[MD] Theism/epistemology

[Michael Poloukhine]

> [Arlo]
> I honestly don't know what the argument is here, expect over your wanting to
> redefine theism for whatever purposes you have. Other than that, we seem to
> agree on most of this. As I've been saying, I have no trouble with a view that
> considers theism (in all its world colors) as paintings on the mural of human
> experience, metaphors that people across the globe and throughout history have
> used to describe the indescribable. More than this, I don't know what I can
> say. 
MP: LoL. And *I'm* the one seeking to redefine theism?? 

If you could just manage to say that as "considers theism as the belief in a god 
or gods" we'd be all set. ;-)  It really is that simple. Anything else, is *you* 
redefining theism to suit whatever purposes *you* have, not the other way 
around. 

Why is it so hard to say "theism" is the *idea* that one *can* believe in a g*d, 
and "religion" *is that belief* defined?  If one accepts "atheism" in exactly this 
way, one is obliged to do so with "theism."  Period. Anything else is 
disingenuous.



> [Arlo]
> I would say you won't fully understand the MOQ until you understand Zen. 
MP:  I don't doubt you. And I would say MoQ won't fully realize Zen until 
understands theism.