You got that right, sister.
It might help if you didn't have such a chip on your shoulder. I'm not the one being hostile, here.
I am not misusing terms. I am simply using them in ways that you don't like. There is a difference.
It is perfectly legitimate, under the generally accepted definition of theism, to classify pantheism and panentheism, and any other view of God that accepts an existence of God as theism. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable.
It doesn't make me uncomfortable; it's simply inaccurate, which is frustrating.
Yes, under the
common usage of the word "theism," that is perfectly acceptable. However, the
theological meaning is much more specific.
It's just like the word "theory." In common usage, it's perfectly acceptable to equate "theory" and "hypothesis," but when you're discussing science, you're expected to know the difference between a theory and a hypothesis, and use the words correctly.
Likewise, because we are discussing theology, I expect "theism" to
mean theism. If you were using the common, inaccurate meaning of theism as "belief in God," that's fine, but is it really so much to ask that you recognize the precise meaning and simply clarify your statement, rather than throw a hissy fit when you confuse someone who thinks you're misusing the theological?
You have yet to defend your original description of theism, which, given the context, should have been the specific definition. Otherwise, saying that you're both a theist and a panentheist is as pointlessly redundant as saying "I'm both a human and a woman."
You seem to have issues with what you consider to be "theism" and wish to distance yourself from it. I have no such desire.
No, I just understand what it really means and understand that it's not what I believe.
I
do have issues with imprecise language in an inappropriate context. I have to translate, the devil's in the details, and precision is important.
As for Unitarian Universalism not being a religion, I'll just tell my friends who are UU ministers and seminarians, who studied UU theology at UU seminaries, that they are the clergy of an "interfaith community." :sarcastic
Look, there was a time when I didn't understand what UU was either, when I self-mockingly referred to us as nothing more than "a social club for religious rejects." But even then, I did not have the impudence to tell others that they were wrong when they referred to UU as a religion.
Or you could go tell the Rabbi at my old UU church that he's practicing idolatry. I'd be happy to buy a ticket to that one.
From the Wiki:
Unitarian Universalism is a faith with no creedal requirements* imposed on its members. It values religious pluralismand respects diverse traditions within the movement and often within the same congregation. Many see it as a syncretic religion, as personal beliefs and religious services draw from more than one faith tradition. Even when one faith tradition is primary within a particular setting, Unitarian Universalists are unlikely to assert that theirs is the "only" or even the "best" way possible to discern meaning or theological truths. There is even a popular adult UU course called "Building Your Own Theology".
*re·li·gion
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
Once again, the issue is precision. I thought I made it clear that I was referring to UU's lack of set theology, and the fact that labelling yourself as one reveals nothing of what you actually believe. In any event, I'm just not interested in arguing it further.
I don't know why you've decided to take everything I say as some kind of personal insult, but it's rather tiresome.
I could go on about UU but this isn't the right forum for it. Try going to the UU forum and saying that UU isn't a religion. See what kind of response you get. Otoh, you could try asking instead.
I've been a UU for a decade now, and none of my fellows have ever had an objection to that statement. In fact, we're quite proud of it.
Why would I ask you, especially when you seem so set on picking a fight?