Editing Nontheistic religion

{{short description|Religious thought and practice independent of belief in deities}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=April 2020}}
{{Use Indian English|date=January 2016}}
{{Nontheism and religion}}

'''Nontheistic religions''' (not to be confused with [[atheism]]) are traditions of [[religious belief|thought]] within a religious context—some otherwise aligned with [[theism]], others not—in which [[nontheism]] informs religious beliefs or practices.<ref>{{cite journal|last=  Williams|first= J. Paul|author2= Horace L. Friess|author-link2=Horace L. Friess |title= The Nature of Religion|journal= Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion|year= 1962|volume= 2|issue= 1|pages= 3–17|jstor= 1384088|publisher= Blackwell Publishing|doi= 10.2307/1384088}}</ref> Nontheism has been applied and plays significant roles in [[Hinduism]], [[Buddhism]], and [[Jainism]]. While many approaches to [[religion]] exclude nontheism by definition, some inclusive definitions of religion show how religious practice and belief do not depend on the presence of a god or gods. For example, [[Paul James (academic)|Paul James]] and [[Peter Mandaville]] distinguish between religion and [[spirituality]], but provide a definition of the term that avoids the usual reduction to "religions of the book":

{{quote|Religion can be defined as a relatively-bounded system of beliefs, symbols and practices that addresses the nature of existence, and in which communion with others and Otherness is lived as if it both takes in and spiritually transcends socially-grounded ontologies of time, space, embodiment and knowing.<ref>
{{Cite book
 | year = 2010 | last1 = James | first1 = Paul
 | author-link = Paul James (academic)
 | last2 = Mandaville | first2 = Peter
 | title = Globalization and Culture, Vol. 2: Globalizing Religions
 | url = https://www.academia.edu/4416072
 | publisher = Sage Publications | location = London | page = xii–xiii
}}
</ref>
}}

== Buddhism ==
[[File:Astasahasrika Prajnaparamita Descending Trayastrimsa Heaven.jpg|thumb|The [[Gautama Buddha|Buddha]] descending from [[Trāyastriṃśa|Trāyastriṃśa Heaven]]. [[Palm leaf manuscript]]. [[Nalanda]], [[Bihar]], [[India]]]]
[[File:Brahma and Indra.jpg|thumb|upright|The [[Deva (Buddhism)|gods]] [[Śakra (Buddhism)|Śakra]] (left) and [[Brahma (Buddhism)|Brahmā]] (right)]]

=== Existence of gods ===
{{See also|God-being in Buddhism}}

The [[Gautama Buddha|Buddha]] said that ''[[Deva (Buddhism)|devas]]'' (translated as "gods") do exist, but they were regarded as still being trapped in ''[[Samsara (Buddhism)|samsara]]'',<ref>{{cite web|title=The Thirty-one planes of Existence|url=http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sagga/loka.html|publisher=Access To Insight|access-date=26 May 2010|author=John T Bullitt|year=2005|quote=The suttas describe thirty-one distinct "planes" or "realms" of existence into which beings can be reborn during this long wandering through samsara. These range from the extraordinarily dark, grim, and painful hell realms to the most sublime, refined, and exquisitely blissful heaven realms. Existence in every realm is impermanent; in Buddhist cosmology there is no eternal heaven or hell. Beings are born into a particular realm according to both their past kamma and their kamma at the moment of death. When the kammic force that propelled them to that realm is finally exhausted, they pass away, taking rebirth once again elsewhere according to their kamma. And so the wearisome cycle continues.}}</ref> and are not necessarily wiser than humans. In fact, the Buddha is often portrayed as a teacher of the gods,<ref>{{cite book|title=Teacher of the Devas|year=1997|publisher=Buddhist Publication Society|url=http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/jootla/wheel414.html|author=Susan Elbaum Jootla|editor=Access To Insight|location=Kandy, Sri Lanka|chapter=II. The Buddha Teaches Deities|quote="Many people worship Maha Brahma as the supreme and eternal creator God, but for the Buddha he is merely a powerful deity still caught within the cycle of repeated existence. In point of fact, "Maha Brahma" is a role or office filled by different individuals at different periods." "His proof included the fact that "many thousands of deities have gone for refuge for life to the recluse Gotama" (MN 95.9). Devas, like humans, develop faith in the Buddha by practicing his teachings." "A second deva concerned with liberation spoke a verse which is partly praise of the Buddha and partly a request for teaching. Using various similes from the animal world, this god showed his admiration and reverence for the Exalted One.", "A discourse called Sakka's Questions (DN 21) took place after he had been a serious disciple of the Buddha for some time. The sutta records a long audience he had with the Blessed One which culminated in his attainment of stream-entry. Their conversation is an excellent example of the Buddha as "teacher of devas," and shows all beings how to work for Nibbana."}}</ref> and superior to them.<ref>{{cite book|last=Bhikku|first=Thanissaro|authorlink=Thanissaro|title=Kevaddha Sutta, Digha Nikaya, 11|year=1997|publisher=Access To Insight|url=http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.11.0.than.html#bigbrahma|quote=When this was said, the Great Brahma said to the monk, 'I, monk, am Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be... That is why I did not say in their presence that I, too, don't know where the four great elements... cease without remainder. So you have acted wrongly, acted incorrectly, in bypassing the Blessed One in search of an answer to this question elsewhere. Go right back to the Blessed One and, on arrival, ask him this question. However he answers it, you should take it to heart.}}</ref> Except gods who are considered as manifestations of Buddhas such as the five [[Jambhala#Five Jambhalas|Jambhalas]] and the devas who reside in [[Pure abodes|Pure Abodes]] and other deities such as Tara based on some Buddhist traditions.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Arya Tara the Liberator: A Guide for Readers |url=https://www.shambhala.com/tara-the-liberator-a-guide-for-readers/}}</ref>

Since the time of the Buddha, the denial of the existence of a [[creator deity]] has been seen as a key point in distinguishing Buddhist from non-Buddhist views.<ref>B. Alan Wallace, ''Contemplative Science.'' Columbia University Press, 2007, pages 97–98.</ref> The question of an independent creator deity was answered by the Buddha in the [[Brahmajala Sutta (Theravada)|Brahmajala Sutta]]. The Buddha denounced the view of a creator and sees that such notions are related to the false view of [[Sassatavada|eternalism]], and like the 61 other views, this belief causes [[Dukkha|suffering]] when one is [[Upādāna|attached]] to it and states these views may lead to desire, aversion and delusion. At the end of the Sutta the Buddha says he knows these 62 views and he also knows the truth that surpasses them. Later Buddhist philosophers also extensively criticized the idea of an eternal creator deity concerned with humanity.<ref>[http://www.unm.edu/~rhayes/atheism.pdf Principled Atheism in the Buddhist Scholastic Tradition]</ref>

===Metaphysical questions===
On one occasion, when presented with a problem of [[metaphysics]] by the monk Malunkyaputta, the Buddha responded with the [[Parable of the Poisoned Arrow]]. When a man is shot with an arrow thickly smeared with poison, his family summons a doctor to have the poison removed, and the doctor gives an antidote:<ref name="hanh">{{cite book
|last=Nhat Hanh
|first=Thich
|author-link=Nhat Hanh
|title=Old Path White Clouds: walking in the footsteps of the Buddha
|year=1991
|page=[https://archive.org/details/oldpathwhiteclou00nhat/page/299 299]
|isbn=0-938077-26-0
|publisher=Parallax Press
|url=https://archive.org/details/oldpathwhiteclou00nhat/page/299
}}</ref>

{{quote|But the man refuses to let the doctor do anything before certain questions can be answered.  The wounded man demands to know who shot the arrow, what his caste and job is, and why he shot him.  He wants to know what kind of bow the man used and how he acquired the ingredients used in preparing the poison.  Malunkyaputta, such a man will die before getting the answers to his questions.  It is no different for one who follows the Way.  I teach only those things necessary to [[Bodhi|realize the Way]].  Things which are not helpful or necessary, I do not teach.}}

== Christianity ==
{{Main|Christian atheism|Death of God theology|Secular theology}}
[[File:2005-11-20_-_United_Kingdom_-_England_-_London_-_Hyde_Park_-_Speakers'_Corner_4887898959.jpg|thumb|A man promoting Christian atheism at [[Speakers' Corner]] in [[Hyde Park, London|Hyde Park]], London, in 2005. One of his placards reads "To follow Jesus, reject God."]]
[[File:Tillich_Park_Bust.jpg|thumb|Bust of [[Paul Tillich|Tillich]] by [[James Rosati]] in [[New Harmony, Indiana]]]]
A few [[Liberal Christianity|liberal Christian]] [[Christian theology|theologians]] define a "nontheistic God" as "the ground of all being" rather than as a personal [[Divinity|divine]] [[being]].

Many of them owe much of their theology to the work of [[Christian existentialist]] [[philosopher]] [[Paul Tillich]], including the phrase "the ground of all being". Another quotation from Tillich is, "God does not exist. He is being itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore to argue that God exists is to deny him."<ref>Tillich, Paul. (1951) ''Systematic Theology'', p.205.</ref> This Tillich quotation summarizes [[Transtheism|his conception of God]]. He does not think of God as a being that exists in time and space, because that constrains God, and makes God finite. But all beings are finite, and if God is the Creator of all beings, God cannot logically be finite since a finite being cannot be the sustainer of an infinite variety of finite things. Thus God is considered beyond being, above finitude and limitation, the power or essence of being itself.{{cn|date=July 2020}}

From a nontheistic, [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalist]], and [[Rationalism|rationalist]] perspective, the concept of divine grace appears to be the same concept as [[luck]].<ref>Kaufman, Arnold S. "Ability", ''The Journal of Philosophy'', Vol. 60, No. 19</ref>

===Nontheist Quakers===
{{Main|Nontheist Quakers}}
A nontheist Friend or an atheist Quaker is someone who affiliates with, identifies with, engages in and/or affirms [[Religious Society of Friends|Quaker]] practices and processes, but who does not accept a belief in a theistic understanding of [[God]], a Supreme Being, the [[divinity|divine]], the [[soul]] or the [[supernatural]]. Like theistic Friends, nontheist Friends are actively interested in realizing centered [[peace]], simplicity, integrity, community, equality, and [[social justice]] in the Society of Friends and beyond.

== Hinduism ==
{{Main|Atheism in Hinduism}}
Hinduism is characterised by extremely diverse beliefs and practices.<ref>Catherine Robinson, ''Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord.'' Routledge Press, 1992, page 17.</ref> In the words of [[R.C. Zaehner]], "it is perfectly possible to be a good Hindu whether one's personal views incline toward [[monism]], [[monotheism]], [[polytheism]], or even [[atheism]]."<ref name="Catherine Robinson 1992, page 51">Catherine Robinson, ''Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord.'' Routledge Press, 1992, page 51.</ref> He goes on to say that it is a religion that neither depends on the existence or non-existence of God or Gods.<ref>R. C. Zaehner, (1966) ''Hinduism'', P.1-2, Oxford University Press.</ref> More broadly, Hinduism can be seen as having three more important strands: one featuring a personal Creator or Divine Being, second that emphasises an impersonal Absolute and a third that is pluralistic and non-absolute. The latter two traditions can be seen as nontheistic.<ref>Griffiths, Paul J, (2005) ''Nontheistic Conceptions of the Divine'' Ch. 3. in  T''he Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion'' by William J Wainwright, p.59 . Oxford University Press .</ref>

Although the Vedas are broadly concerned with the completion of ritual, there are some elements that can be interpreted as either nontheistic or precursors to the later developments of the nontheistic tradition. The oldest Hindu scripture, the [[Rig Veda]] mentions that 'There is only one god though the sages may give it various names' (1.164.46). [[Max Müller]] termed this [[henotheism]], and it can be seen as indicating one, non-dual divine reality, with little emphasis on personality.<ref>Masih, Y. A comparative study of religions, P.164, Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 2000 {{ISBN|81-208-0815-0}}</ref> The famous [[Nasadiya Sukta]], the 129th Hymn of the tenth and final Mandala (or chapter) of the Rig Veda,  considers creation and asks "The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe. "Who then knows whence it has arisen?".<ref>O'Flaherty, Wendy Doniger, (1981)''The Rig Veda: An Anthology of One Hundred Eight Hymns'' (Classic) Penguin</ref> This can be seen to contain the intuition that there must be a single principle behind all phenomena: 'That one' (tad ekam), self-sufficient, to which distinctions cannot be applied.<ref>Collinson, Diané and Wilkinson, Robert Thirty-Five Oriental Philosophers, P. 39, Routledge, 1994 {{ISBN|0-415-02596-6}}</ref><ref>Mohanty, Jitendranath (2000), Classical Indian Philosophy: An Introductory Text, p:1 Rowman & Littlefield, {{ISBN|0-8476-8933-6}}</ref>

It is with the [[Upanishads]], reckoned to be written in the first millennia (coeval with the ritualistic [[Brahmanas]]), that the Vedic emphasis on ritual was challenged. The Upanishads can be seen as the expression of new sources of power in India. Also, separate from the Upanishadic tradition were bands of wandering ascetics called Vadins whose largely nontheistic notions rejected the notion that religious knowledge was the property of the Brahmins. Many of these were [[shramana]]s, who represented a non-Vedic tradition rooted in India's pre-Aryan history.<ref>Jaroslav Krejčí, Anna Krejčová (1990) Before the European Challenge: The Great Civilizations of Asia and the Middle East, p:170, SUNY Press, {{ISBN|0-7914-0168-5}}</ref> The emphasis of the Upanishads turned to knowledge, specifically the ultimate identity of all phenomena.<ref>Doniger, Wendy, (1990) ''Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions'', P. 441, Merriam-Webster, {{ISBN|0-87779-044-2}}</ref> This is expressed in the notion of [[Brahman]], the key idea of the Upanishads, and much later philosophizing has been taken up with deciding whether Brahman is personal or impersonal.<ref>Smart, Ninian (1998) The World's Religions P.73-74, CUP {{ISBN|0-521-63748-1}}</ref> The understanding of the nature of Brahman as impersonal is based in the definition of it as 'ekam eva advitiyam' (Chandogya Upanishad 6.2.1) – it is one without a second and to which no substantive predicates can be attached.<ref>Wainwright, William J. (2005) Ch.3 Nontheistic conceptions of the divine. ''The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion'' p.67 OUP, {{ISBN|0-19-513809-0}}</ref> Further, both the [[Chandogya]] and [[Brihadaranyaka]] Upanishads assert that the individual [[Ātman (Hinduism)|atman]] and the impersonal Brahman are one.<ref>Jones, Richard H. (2004) ''Mysticism and Morality: A New Look at Old Questions'', P. 80, Lexington Books, {{ISBN|0-7391-0784-4}}</ref> The [[Mahāvākyas|mahāvākya]] statement [[Tat Tvam Asi]], found in the Chandogya Upanishad, can be taken to indicate this unity.<ref>Brown, Robert L, (1991) ''Ganesh: Studies of an Asian God'', SUNY Press, {{ISBN|0-7914-0656-3}}.</ref> The latter Upanishad uses the negative term [[Neti neti]] to 'describe' the divine.
[[File:Patanjali Statue.jpg|270px|thumb|right|[[Patañjali]] statue in Pantanjali Yog Peeth Haridwar]]
Classical [[Samkhya]], [[Mimamsa]], early [[Vaisheshika]] and early [[Nyaya]] schools of Hinduism do not accept the notion of an omnipotent creator God at all.<ref>Larson, Gerald James, Ch. Indian Conceptions of Reality and Divinity found in ''A Companion to World Philosophies'' By Eliot Deutsch, Ronald Bontekoe, P. 352, Blackwell, {{ISBN|0-631-21327-9}}</ref><ref>Morgan, Kenneth W. and Sarma, D S, Eds. (1953) Ch. 5. P.207 Hindu Religious Thought by Satis Chandra Chatterjee, ''The Religion of the Hindus: Interpreted by Hindus'', Ronald Press. {{ISBN|81-208-0387-6}}</ref> While the Sankhya and Mimamsa schools no longer have significant followings in India, they are both influential in the development of later schools of philosophy.<ref>Flood, Gavin D, ''An Introduction to Hinduism'',(p.232) CUP, {{ISBN|0-521-43878-0}}</ref><ref>Larson, Gerald James,(1999) ''Classical Samkhya'', Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, {{ISBN|81-208-0503-8}}</ref> The Yoga of [[Patanjali]] is the school that probably owes most to the Samkhya thought. This school is dualistic, in the sense that there is a division between 'spirit' (Sanskrit: [[purusha]]) and 'nature' (Sanskrit: [[prakṛti]]).<ref>Feuerstein, Georg (1989), ''Yoga: The Technology of Ecstasy'', Tarcher, {{ISBN|0-87477-520-5}}</ref> It holds Samadhi or 'concentrative union' as its ultimate goal<ref>King, Richard (1999) ''Indian Philosophy: An Introduction to Hindu and Buddhist Thought'', p:191, Edinburgh University Press, {{ISBN|0-7486-0954-7}}</ref> and it does not consider God's existence as either essential or necessary to achieving this.<ref>Clements, Richard Pauranik, ''Being a Witness in Theory and Practice of Yoga'' by Knut A. Jacobsen</ref>

The [[Bhagavad Gita]], contains passages that bear a monistic reading and others that bear a theistic reading.<ref>Yandell, Keith. E., ''On Interpreting the "Bhagavadgītā"'', Philosophy East and West 32, no 1 (January 1982).</ref> Generally, the book as a whole has been interpreted by some who see it as containing a primarily nontheistic message,<ref>Catherine Robinson, ''Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord''. Routledge Press, 1992, page 45, 98, 115, 136.</ref> and by others who stress its theistic message.<ref>Catherine Robinson, ''Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord.'' Routledge Press, 1992, pages 47, 51.</ref> These broadly either follow after either [[Adi Shankara|Sankara]] or [[Ramanuja]]<ref>Flood, Gavin D, ''An Introduction to Hinduism'', (pps 239-234) CUP, {{ISBN|0-521-43878-0}}</ref> An example of a nontheistic passage might be "The supreme Brahman is without any beginning. That is called neither being nor non-being," which Sankara interpreted to mean that Brahman can only be talked of in terms of negation of all attributes—'Neti neti'.<ref>[[Swami Gambhirananda]], (1995), [http://www.gitasupersite.iitk.ac.in/ ''Bhagavadgita: with the Commentary of Sankaracharya''], Ch. 13. Vs. 13, Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta {{ISBN|81-7505-150-7}}</ref>

The [[Advaita Vedanta]] of [[Gaudapada]] and [[Adi Shankara|Sankara]] rejects theism as a consequence of its insistence that Brahman is "Without attributes, indivisible, subtle, inconceivable, and without blemish, Brahman is one and without a second. There is nothing other than He."<ref>Richards, John, [http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/vc/vc_10.htm ''Viveka-Chudamani of Shankara'' Vs 468.]</ref> This means that it lacks properties usually associated with God such as omniscience, perfect goodness, omnipotence, and additionally is identical with the whole of reality, rather than being a causal agent or ruler of it.<ref>Wainright, William, (2006), [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/concepts-god/ ''Concepts of God''], Stanford Encyclopedia of Religion</ref>

==Jainism==
{{Main|God in Jainism}}
{{Further|Jainism and non-creationism}}
Jain texts claim that the universe consists of ''[[jiva]]'' (life force or souls) and [[ajiva]] (lifeless objects). According to Jain doctrine, the universe and its constituents – soul, matter, space, time, and principles of motion – have always existed. The universe and the matter and souls within it are eternal and uncreated, and there is no omnipotent [[creator god]]. Jainism offers an elaborate cosmology, including heavenly beings/''devas'', but these heavenly beings are not viewed as creators-they are subject to suffering and change like all other living beings, and are portrayed as mortal.

According to the Jain concept of divinity, any soul who destroys its ''[[Karma in Jainism|karmas]]'' and desires, achieves liberation/Nirvana. A soul who destroys all its passions and desires has no desire to interfere in the working of the universe. If godliness is defined as the state of having freed one's soul from ''karmas'' and the attainment of enlightenment/Nirvana and a god as one who exists in such a state, then those who have achieved such a state can be termed gods (''[[Tirthankara]]'').

Besides scriptural authority, Jains also employ [[syllogism]] and [[deductive reasoning]] to refute [[creationism|creationist]] theories. Various views on divinity and the universe held by the [[Historical Vedic religion|Vedics]], [[samkhya|Sāmkhyas]], [[Mīmāṃsā|Mimamsas]], Buddhists, and other school of thoughts were criticized by Jain Ācāryas, such as [[Jinasena]] in [[Adipurana|Mahāpurāna]].

==Taoism==
{{Main|Taoist theology}}
Chinese [[Taoism]] or Daoism originally emphasizes the otherness of the divine, the [[Tao]], which is at the same time [[Immanence|immanent]] and [[Transcendence (religion)|transcendent]], but not [[Anthropomorphism|anthropomorphic]]. Only in later Taoism does a [[Chinese gods and immortals|pantheon of gods]] emerge, and even then they are considered deities inferior to the principle of Tao, often representing cosmic or heavenly concepts. The god [[Shangdi]] might have originally as a symbolic of the Pole Star in northern China, eventually becoming a kind of intermediary between the impersonal Tao and the world of active creation. There is no [[creator deity]] in traditional Taoism, and universe is held to be in constant creation and change.<ref>{{cite book|last=Cooper|first=Jean C.|title=An Illustrated Introduction to Taoism|date=2010|publisher=Joseph A. Fitzgerald|page=8-9|isbn=9781935493167}}</ref>

==Others==
Philosophical models{{clarification needed|date=February 2023}} not falling within established religious structures, such as [[Confucianism]], [[Epicureanism]], [[Deism]], and [[Pandeism]], have also been considered to be nontheistic religions.<ref>{{cite book
|author = Charles Brough
|title = The Last Civilization
|year = 2010
|isbn = 978-1426940576
|page = 246
|publisher = Trafford
|quote = Deism and pan-deism, as well as agnosticism and atheism, are all Non-Theisms.}}</ref>

The [[white supremacist]] [[Creativity (religion)|Creativity]] movement has also been described as a nontheistic religion.<ref>{{cite news |title=Neo-Nazi bought church with plans to name it after Trump. A fire destroyed it. - The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/03/24/neo-nazi-bought-church-with-plans-to-name-it-after-trump-a-fire-destroyed-it/ |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]}}</ref>

The [[Cult of Reason]] was formed in the maelstrom of the French Revolution. The avowedly atheistic founders of the Cult — including Antoine-François Momoro, who had famously coined the Revolutionary motto ″Unité, Indivisibilité de la République; Liberté, égalité, fraternité ou la mort″—sought to replace French Catholicism with a secular, Humanistic religion venerating philosophical principles such as Reason, Beauty, Nature and Truth.

The sociologist [[Auguste Comte]] devised a religion called the [[Religion of Humanity]] based on his [[Positivism#Comte's positivism|Positivist]] principles. The Religion of Humanity is not a metaphysical religion and as such there are no gods or [[supernatural]]isms in its belief.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Bourdeau |first1=Michel |date=2021 |title=Auguste Comte |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/comte/ |access-date=25 December 2021 |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University}}</ref>

[[Religious naturalism]] and [[Secular paganism]] are both umbrella terms encompassing a wide variety of individual and small-group perspectives on, and practices of nontheistic religion inspired by the natural world. 

The [[Church of Satan]] adheres to [[LaVeyan Satanism]], which is nontheistic.<ref name="DwD">{{cite web |last=Robinson |first=Eugene |date=7 September 2016 |title=My Dinner With The Devil |url=https://www.ozy.com/true-story/my-dinner-with-the-devil/71233/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180713103829/https://www.ozy.com/true-story/my-dinner-with-the-devil/71233/ |archive-date=2018-07-13 |access-date=2018-07-13 |website=OZY}}</ref> [[The Satanic Temple]], a non-theistic religious organization, is officially recognized as a tax-exempt church in the U.S. [[Internal Revenue Service]] on 25 April 2019 and regards the figure of "Satan" as a symbolic figurehead rather than a supernatural entity.<ref>{{Cite web |date=25 April 2019 |title=Satanic Temple: IRS has designated it a tax-exempt church |url=https://apnews.com/6addf2f0ecb646919cb1cfcfdacfc6c1 |access-date=30 July 2019 |website=AP NEWS}}</ref>

== See also ==
{{Div col|colwidth=30em}}
* [[Antitheism]]
* [[Conceptions of God]]
* [[Ethical culture]]
* [[Falsifiability]]
* [[Freethought]]
* [[Humanism]]
* [[Ietsism]]
* [[Irreligion]]
* [[Jediism]]
* [[Jewish atheism]]
* ''[[Language, Truth, and Logic]]''
* [[Mu (negative)]]
* [[Naturalistic pantheism]]
* [[Nonduality (spirituality)|Nondualism]]
* [[Pantheism]]
* [[Raëlism]]
* [[Religious naturalism]]
* [[Scientology]]
* [[Secular religion]]
* [[Speciesism]]
* [[Syntheism]]
* [[Transcendentalism]]
* [[Transtheism]]
* [[Unitarian Universalism]]
{{div col end}}

== References ==
{{reflist}}

{{Religion topics}}
{{Irreligion}}
{{Theology}}
{{Criticism of religion}}

[[Category:Nontheism|*]]
[[Category:Religious studies]]
[[Category:Religion and politics]]