Plato's Playground
Cervantes, first, IMHO, you could find a better word than "theists" for the other side, but of course it is your blog, and you can do as you like.
Second, I'm glad you see that you realize, There is often a lot of common ground between liberal religious people and non-religious people. I'd say that was progress on someone's part.
If I am inspired to write something of some length and weight, I will send it to you or Pirate for consideration. As I said from the beginning, I am a better blog commenter than blogger.
janeboatler--what do you suggest to replace theist? i am satisfied with humanist and want the other side to be ok with a label also.
we welcome your comments and/or longer thoughts.
Pirate, let's see. It's not easy, I'll grant you. Really, what I come with is "believers" or "people of faith". They're not great, but I remember I had to look up theist because I was not sure how or if it was different from deist. It is the most accurate word, but I think quite a few folks would not know what it means. Anyone else have a better idea?
I like believer and nonbeliever. I personally don't consider myself religious. I don't go to church or bible study classes which is what I imagine religious folks do. But I do believe in "God". I have no idea why but I absolutely believe there is more than this universe and that our small part in it is just for our individual evolving self. And the adventure continues after we die only we take on a different form. One that is capable of merging with 'God' which is formless. I also believe we keep repeating being born and dying here until we evolve enough to move on to another adventure. This life on this earth is to learn about love. These concepts ring true in the deepest part of me. That is my take on all this.
I'm a non-religious believer. Does this make me a theist or perhaps a whacko?
Well, I would say that by definition, if you say you believe in God, that makes you a theist. On the other hand, you put "God" in quotation marks, which points out a basic issue here -- the need to define one's terms. Your belief in an afterlife and reincarnation etc. are characteristic of theists also. The important question if there is to be discussion is not how you want to label yourself or how other people would label you, but rather, "why do you believe these things?"
By the way JB, it's not my blog -- it's a joint project of everyone who posts and comments. As you suggest, I use the term simply because it seems to accurately define a key difference -- "the two chief world systems" without being too loaded with other conceptual baggage. "Believer" is perhaps confusing because everybody believes something. The question is how we arrive at our beliefs. The word for the day is epistemology -- the theory of knowledge, one's philosophy of how one comes to decide what is true. The word for tomorrow is ontology -- or, as we said back in the day, "what is reality?"
ABout the terms in question, theist believer...etc. It seems to me the difficulties are that faith is more a journey than a definition. Today's agnostic may be tomorrow's theist or tomorrow's atheist. It seems to me we are all moving, evolving in our thinking, constantly repsonding to a whole multi-dimesional field of ideas and information. To me the issues are more about form and content. Form is religion. Content is faith or Spirit. The content moves about in response to what's happening. Form tries to stay hardened, and tries to pin down content to make it take a form. But it keeps rising up in new ways and new groupings. Better to love and delight in the viccistudes of content, and puzzle over the hardness of form than to get all hot & bothered about it. So says I...
Hmmm. You seem to have a different definition of faith than most people who profess to have it. Faith is supposed to be unshakable, a kind of belief that is impervious to events. "God said it, I believe it, and that settles it." What does it mean to have faith that is faithless?
Aren't you confusing faith with belief. Belief I liken to opinion. Faith as I get it is more of an inward knowing. That knowing is unshakeable, but the understanding is ever growing, moving, responding. It has an organic quality quite unlike belief or opinion.
When I said today's agnostic could be tomorrows atheist or theist, I didn't mean to suggest it was a today I'm this, tomorrow I'm that...just that as we live, our perspective changes.
Your website has been very helpfull to me della dieta calendario alessia giardini giapponesi
poker chips cheap poker chips cheap poker chips cheap // mortgage rates historic mortgage rates historic mortgage rates historic
loan for people with bad or no credit loan for people with bad or no credit loan for people with bad or no credit. lawsuit loan funding usa lawsuit loan funding usa lawsuit loan funding usa.
Commenting by HaloScan
