What if you don't belive in religion, jesus, any of the Gods. You belive its bull**** made up by man. You belive in evolution, you don't belive in prayers, or that anyone or something can hear you're prayers.

But, you do belive there is a creator of the universe. Something bigger than us. Even if there is multiple universes. That something created the start of everything.

What does that make you?

I think that would make you a theist. The kind of hands-off creator that you describe is typically captured within the subset of theism that is identified as deism.

"The Great Clockmaker." He puts everything into place, winds it up, and drinks a cup of tea.

It's not the biggest stretch of the imagination. If we humans had the means, I wouldn't be surprised if we had tried to create universes. Once you're taking about a being with an active role in this universe... or you start giving typical "god" attributes like "extremely powerful" etc, I'd say you have crossed the line towards theism.

That being said, that you can believe something isn't really a good reason to do so.

Semantics always does my head in

So can a deists be an atheist? What if he uses a word other than God to label 'the creator'. Then of course he is not a deists as a deists labels the creator God. So I guess what you looking for is someone who 's belief's are much the same as a deists except that they do not label their creator god. Guess that would make the person someone who believes in a creator that is not labelled God.

Still I guess there is scope to spin your definitions whatever which way you want.

In principle deism is much closer to atheism, than it is to any kind of revealed religion. In practice it is often related to its "parent" religion.

I can call a potato a chazzwuzzer, but an Irishman will still distill it into booze.

Most people have a clear picture of what a potato is, especially after peeling a load of them. Further most of those people seem to agree on what such a potato and its properties are.

I am all for referring to items by their observed properties, and not getting too bogged down in terms. Especially emotive names that have confusing colloquial usages. That is of course the advantage in using technical terms for which people don't have any preconceived biases.

That would be a Deist. Which, I've been told, is also a Theist, but I still refuse to accept it.

That person would be a deist. It's a lot more reasonable to be a deist than it is to believe in a personal god.

There is nothing to believe. "Deist" is a word with a definition. Look it up in a dictionary or read the wiki entry on deism. That should be enough.

the·ism
[thee-iz-uh m] Show IPA
noun
1. the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation (distinguished from deism).


Thank you! I'm not a Theist!

I guess it is arguable.

The issue becomes whether one accepts the broad defintion of theism in bold or a narrower definition that requres an active God. The issue in my mind is that "atheist" then becomes a little vague as to whether it rejects God broadly or only the "active God". We are getting into semantics which is why your post kind of grated for me. What you believe is what you believe. What word you use is not really something that should really get an emotional response.

But I will concede that you scored a point here.

Meh. asdfasdf32 has already convinced me that Deism is a subset of Theism -- as completely opposed to Atheism.

I'm cool with it. I just found that one (of many) definitions, and felt empowered!

I never really liked the term atheist for exactly this reason. It's common use is probably more like adeist or aspiritual. Not believing in gods, afterlife, or other things that are completely out of bounds to science.

Why would you believe something exists?

Probably best not to rely on dictionaries to have any concrete definition of philosophical concepts (or anything, actually).

I find deism to be weird.

I find the word atheist/atheism unclear. Atheist communicates an anti belief. It would make more sense IMO to say what one does believe, rather than using a vague word to explain what one doesn't believe. Often communicating in the negative creates confusion.

I don't find the label "atheist" very instructive to actually understand what someone believes.

edit: correct me if I am wrong but it seems many self dubbed atheists here are actually agnostics because they are open to the possibility of a god existing.

Skeptical and perceptive.

What's the word for someone that doesn't believe in Father Christmas?

Words such as Theist, Deist, Atheist are all words used to examine the phenomenon in human societies of creating god-like figures throughout history. Nevertheless it is the human behaviour, and not the existence of any deity which is the object of that study.

Atheists have a rational, evidence-based belief system that should not be influenced by emotional preference, or self-interest.

Atheists are not better people, in fact I would much rather spend time in your company than in that of many atheists, but for atheists, the question is not whether god exists, but to look at everything critically and analytically when forming beliefs. Some atheists also fail in this duty.

Sure, as long as the creator is not God.

fyp

Atheists can't have an evidence based belief system because atheism is about not believing (burden of proof and all that). This is my point, it seems confusing to name something in the negative.

What's the word for someone that doesn't believe in Father Christmas?

Good example. There is no word for this. Similarly I think the word atheist causes more confusion than it does to communiate accurately.

I think it is more instructive for someone to describe in a narrative what they believe than to use a vague label like "atheist" that can mean so many different things.

Christan means many things. Really by comparison atheist is pretty streamlined.

I thought of this too as I was writing my criticism of the word "atheist". I agree the word "Christian" can probably represent a wider set of beliefs than "atheist".

It depends, I usually consider a Christian to be someone who thinks they are a Christian. Who am I to say different? Pretty straightforward definition in comparison to atheist whoes colloquial meaning does not make much sense to me.