Instances of this sort are, indeed, so remarkable, and so irresistibly convincing to most minds, that some theists have consented to rest on them exclusively the inference of a designing intelligence.
Such theists seem to me not only the best allies of atheists, but even more effective labourers in the cause of unbelief than atheists themselves.
The universe, regarded even only so far as it is admitted by all materialists no less than by theists and pantheists to be an effect, cannot be explained, as materialists think, merely physically.
Down to 1870 the new literary names committed to the rejection of Christianity, apart from the men of science who kept to their own work, were the theists Hennell, F.
Already in his own day his arguments were logically confuted by both Gassendi and Hobbes; and his partial success with theistswas a success of partisanism.
As against that method, Hume showed the futility of all apriorism alike, destroying the sham skepticism of the Christian theists by forcing their method to its conclusions.
Like fallacies to Bacon's may be found in Descartes, whose seventeenth-century reputation as a champion of theism proved mainly the eagerness of theists for a plausible defence.
Again he was accused of atheism in print; and after a defence in which he retorted the charge on the utilitariantheists he resigned.
This being what Theistsmean when they speak of God, their assent to this truth admits without difficulty of being what I have called a notional assent.
And as he unquestionably has against him the present world of theists no less than the history of Theism in the past, I do not see how he is to meet this charge except by confessing to an abuse of the term in question.
The dilemma is, that, looking to the facts of organic nature, theists must abandon their belief, either in the divine omnipotence, or in the divine beneficence.
Thus academic theists in our own day are found resenting the tendency of ancient freethinkers to discredit and disestablish the Gods of Olympus, who for the academics themselves, as for everybody else, are a set of chimeras.
Consciousness of intercourse with the supernatural has never ostensibly availed to give the common run of theists imperturbability in their intercourse with the naturalist.
And it is due to the ignorance and the bigotry of the theists that the spread of sex knowledge is hampered so that a sane conception of sex and the prevention of venereal disease does not eradicate these diseases.
Theists are desperately attempting to harmonize a primitive theory of things, with a larger knowledge and a more developed moral sense.
Applying this reasoning that everything is the effect of some cause, and that a cause is the effect of some other causes, the theists work back from effect to cause and from cause to effect until they reach a First Cause.
The theists no longer use Paley's original arguments, but a great deal of the theistic arguments are still based on his assumptions.
The secularists, the opinion of the theists to the contrary, are also agreed.
The theists protested vehemently, and showed their superiority by calling their dogs "Immanuel Kant.
These are 'strong reasons' for Atheism--they prove that Theists set at nought the rule of philosophising which forbids us to choose the greater of two difficulties.
Theists of every class would do well to calmly and fully consider this rule of philosophising, for it involves nothing less than the destruction of belief in the supernatural.
Priestley's reasonings on the existence of God, well remarked that 'Theists are always for turning their God into an overgrown Man.
The difference on this point betweenTheists and Atheists is very palpable.
Theists say, something has been from all eternity, which something is not matter, but God.
Theists say, something has been from all eternity, which something is not matter but God.
The difference on this point betweenTheists and Universalists is very palpable.
They prove that Theists set at nought the rule of philosophising which forbids us to choose the greater of two difficulties.
What is known as the scientific method leads logically to the conclusion that there must be something that theists generally name God.
Materialism in its last analysis ascribes to matter all that theists ascribe to God.
There must have been an intelligent potency, and that power theists call God.
Most of the ablest thinkers become pureTheists or Unitarians.
The pantheists are thus no separate sect from the theists, any more than the theists are from the polytheists.
What, then, is this providence which the theists suppose in God?
Today this is scarcely discussed: the theists are no longer troubled by the logical impossibilities of their system.
This the fatalists are bound to explain, quite as much as the theists are bound to explain what sort of an infinite intelligence that can be which is unable either to foresee or prevent the misery of its creatures.
The third and last proof of the existence of God proposed by the theists and called by them the metaphysical proof is nothing but a tautological construction of categories, which proves absolutely nothing.
To try the actual value of this argument, it is not unfair to ask, Do Theists ever steal?
Surely, too, the accidental element may play its part in Nature without negativing design in the theists view.
To illustrate this from the theists point of view: Transfer the question for a moment from the origination of species to the origination of individuals, which occurs, as we say, naturally.
Some Theists may have lighter sense of personal dignity than some atheists.
Theists are always for turning their God into an overgrown man.
Only in regard to the manner of that rule do the theists differ among themselves.
The God of thetheists rules the world from above as a quite distinct establishment.
The God of the pantheists differs from the God of the theists in so far that the former is in the world itself, while the latter is external to, or, in other words, is over the world.
This very conclusion has actually been reached by many professed Theistsand professed Christians.
The Atheist simply stands honestly to the conclusions which suchTheists have avowedly come to and then feebly let go.
To try the actual value of this argument, it is not unfair to ask: Do Theists ever steal?
Theism declares that God dispenses health and inflicts disease, and sickness and illness are regarded by the Theists as visitations from an angered Deity, to be borne with meekness and content.
For it is certain that there are agnostics who would greatly prefer being theists, andtheists who would give all they possess to be Christians, if they could thus secure promotion by purchase--i.
But surely it is time for theists to abandon this assumption.
Theists do not deny the limitations of knowledge, on the contrary, they are always affirming it.
So far as professed theists are concerned one expects this to be ignored.
The theists own argument, if logically pursued ends in divesting it of all coercive value.
On the part of non-theists one expects a more logical attitude.
And if theists will examine nature candidly and with an open mind, they will see that it is so.
If, he says, theists will look the facts of the universe steadily in the face: What they will see will astonish them.
And, as will be seen, when non-theists quarrel with it, it is only because it is mis-stated or misunderstood.
In doing this he has the concurrence of all theists in discarding every god save one--his own.
And it would indeed be a matter for surprise if this belief--said by theists to be of all beliefs the most profound--should be the one speculation on which savage thought has justified itself.
It is quite usual for the theist to propound problems which only arise on his own assumptions, and then call upon his opponents for answers to them, but there is no justification whatever for non-theists playing the same game.
Present-day theists are apt to condemn this attitude of their predecessors, but it can hardly be denied that the logic lies with the earlier representatives.
Now, curiously enough, modern theists hover between the two positions.
Many pious and learned theists feel that the character of Christ as portrayed in the Gospels betrays imperfections.
The position here taken up is wise, and one that all who remain Theists will eventually have to adopt.
Why, then, whether we are Theists or Agnostics, should we not study and apply those laws for our moral improvement?
Such Theists seem to me not only the best allies of Atheists, but even more effective labourers in the cause of unbelief than Atheists themselves.
Campbell's "New Theology," will certainly enable many who are in reality non-Christian theists to continue calling themselves Christians.
There areTheists who candidly admit the perplexities of the situation.
Theists contend [217] that there must be a future life if only because the glaring wrongs of this world have to be righted.
Preliminary Remarks Theism, and Who Are Theists Sec.
And, as a fact, Theists are settling down to formulate their position in that way.
If God be such, and our relations to God be such, as Theists describe, would not that Son of Man be the confirmation of their thoughts?
The above list will hopefully give you a few useful examples demonstrating the appropriate usage of "theists" in a variety of sentences. We hope that you will now be able to make sentences using this word.
