Theism includes any philosophy which claims that some kind of God or gods exist.
Keywords: Theism, Atheism, Philosophy, True, God, Deductive.
Theistic claims are true .
Either there are no gods, and therefore atheistic claims are true, or there is at least one god, and therefore theistic claims are true.
Premise 1: If atheistic claims are false, then theistic claims are true.
Premise 2: Atheistic claims are false.
Conclusion: Therefore, theistic claims are true.
Since atheistic claims are deductively false, theistic claims are therefore deductively true.
In Printed Form
Along with numerous other authors including Don Landis, Bodie Hodge and Roger Patterson, Timothy McCabe contributes analyses of various world religions and cults in this volume from Master Books.
"If Jesus really was God, and he shares an equal part of the trinity (meaning they are all coequal; none are above each other) then why does Jesus say in John 14:28: My Father is GREATER than I?"
Being co-equal is not intended as a mathematical equality and does not necessitate that none is in charge of another. The scriptures talk about the equality of the Father and Son in John 5:18, where John states "For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.
"Should modern mainstream religions be considered cults?"
Modern mainstream religions could be considered "cults", and every form of Atheism could as well. But why should it matter if that particular term can be applied? Why would we want to call every modern mainstream religion a "cult" apart from a desire to provoke some type of defensive emotional reaction from religious persons? And why would anyone be interested in manipulating such a reaction?
"If there is a God, but there is no evidence to be found for his existence except subjective experiences, is it not reasonable to assume that if he does exist, he does not want us to know about it?"
The conclusion is not reasonable. First, the premise is very poorly worded. Second, in the only way that the premise could be considered true, the conclusion is not reasonably based on it. First, the premise is poorly worded in that it seems to suggest that evidence is the only way to justifiably be convinced of something. But note that rational thought cannot exist without reason behind it.