Non religious theists?

[David Henson]

I didn't say that people who simply believe in God are religious.

I'm asserting that people who believe in God and follow the teaching of the Bible, believe that Jesus was the son of God, that God has a plan for his creation etc. are in fact religious even if they say they are not, which they have done here.

I see. You are not saying that the religious can be atheists, like Adrain pointed out with his example of some Buddhists, Christian Science, but that those who believe in the God of the Bible in a specific way according to your limited definition are religious regardless of their seeing fit to distance themselves from organized religion? What if they don't believe Jesus is the son of God but in fact God or they believe that God has no plan for his creation or whatever variation from your definition of religious might involve?

We theists would sort of bristle at the obvious fact that you might be dismissive or prejudice, judgmental in doing that, even though in a basic sense you have reasons other than those for objection.

[Purple Rabbit]

I didn't say that people who simply believe in God are religious.

I'm asserting that people who believe in God and follow the teaching of the Bible, believe that Jesus was the son of God, that God has a plan for his creation etc. are in fact religious even if they say they are not, which they have done here.

According to Wikipedia the people you are describing are religious indeed:

"A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a supernatural agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs."
(source Wikipedia)

[Darwinian]

I was making the observation that there had/have been quite a few people on this forum who have claimed that although they believe in God, believe that Jesus was sent to save us from original sin, that they believe that the Bible is the revealed word of God and that they follow its teachings, still claim that they are in no way religious and even go so far as to say that they don't like religion.

As far as I can see, if you adhere to a supernatural belief system and follow it's doctrines then it's pretty reasonable to say that you are exhibiting religious behaviour.

I was wondering why, when it seems so obvious, that some people claim the reverse.

Also, I'm sure there are many religious who are also atheist, this has nothing exclusively to do with Christianity, Islam etc.

Being religious does not require a belief in a god or gods. People may well want to distance themselves from organised religion, especially the catholic church for example, but that does not mean they are not, in themselves, religious if they adhere to a certain set of beliefs that I have outlined previously.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Also, I'm sure there are many religious who are also atheist, this has nothing exclusively to to with Christianity, Islam etc.

Indeed,quite common amongst Anglican (Episcopalian) clergy AND/OR occasionally one will exhibit signs of critical thinking ( John Spong for example)


I've also crossed swords with a quite rabid anti-Islamic Hindu bigot on another forum who is also atheist-ish.(not uncommon amongst Hindus)

[David Henson]

Being religious does not require a belief in a god or gods. People may well want to distance themselves from organised religion, especially the catholic church for example, but that does not mean they are not, in themselves, religious if they adhere to a certain set of beliefs that I have outlined previously.

That is part of the problem. Part of your outline for what is religious was that they believe in God, yet you admit that they don't always believe in God, the other part was that they believe in Jesus as the son of God, but that only involves Christians, another part is that they believe in the Bible. Some don't, but rather the Quran. I think that your only real objection is that a theist, especially Christian, who denies the influence of or adherence to organised religion denies your limited opinion of them as well as the organised religion itself.

If you ask me I would say that in some sense of the word, everyone is religious and you can't define religious in terms which you have. There is some other reason for you doing it. You see all religious people as the same and all atheists as unique.

[fr0d0]

I resemble that remark! So do many Christians, well all Christians I can think of. The term 'Religious' has the huge stigma of 'following blindly'; doing something repeatedly with emphasis on the act rather than the motivation.

Jehovas Witnesses are 'religious' in their observance of rules with the specific aim of this precisely earning them the purpose of their lives > a free pass to heaven. Christianity, and Christ himself stands in absolute opposition to this idea.

Christianity is classified as a religion, and you can't argue with that.

[Darwinian]

Part of your outline for what is religious was that they believe in God

I think you missed my original point which was that I was giving examples of those on this forum who have made certain statements and then said they were not religious.

If someone came on here claiming that they believe that the entire universe was sneezed out of the nose of a being called the Great Green Arkalseezure and live in perpetual fear of the time they call the Coming of the Great White Hankerchief and follow doctrines and scriptures based on that belief but then said they were not religious, the same query would still apply.

Also, I have no limited opinion of anyone, nor do I object. I simply wondered why people who so obviously seem religious according to any sensible definition of the world seem to recoil from that label.

[David Henson]

Also, I have no limited opinion of anyone, nor do I object. I simply wondered why people who so obviously seem religious according to any sensible definition of the world seem to recoil from that label.

Isn't it obvious? Several reasons which I have discussed. They don't fit the mold, they don't belong to any organized religion, they don't agree with your definition, they don't approve of the history of religion . . . it is similar to you having some objection to being called an Atheist. A great deal more information is available to people on the subject of religion and there is, it seems, a multitude of people who believe in the Bible but not religion.

For me personally its similar to political frustration. Freedom and democracy seem like a pretty good idea but hand those ideas over to the chosen few of the masses and, well . . . give anyone too much rope and they'll fuck it up.

[Darwinian]

So, they dislike the stereotype that the word religion conjures up! Even though they are plainly religious. This is what I hypothesized in the first place.

Even though I may object to being called an atheist I still must accept that that definition is accurate.

And it's not my definition of the word, it's the commonly accepted definition. If you want to change the meaning of it then go ahead.

[David Henson]

Exactly, fr0d0, and I would take it one step further by responding to your sig. Christianity is far from perfect, even Paul foresaw to the extent that would be true. (2 Timothy 4:3-4) The demons know and yet are fearful, they don't have any doubt of God, don't worship him but don't misinterpret his word as well. Someone can be a believer and yet hate and reject God. Are they still religious? Others can have absolutely no idea of who or what God is yet go to church and profess belief.

---

So, they dislike the stereotype that the word religion conjures up! Even though they are plainly religious. This is what I hypothesized in the first place.

I know that, and I never denied it.

Even though I may object to being called an atheist I still must accept that that definition is accurate.

Not just atheist. Atheist, capitilized indicating religious. I have no doubt that many theists have thrown the charge of religion back at you and you have denied it as well.

And it's not my definition of the word, it's the commonly accepted definition. If you want to change the meaning of it then go ahead.

Which one? Religion or Atheist? I don't care for either one.