Nontheist

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" should not be confused with "irreligion".

Non-theism has various types. "Strong atheism" is the positive belief that a god does not exist. Someone who does not think about the existence of a deity may be termed "weakly atheistic", or more specifically implicit atheism). Other, more qualified types of nontheism are often known as agnosticism, or more specifically explicit atheism. "Strong" or "positive" agnosticism is the belief that it is 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.¹

Other, related, philosophical opinions about the existence of deity are ignosticism and skepticism. Because of variation of the term "god", it is 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 for 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) does not 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 θεός.

First recorded usage of Non-theism is by G. J. Holyoake in 1852,² who introduces it because

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

Spelling without hyphen sees scattered use in the later 20th century, following Harvey Cox's 1966 Secular City:

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

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."⁴

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 does not exist. He is being itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore to argue that God exists is to deny him."⁵ This Tillich quotation summarizes his conception of God. He does not 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 cannot logically be finite since a finite being cannot 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.⁶

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

Since the time of the the Buddha, the refutation of the existence of a creator has been seen as a key point in distinguishing Buddhist from non-Buddhist views.⁷ The Buddha said that gods (Pali: devas) exist, though he portrayed them as mortal and, in some cases, deluded. He did not center his teaching around these gods, but instead around the explanation of dukkha (suffering, imperfection) and attaining freedom from it. Although the Buddha did affirm a positive belief in the existence of gods, he stated that they are not to be worshiped and are in themselves the cycle of samsara. As nothing is permanent according to Buddhism, gods cannot remain as such forever although they have a much more extended life than humans In that respect, The Buddha can be considered a non-theist. The Buddha denounced the view of a Creator and sees that such notions are related to the false view of 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 for not having 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:

Relative and ultimate truth

Some revolutionary Buddhist teachers teach that mention of divine beings in the scriptures does not 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, cannot give people enlightenment, and they are 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:

Hinduism

In the words of one scholar, "it is perfectly possible to be a good Hindu whether one's personal views incline toward monism, monotheism, polytheism, or even atheism."¹⁰ He says that it is a religion that neither depends on the existence or non-existence of God or Gods.¹¹ More broadly, Hinduism can be seen as having three more important strands: one featuring a personal Creator or Diving Being, one that emphasises an impersonal Absolute and a third pluralistic and non-absolute.¹² Some scholars regard devotion to a personal deity as the ultimate reality is the last and perhaps most significant stage of Hinduism's development.¹³ This article will focus on the latter two traditions - which can be seen as nontheistic.

The tenth chapter of the Rig Veda, the oldest Hindu scripture, in the 129th Hymn or Nasadiya Sukta considers creation and asks "The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe. /Who then knows whence it has arisen?" ¹⁴

It is with the Upanishads, reckoned to be written in the first millenia (coeval with the ritualistic Brahmanas), that the Vedic emphasis on ritual was challenged. The emphasis of the Upanishads turned to knowledge, specifically the ultimate identity of all phenomena¹⁵. Most ideas about Brahman in the Upanishads are nontheistic. Both the Chandogya and Brihadaranyaka Upanishads assert that the individual atman and the impersonal Brahman are one.¹⁶ The statement Tat Tvam Asi, found in the Chandogya Upanishad, can be taken to indicate this unity. ¹⁷ The latter Upanishad uses the term Neti neti to 'describe' the divine.

Classical Samkhya, Mimamsa, early Vaisheshika and early Nyaya schools of Hinduism do not accept the notion of an omnipotent creator God at all. ¹⁸¹⁹ While the Sankhya and Mimamsa schools no longer has significant followings in India, they are both influencial in the developent of later schools of philosophy.²⁰²¹

The Bhagavad Gita, contains both passages which bear a monistic reading and others which bear a theistic reading.²² Generally, the book as a whole has been interpreted by some who see it as containing a primarily theistic message,²³, and by others give it a theistic message. ²⁴ These broadly either follow after Sankara or Ramanuja²⁵.

The Advaita Vedanta of Gaudapada and Sankara is one of the schools that falls into this category. The rejection of theism in Advaita Vedanta is a consequence of its insistence that Brahman is “Without attributes, indivisible, subtle, inconceivable, and without blemish, Brahman is one and without a second. There is nothing other than He.”²⁶. This means that it lacks properties usually associated with god such as omniscience, perfect goodness, omnipotence, and additionally is identical with the whole of reality, rather than being a causal agent or ruler of it. ²⁷

Contents

Origin and definition

Christianity

Buddhism

Belief and practice

Relative and ultimate truth

Hinduism

See also

References

External links