Who has the burden of proof?

[ImmortalFlame]

Yes! You are finnaly getting it! An agnostic theist thinks that God's existence is highly probable but does not know for sure.

That's not what I said. I repeat:

An agnostic theist - as I have been explaining THIS ENTIRE THREAD - is someone who believes that there is a God, but does not claim to KNOW that there is a God.

Not someone that "thinks that God's existence is highly probable but does not know for sure."

The fact that you are now attempting to act like I'M the one who doesn't understand what agnosticism is WHEN I'VE BEEN USING THIS DEFINITION THIS ENTIRE TIME is incredibly desperate.

And yes, a theist believes that the proposition "God exists" is true.

Myself, POST #334 on page 34:

Anyone who says "I believe there is a God" is a theist, regardless of how certain they are of the proposition. Anyone who says anything other than that (including "I don't know") is, by definition, an atheist. There is no middle ground. You cannot be neither an an atheist nor a theist any more than you can be neither a stamp collector nor not a stamp collector.

Meanwhile, agnosticism is a position with regards to knowledge, not belief. Ergo, an agnostic theist is someone who BELIEVES there is a God, but doesn't claim to KNOW that there is a God, and conversely an agnostic atheist is someone who DOESN'T BELIEVE there is a God (not someone who BELIEVES there are NO Gods), but doesn't claim to KNOW that there are no Gods.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

If only someone had said that to pages and pages ago....
And you're correct with both definitions, agnostic theist and theist, but your wrong comparatively , where you're trying to show them to be completely different things.
an agnostic theist is a theist.
And a theist is either an agnostic theist, or a gnostic theist.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

Ok, so you are saying that there are 2 types of atheists and 2 types of theists.
I prefer agnostic atheist and atheist. I also prefer agnostic theist and theist.
If one says " theist" (as you said and I agree is the belief in God). The agnostic added means that one has doubts about theism but still favors it.

Holy crap, you read!
I'm so damn proud right now.I'm scared to go back to where I joined this conversation and said precisely this to you, just to see how many posts it took you to get it...
Edit, except for that third sentence.. Still not there on that concept.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Ok, so you are saying that there are 2 types of atheists and 2 types of theists.

Actually, there are lots of different types of both, but all the variations fit neatly into one of four categories: Gnostic theism, agnostic theism, gnostic atheism and agnostic atheism. There are lots of variations within each category, such as antitheism, strong atheism, deism, etc., but they all fit somewhere under one of those four headings.

I prefer agnostic atheist and atheist. I also prefer agnostic theist and theist.

Then you're confused with regards to the terminology.

If one says " theist" (as you said and I agree is the belief in God). The agnostic added means that one has doubts about theism but still favors it.

Which STILL isn't what agnostic theist means. You can still BELIEVE a claim, but not KNOW that it is true. Do you disagree?

 

[raw_thought]

How does your defintion of theist differ from an agnostic theist? If a theist is one that believes in God and yet does not know (have certainty ) that God exists, and an agnostic theist favors the proposition that "God exists" but lacks certainty....I really do not see a difference in the definitions.

 

[raw_thought]

Im confused about the termonolgy? You just used the terms agnostic atheist....etc

 

[ImmortalFlame]

How does your defintion of theist differ from an agnostic theist?

"How does the definition of an owl differ from the definition of a barn owl"?

If a theist is one that believes in God and yet does not know (have certainty ) that God exists, and an agnostic theist favors the proposition that "God exists" but lacks certainty....I really do not see a difference in the definitions.

Are you reading my posts at all??

THEIST = someone who believes God exists
AGNOSTIC THEIST = someone who believes God exists, but doesn't claim to know that God exists

Get it yet?

Im confused about the termonolgy?

Yes. You still don't appear to understand what an agnostic theist is.

You just used the terms agnostic atheist....etc

And?

 

[raw_thought]

Last sentence of your last post. Of course I agree!

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Last sentence of your last post. Of course I agree!

Right! So, do you now understand that an agnostic theist IS A KIND OF THEIST?

 

[raw_thought]

I agree, Im glad you are taking my side.
Theist= believes God exists.
Agnostic theist= Believes that God exists but does not know (lacks certainty)

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I agree, Im glad you are taking my side.
Theist= believes God exists.
Agnostic theist= Believes that God exists but does not know (lacks certainty)

Since I've already shown you that those are the exact definitions I was using THIRTY PAGES AGO and that you have been constantly arguing AGAINST this entire thread, I can only assume that this "I'm glad you are taking my side" thing is a desperate attempt to save face.

You've been disagreeing with my definitions THIS ENTIRE TIME, and now you suddenly act like I've "taken your side" despite the fact I'VE BEEN SAYING THE SAME THING ALL THE WAY THROUGH THIS THREAD.

You must be joking.

 

[Awkward Fingers]

Immortal.
Be honest.
Is there any doubt in your mind at this point that this guy is trolling/flame-baiting?

 

[raw_thought]

Forget about the votes 70% of the time Republican.
Lets not get into that superfluous debate about if beliefs can be quantified.
If I tend to agree with the Republican party, I am still an independant, I am not a Republican.
If I tend to agree with theism, I am not a theist, I am still an agnostic. I am an agnostic with theist tendencies.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Immortal.
Be honest.
Is there any doubt in your mind at this point that this guy is trolling/flame-baiting?

To be honest, no. But I'm having such a good time in this thread I'm really willing to suspend all disbelief in favour of believing that this guy is 100% legit. I rarely get the opportunity to destroy someone this easily and this regularly.

 

[raw_thought]

Since I've already shown you that those are the exact definitions I was using THIRTY PAGES AGO and that you have been constantly arguing AGAINST this entire thread, I can only assume that this "I'm glad you are taking my side" thing is a desperate attempt to save face.

You've been disagreeing with my definitions THIS ENTIRE TIME, and now you suddenly act like I've "taken your side" despite the fact I'VE BEEN SAYING THE SAME THING ALL THE WAY THROUGH THIS THREAD.

You must be joking.

I never disagreed with those defintions. Scroll back.
So you agree, that there is a difference between agnostic theist and theist. Im glad you finally agree with me.
Actually, in this thread I was the one that introduced "agnostic theist" in order to differentiate it from theist.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Forget about the votes 70% of the time Republican.
Lets not get into that superfluous debate about if beliefs can be quantified.
If I tend to agree with the Republican party, I am still an independant, I am not a Republican.
If I tend to agree with theism, I am not a theist, I am still an agnostic. I am an agnostic with theist tendencies.

So what part of "God exists" do you "tend" to agree with, because if you agree with the statement "God exists", you ARE a theist. If you DO NOT agree with it, you are an atheist. There's NOTHING ELSE to theism than that. The only "theist tendency" is the belief that there is a God. That's it.

 

[idav]

So you agree, that there is a difference between agnostic theist and theist. Im glad you finally agree with me.

More accurate to say that theists may have an additional agnostic qualifier if knowledge is lacking. Belief just doesn't require any type of knowledge, belief would be like just taking someones or gods word for it, not knowing if they speak truth.

 

[idav]

If I tend to agree with theism, I am not a theist, I am still an agnostic. I am an agnostic with theist tendencies.

Really that doesn't follow. People who tend to agree with theism are theists. Because you tend to believe. It is the other way, theist with agnostic tendencies. I consider myself gnostic.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I never disagreed with those defintions. Scroll back.

Post #541:
My definitions ( and the dictionary's) are more concise and precise.
1. Atheist= believes there are no Gods.
2. Theist= believes that there are at least one God.
3. Agnostic= is uncertain.

Post #517:
Agnosticism= doubts
Agnostic atheist= someone that has doubts about atheism.

Post #491:
"and come to the conclusion that they doubt the existence of god. "
Monk Of Reason
That is not an atheist. That is an agnostic.

Post #480:
As for the idea that atheism includes agnosticism because it is the lack of belief, that shows a lack of knowledge about logic. A negative proposition is still a proposition.

Post #403:
As for the argument that atheism is the lack of belief. That is not incorrect. Atheism is the belief that there is no God. Agnosticism is the lack of belief.

Post #402:
They even go to the extreme of saying that it is so obviously the most rational option that almost everyone is agnostic ( the definition of agnostic is having doubts)
Yes, one can be an agnostic that favors theism, an agnostic theist. However, to claim that agnostic theist= theist is improper English.

Post #397:
Anyway, I agree that your version is the way people talk. However, it is not grammatical. In other words if a person says that they are not an agnostic, they are a theist, I may understand that they are trying to imply that they favor theism. However, that is not what they are saying. They are saying that they have no doubts regarding theism.


You have been disagreeing with our definitions of agnosticism, theism and atheism THIS ENTIRE TIME.

So you agree, that there is a difference between agnostic theist and theist. Im glad you finally agree with me.

Again, are you even reading my posts? The difference between a theist and an agnostic theist is like the difference between an owl and a barn owl. One is A PARTICULAR KIND OF THE OTHER.

I've been saying that FOR OVER THIRTY PAGES.

 

[raw_thought]

So what part of "God exists" do you "tend" to agree with, because if you agree with the statement "God exists", you ARE a theist. If you DO NOT agree with it, you are an atheist. There's NOTHING ELSE to theism than that. The only "theist tendency" is the belief that there is a God. That's it.

Except for the fact that I am more atheist, I agree!
Theists believe that God exists.
Atheists disagree with that. They think God does not exist.
If you lack knowledge (certainty ) you are an agnostic.
Ironically, the above is the position you have been trying to refute.