On Being a Theist

Atheism is definitely one of the opponents of theology. However, atheism offers an important role to theology by acting as "advocate of the devil", which in turn will ultimately strengthen theology. In the book "On Atheists" by H. J. McCloskey, McCloskey criticizes the classical argument of the existence of God and regards the problem of evil as the reason why people should not believe in God. In his view, McCloskey studied the weakest argument of the theory, such as cosmological argument, distance learning argument, and evil discussion.

However, we are not atheists, but they are not called atheists. Somehow, I think that what is recommended as an atheist is not a theologian at all. It shows that we believe that the world is fully mechanized, that the world is not mysterious, that we do not have the essence and vitality connecting all of us. So, you can think of yourself as an atheist, but you can think of the concept of "God" in many Oriental traditions, the essence of the universe, "meditation" or other transcendence, or the vitality that we experience As, or we have other existence and intimate relationships with the earth

Most Christians I encounter belong to the "Gnutishan" category. I classify myself as "atheist of agnostic" and atheists like O'Connor and Dawkins. Christian Omamori Frank Turek can be classified as "Agnostic" and he is not convinced of God's existence, but chooses to be based on faith. But what is important here is that "theists" and "atheists" are the main descriptors, "north" and "agnostic" are modifiers. This is not one or two cases, and attribution to one category does not necessarily determine if it is due to another category.