating and exchanging ideas, an honest effort to communicate your ideas and beliefs to others" to reveal God scientifically which is a big No-No since the religious have accepted that their god/gods don't exist, or can't exist in science, .. or why they allow him to reveal the paradoxes in the use of words like "religion, theism, deism, infinite vs. finite, his scientific proof of the existence of 'nothing', that there is a Creator God that is not of our religiously created god/gods," .. this should be forbidden on a debating forum! Just saying, right?

[DerFrostman]

If you believe in a Creator, then you are a theist. It doesn't matter if your beliefs are different from everyone else in every religion, it is still theism.

Not necessarily true.

If one believes our Creator to be a physical being, then it really just boils down to science and there is no "theology" to it.

One can be a complete Atheist and still believe mankind or even our entire universe, was created by a highly scientifically advanced physical being.

edit:
Given enough time, mankind will eventually create a virtual universe.. a simulated environment.. and be able to interact with the beings inside. This is just a matter of time but I'm sure it's several decades away at least. But when it occurs. Will we necessarily become gods? Do any believers in that realm become Theists?

[arian]

Jon, It is a pleasure to respond to an erudite post. I have ordered and look forward to the electronic edition of your book. Thank you for joining us.

I assure you, the honor is mine. Thank you.

Many terms commonly used in these threads have been so broadly "interpreted" that they convey little meaning (or a lot of "wiggle room"). Faith is used to indicate one's belief in God AND to mean confidence that one's car will start or the sun will rise and set (the latter often by Theists to claim "everyone has faith"). God (capitalized or not) can refer to any of thousands of proposed supernatural entities. Religion can mean one's belief in gods OR one's practice of having morning coffee.

Beautifully stated - I have often said as much about the term 'faith,' but I love the example of 'religion' being a morning cup of coffee.

Many refer to all Non-Believers as "Atheists" - and all Atheists as "god deniers" - even when someone clearly states that they take no such position.

Indeed, and I would think that more Christians would understand this fallacy since in the early days of Christian history, they too were labeled as atheists for having rejected the Greco-Roman pantheon.

As for the position of 'denying God,' I don't see that I have categorically rejected him for two reasons: 1) I am certainly willing to believe given reasonable (or I might say, any) evidence of God. As of yet, however, I have not seen it. 2) I've always made it clear that I desperately want to know if I'm wrong. The simple fact is, if I'm wrong, I'm in a huge mess!

Hello Jon, welcome to the forum. About God the Creator vs. god/gods I invite you to check out my claim in Zzyzx's OP; "Undeniable and Scientific Evidence of The Creator"

http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... c&start=60

Glad you have joined us, I would love to hear your comments on that friend!