Jumi
Well-Known Member
By definition it can be either. That's why for your convenience I identified as agnostic atheist above.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Can you be a theist and an atheist at the same time?
- Thread starter Jumi
- Start date
Jumi
Well-Known Member
I regret trying to be funny on the subject line now.
Jumi
Well-Known Member
There are some god concepts I reject completely, most gods I'm agnostic towards however.
Last edited:
Jumi
Well-Known Member
Will you reject that the Sun is a God?
psychoslice
Veteran Member
You know, we can be whatever we want, we don't need to please anyone but ourselves, if we live our lives trying to please others, then what a wast of life, I say don't follow others and their beliefs, follow yourself, because that's all you really can ever know, yourself.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
I have to say without my yelling, just lifting a curious eye.
The prefixes of anti- and a- is:
Anti-is against/reject
A-opposite of
Theism is a belief in (Not acceptance of) god/s.
An Anti-theist is "against/rejects theism"
An Atheist is "opposite of theism"
You are arguing antitheism Not atheism.
Anything extra to either words dont change that:
Anti theists reject belief in theism
Athiest disbelieve in theism.
Its basic grammar. Anything more is what humans do to make words more than its basic definition. At the end, though, there is only a cake. No icing and cherry makes it more than a cake then it being naked.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
I think the prefix a- just negates. For example "atypical" means "not typical". So "atheist" means "not theist".
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
I stand corrected.
negates and rejects are two different words, Id say still.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
I stand corrected.
Yes, atheist and anti-theist are quite different. Apparently "New Theists" are anti-theists, so maybe that means old theists are more like apatheists.
McBell
Unbound
Ouch.
Sad you are as ignorant as you whine about the OP being.
Unification
Well-Known Member
Someone can be anything by simply being. Can do's and can't do's just strip away an individual's free mind by rules and control.
So of course someone can. An "atheist" doesn't believe "God" is a deity. A theist can believe "God" is not a deity also.
A better word for "atheist" can be "adeity."
Atheist and theist can find a middle path in which "God" is not a deity.
Wiki is not a reliable source. In academia the three terms have been defined just as I have stated. The three terms are contraries to each other and they cannot be mixed. Rational people ought to understand if something is contrary both attributes cannot apply simultaneously. If one label is true the other two MUST BE FALSE.
Words are not defined by grammar but the meaning implied. A concept has a meaning or message to relay. The concepts under discussion have a meaning to relay to other humans when used. Many of you are confusing freedom of speech and rational thinking. Yes you have the freedom to think what you like and say what you like but that doesn't mean you are making rational sense. All atheist will fall under the class of anti theist. As a matter of fact those are the only two classes we can have in this discussion: theist and anti theist. There is no third option.
Under the class of anti theist are agnostic and atheist. A theist is a human believes in a deity. You trying to use grammar and STILL going back to etymology does not convey the proper context. You are being a literal reader when you ought to be looking at the context and what message a person is trying to convey when using those words.
It would be nice if you demonstrate academic usage of the terms in question to show I am ignorant. No using the dictionary and no using wiki as a source for they are not reliable.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
Jumi
Well-Known Member
Depends. Often the wiki is a good starting point.
Your choice is whether you accept it or not. It's use is not rare.
Jumi
Well-Known Member
What is your source for this definition of anti-theist? Looking forward to seeing your sources for this one. Good luck.
Your usage may be legit in your hood or community which is what I stated but academic sources would not use any of the terms like YOU and the emotional folk here. Your definition is the emotional kind. These terms as I have stated are contraries and cannot be true simultaneously. Rational people ought not speak in such a manner where you either say something contrary or contradict yourself. I do not know of any rationalally sound folk who do those things intentionally. You OUGHT to be focusing on the CONTRARY relationship instead of how some emotional person just does what he likes with any word whatsoever. Address the contrary relationship please the terms have. If one is TRUE the others MUST BE FALSE.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
It's a redundant label. If you believe in deities, you are a theist. It seems that you do not know what you believe, some people call that agnostic, some people just say ''I don't know''/
I think that ''I don't know'' would be an accurate description of your position.