Nontheism Totally Explained

Everything about Non-theistic totally explained

Nontheism is a term that covers a range of both religious and nonreligious attitudes characterized by the absence of—or the rejection of—theism or any belief in a personal god or gods. It is in use in the fields of Christian apologetics and general liberal theology. "Nontheism" shouldn't be confused with "irreligion."
   Non-theism has various types. Atheism or "strong atheism" is the positive belief that a god doesn't exist. Someone who doesn't think about the existence of a deity may be termed "weakly atheistic." Other, more qualified types of nontheism are often known as agnosticism. "Strong" or "positive" agnosticism is the belief that it's impossible for humans to know whether or not any deities exist. It is a more precise opinion than weak agnosticism, which is the belief that the existence or nonexistence of any deities is unknown but not necessarily unknowable. Philosopher Anthony Kenny distinguishes between agnostics, who find the claim "God exists" uncertain, and theological noncognitivists, who consider all God-talk to be meaningless.
   Other, related, philosophical opinions about the existence of deity are ignosticism and skepticism. Some forms of Buddhism, and also some developments of Christianity, have also been described as nontheistic. Because of variation of the term "god," it's understood that a person could be an atheist in terms of certain portrayals of gods, while remaining agnostic in terms of others.
   Invented originally as a synonym of secularism (see below), it has become an umbrella term for summarizing various distinct and even mutually exclusive positions united by a naturalist approach, sometimes in the plural, nontheisms.

Origin and definition

While the Oxford English Dictionary (2007) doesn't define non-theism, it does define a "non-theist" as "not having or involving a belief in God, especially as a being who reveals himself to humanity." It should be noted that the term is macaronic, combining Latin "non-" with Greek .
First recorded usage of Non-theism is by G. J. Holyoake in 1852, who introduces it because ť "Mr. [Charles] Southwell has taken an objection to the term Atheism. We are glad he has. We have disused it a long time [...]. We disuse it, because Atheist is a worn-out word. Both the ancients and the moderns have understood by it one without God, and also without morality. Thus the term connotes more than any well-informed and earnest person accepting it ever included in it; that is, the word carries with it associations of immorality, which have been repudiated by the Atheist as seriously as by the Christian. Non-theism is a term less open to the same misunderstanding, as it implies the simple non-acceptance of the Theist's explanation of the origin and government of the world."

This passage is cited by J. Buchanan in his 1857 Modern Atheism under its forms of Pantheism, Materialism, Secularism, Development, and Natural Laws, who however goes on to state that ť "Non-theism" was afterwards exchanged [byHolyoake] for "Secularism," as a term less liable to misconstruction, and more correctly descriptive of the real import of the theory.

Spelling without hyphen sees scattered use in the later 20th century, following Harvey Cox's 1966 Secular City: ť "Thus the hidden God or deus absconditus of biblical theology may be mistaken for the no-god-at-all of nontheism." (p.225)

but reaches currency only from the 1990s, in contexts where possible association of the term "atheism" with active, ideological anti-theism are unwanted. The 1998 Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics has ť "in the strict sense, all forms of nontheisms are naturalistic, including atheism, pantheism, deism, and agnosticism." (p. 252, s.v. Naturalism)

Pema Chodron uses the term in the context of Buddhism: ť "The difference between theism and nontheism isn't whether one does or doesn't believe in God.[...] Theism is a deep-seated conviction that there's some hand to hold [...] Non-theism is relaxing with the ambiguity and uncertainty of the present moment without reaching for anything to protect ourselves [...] Nontheism is finally realizing there's no babysitter you can count on." .

Christianity

Certain liberal Christian theologians, including Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong (who seeks to build on the ideas of the late Anglican bishop John A.T. Robinson) define a "nontheistic God" as "the ground of all being" rather than as a personal divine being. Spong refers to a theistic God as "a personal being with expanded supernatural, human, and parental qualities, which has shaped every religious idea of the Western world."
Both Robinson and Spong owe much of their theology to the work of Christian existentialist philosopher Paul Tillich, including the phrase "the ground of all being." Another quotation from Tillich is, "God doesn't exist. He is being itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore to argue that God exists is to deny him." This Tillich quotation summarizes his conception of God. He doesn't think of God as a being which exists in time and space, because that constrains God, and makes God finite. But all beings are finite, and if God is the Creator of all beings, God can't logically be finite since a finite being can't be the sustainer of an infinite variety of finite things. Thus God is considered beyond being, above finitude and limitation, the power or essence of being itself. Secular humanist Sidney Hook wrote in an essay called "The Atheism of Paul Tillich":

With amazing courage Tillich boldly says that the God of the multitudes doesn't exist, and further, that to believe in His existence is to believe in an idol and ultimately to embrace superstition. God can't be an entity among entities, even the highest. He is being-in-itself. In this sense Tillich's God is like the God of Spinoza and the God of Hegel. Both Spinoza and Hegel were denounced for their atheism by the theologians of the past because their God wasn't a Being or an Entity. Tillich, however, is one of the foremost theologians of our time.

John Dominic Crossan and Robert Funk cofounded the Jesus Seminar, a group of academic scholars who seek, following Rudolf Bultmann, to "demythologize" Jesus. Some also consider this work to be a nontheistic examination of the life and work of Jesus.
David Boulton edited "Godless for God's Sake: Nontheism in Contemporary Quakerism" (Dales Historical Monographs, 2006), in which, according to the jacket copy, "27 Quakers from 4 countries and 13 yearly meetings tell how they combine active and committed membership in the Religious Society of Friends with rejection of traditional belief in the existence of a transcendent, personal and supernatural God.".

Buddhism

Gautama Buddha taught that gods (Pali: devas) exist, though he didn't center his teaching around these gods, but instead around the explanation of dukkha (suffering, imperfection) and attaining freedom from it. However since The Buddha did affirm a positive belief in the existence of gods, he can't be described as a non-theist. The Buddha described the view of the existence of a Creator God as true to a certain extent, but false in declaring eternity, and like the 61 other views, this belief causes suffering when one is attached to it and relates to these views with desire, hatred and delusion. At the end of the Sutta the Buddha says he knows these 62 views and he also knows the truth that surpasses them.
   Although Buddhism has a vast number of scriptures and practices, the fundamental core of Buddhism, the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path, are distinguished in the world of religion as being absent any mention of God(s) or any notion of worship of any deity. They are purely ethical and meditative guidelines based on the truths of psychological suffering due to impermanence.
   ""And how is a person of no integrity a person of no integrity in the views he holds? There is the case where a person of no integrity is one who holds a view like this: 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no priests or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is how a person of no integrity is a person of no integrity in the views he holds" (Cula-punnama Sutta)
   The fourteen unanswerable questions are different, since Buddha refused to answer these 14 questions. The question of a Creator God, however, was answered by Buddha in the Brahmajala Sutta.

Belief and practice

On one occasion, when presented with a problem of metaphysics by the monk Malunkyaputta, Buddha responded with a story of a man shot with a poisoned arrow. The man's family summons the doctor to have the poison removed, and the man gives an antidote:

"But the man refuses to let the doctor do anything before certain questions can be answered. The wounded man demands to know who shot the arrow, what his caste and job is, and why he shot him. He wants to know what kind of bow the man used and how he acquired the ingredients used in preparing the poison. Malunkyaputta, such a man will die before getting the answers to his questions. It is no different for one who follows the Way. I teach only those things necessary to realize the Way. Things which are not helpful or necessary, I don't teach."

Relative and ultimate truth

Some revolutionary Buddhist teachers teach that mention of divine beings in the scriptures doesn't refer to actual existing gods, but was a language employed by Buddha to bring about a meaning, which was subsequently misunderstood. An example of this is Ajahn Buddhadasa of Thailand. The majority of teachers, however, disagree with this revolutionary interpretation, and teach the orthodox teaching (from the Pali Canon and Mahayana Sutras) that conventional gods do exist and can influence our lives. These gods, however, can't give people enlightenment, and they're themselves unenlightened and unaware of the true Dhamma. Zen Master Bassui (1327-1387) had strong words for those applying notions of divinity to any separate beings, such as bodhisattvas:

"... so you should realize that all the names of the bodhisattvas are just different names for the nature of mind. As an expedient in the World-Honored-One's sermons, he defined things using certain names, and with these names he pointed to the truth. Ordinary people, unaware of this truth, become attached to the names and, in the hopes of attaining Buddhahood, seek the Buddha and Dharma outside their minds. It's like cooking sand in the hopes of producing rice."

Further Information

Get more info on 'Non-theistic'.

External Link Exchanges

Do you know how hard it is to get a link from a large encyclopaedia? Well we're different and will prove it. To get a link from us just add the following HTML to your site on a relevant page:

<a href="http://nontheism.totallyexplained.com">Nontheism Totally Explained</a>

Then simply click through this link from your web page. Our crawlers will verify your link, extract the title of your web page and instantly add a link back to it. If you like you can remove the words Totally Explained and embed the link in article text.
As long as your link remains in place, we'll keep our link to you right here. Please play fair - our crawlers are watching. Your site must be closely related to this one's topic. Any kind of spamming, dubious practises or removing the link will result in your link from us being dropped and, potentially, your whole site being banned.