Just ask some theists if they know God exists. When I said "belief" that was from my perspective.
-
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!
I see no value in atheism
- Thread starter The Transcended Omniverse
- Start date
"English". Wonder what that word means in Bunyupian.
McBell
Unbound
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Admittedly, it's a truth that many do not want to admit to.
Some theists say they know! Some theists say they believe but don't know! Do you have any useful contributions to the dialog?
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Tut tut, Sweet Pea, he is only trying to keep people honest.
A theist can be perfectly honest when he says he knows that some god exists. He might have had some personal experiences that have completely convinced him.Tut tut, Sweet Pea, he is only trying to keep people honest.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Likewise some human animals believe in UFO's due to their experience. It certainly doesn't mean that UFO's are real. The secret lies in how our brains catalog unknown aspects of reality.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Alright, can we please use the actual definition of these terms instead of the one's you apparently created (including the erroneous "know")? Here are the definitions from Websters Dictionary (and I'm sorry, but I have to trust Websters more than you when it comes to defining terms).
Theist: A person who believes in the existence of a God or gods (no mention of "knowing" ... sorry).
Atheist: A person who disbelieves or LACKS BELIEF in the existence of God or gods (merely lacking belief is enough).
Agnostic: A person who claims NEITHER FAITH ("belief" not "knowledge") NOR DISBELIEF in God or gods.
So, how would an Agnostic, "a person who claimes neither faith nor disbelief in God", not fit into the classification of Atheist, "a person who [merely needs to] lack belief in God"? And, just to be clear, there is no mention of knowledge in any of these definitions. That is simply an erroneous addition or assumption on your part. The terms defined do not necessitate anything of the sort. Doesn't really matter whether people think they "know" that God exists, because knowledge is not a prerequisite for any of these terms.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
This has nothing to do with the discussion. Any 4th grade grammer teacher will tell you that an "Agnostic Atheist" is still an atheist. It is merely a more defined subcategory of atheism. Same goes for "Agnostic Theist", "Gnostic Theist", etc. The first word adds further specification to the second. That's how terms work in english. Same would go for a scientific theory. It is merely a much more defined KIND of theory that has a much higher bar.Here is a nice simple guide for you explaining it all.
Atheism vs Theism vs Agnosticism vs Gnosticism. A simple guide to know what the hell you are. - Stanley Colors
I don't argue with the terms and meanings presented here. I already knew these things. They just are not relevant to our discussion.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Only subcategories of Atheist and Theist are defined here. This in no way claims that an Agnostic Atheist is not stilll an Atheist (and an Agnostic in this specific case).Here is a nice simple guide for you explaining it all.
Atheism vs Theism vs Agnosticism vs Gnosticism. A simple guide to know what the hell you are. - Stanley Colors
Yes, this is exactly what I explained to you. And the rest of your posts are so irrational that I won't even try to untangle them.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
What?! If you actually read my post it proves that the general terms of Atheist and Agnostic are both applicable to anyone who lacks belief. Are you actually trying to claim that a weak atheist is not an atheist? Or an agnostic theist is not a theist. There is absolutely no requirement for knowledge as you claim in any of the terms.
I'm not trying to claim any of those things. And you really have to stop this nonsense of yours now it has already gone far enough.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
So, you agree with me? I'll take that as a win. I always do when my opponent resorts to calling my arguments "nonsense" instead of actually arguing against them. Bad form, buddy ... bad, form.
I can't argue against them because they are just nonsense. You win.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Ok, I know you are just trying to get out of admitting defeat, but enlighten me. What is "non-sensical" about them? No need to be disrespectful and just refuse to argue instead of just admitting that your argument was flawed.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
And, by the way, I'm not the one who said that knowledge of God's existence is a prerequisite for theism. Can't think of anything more non-sensical than that, considering that there is not a definition for theism in the galaxy that adheres to this.
Here is a nice simple guide for you explaining it all.
Atheism vs Theism vs Agnosticism vs Gnosticism. A simple guide to know what the hell you are. - Stanley Colors
I tend to identify as "agnostic" mainly because I honestly don't know if there is a god or gods. I don't actively "believe" or "disbelieve," as it seems to be beside the point.
For me, belief is like saying "I believe the Yankees will win the World Series this year." But just because I believe that, it doesn't mean it's going to happen, nor would it mean that I'd even bet on the Yankees.
In any case, dwelling on it or arguing about "belief" seems somewhat fruitless until we actually get to the event in question and see what happens. As a famous Yankee once said, "It ain't over til it's over."
I might go so far as to say "I want to believe" (in an X-Files kind of way), but that's not the same thing as saying "I do believe."