The problem in idolatry is when the object becomes what is worshiped and loved as opposed to what it represents. It is not that one should not love or worship God. At least according to the religions. Judaism is more restrictive than the others.
So It disagree with the OP, which is spreading the meaning out to include any strong devotion to anything. Certainly many monotheists are idolators, but one can be an Abrahamic theist without being an idolator. In that case one knows the image is intended as something to connect one to what has the real value, God, Jesus, etc.
And then, as Phyllo asks, who cares?
There is hardly a person of type of believer, regardless of paradigm, who does not become attached to the symbols, words and images that represent something they value and yet is not the thing they value highest. I see no group that avoids this and agnostics also get attached to phrases and self-classifications - skeptic, doubt, opculation, no one can know - and even more so, if the OP was correct…
agnostics are just as attached to their epistemology as atheists and anyone else.
They think because of X, that we cannot know. They love that, potentially, their line of reasoning, their position, as much as all other kinds of believers.
Some of the old contemplative traditions used a blank wall to stare at of help them go into meditation to insure that nothing was idolized. Meditators try to get to a position of no thought, do not be for or against, so as to let their higher minds free rein.
That has not been my experience with them. although, sure, they will not change their view of uncertainty without facts. They are on the fence and open to being knocked off to either side depending on facts.
Because they are not sure, they choose flight instead of fight. Only believers and atheists see a prize from their fight. Agnostics have no prize in mind and flight is the natural choice.
I am equating idolaters with all believers/atheists and non-idolaters with agnostics, yes.
Your last is counter intuitive. A believer names his God and that makes him an idolater. Unless you think he does not care much about the ideology of his God, and then the question becomes, why believe in a less than ideal God?
Perhaps I can make sense of what you put if you give an example.
Would be better to equate idolatry with gnostic theists and atheists and non idolatry with agnostic theists and atheists
As not all believers and non believers are absolutely certain that what they believe or do not believe is definitely true
Sigh. To have the position that they will be swayed by facts means one has a set of epistemological beliefs about what a fact is. As I said already, they are certain about epistemology and you have just confirmed that you also believe they are.
You tried to make religious people appear to be hypocrites based on scriptural condemnations of idolatry. You have failed to do this because you do not use the term correctly, and certainly not as the scriptures do. You also simply list bad things they have done or believed, as if this demonstrates idolatry. But it does not. Your position, as it often is, is confused, but because you hate religions you seem to find it hard to let of whatever hot new angle, or gotcha you think you have found.
Your beliefs about the scriptural meaning of idolatry of incorrect. But you idolize your own incorrect belief and will not admit, even in the face of evidence that this is the case.
You probably do not think you have beliefs, even though you assert things all the time.
Gnostic theist is not a term I accept. Gnostics of all persuasion are esoteric ecumenists which negates our being theists. We do not recognize any of the Gods as true Gods and above us.
I also do not recognize the terms agnostic theists or agnostic atheist.
Both theists and atheists are firm in their position while agnostic and Gnostic Christians are not.
It’s just incomprehensible how you manage to come to this conclusion when I wrote this : ‘“Naming” god seems to be a fairly trivial act without much significance.’
Everything you said there is completely wrong so it would help if you used these terms as they are commonly understood
You may not accept gnostic theist as a term but they do exist as they are theists who absolutely think that God exists
And agnostic theists and agnostic atheists also exist as I myself am an agnostic atheist and most or many atheists are
I do not think God exists but I cannot be absolutely certain he does not and so I am therefore not firm in my position
Gnostic theist is not a term I accept Gnostics of all persuasion are esoteric ecumenists which negates our being theists
We do not recognize any of the Gods as true Gods and above us
I also do not recognize the terms agnostic theists or agnostic atheist
Both theists and atheists are firm in their position while agnostic and Gnostic Christians are not
[/quote]
Ev
You say as you invent a non-dictionary term. You say I am wrong but do not put a truth to refute me.
[/quote]
I see you as an atheist then as you fit the dictionary definition. But hey, if you want to act more like a agnostic, feel free. I do not think you have to invent new non-dictionary terms though.
You are treating agnostic and atheist as completely independent terms
For you are not accepting that agnostic atheist is also a legitimate one
And so therefore no inventing of non dictionary terms is occurring here
