Why the need for being Agnostic-theist?

[Banana Jelly]

Why is there a need? If you believe there is a god, why lean towards not believing it without facts? This is for Agnostic Theists ofcourse. If you believe there is a god but you also believe alot of aspects of what science says then why don't you become an Atheist? Since if your not following what religion says theres really no point.




Im not trying to offend. Don't let this become an atheist vs me thread. I always lose.

Im not an Atheist if your concerned.

Many of you know already what I am.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Muslim

[SigniferOne]

If you believe there is a god but you also believe alot of aspects of what science says then why don't you become an Atheist?

Or, if you believe there is a god but you also believe a lot of aspects of what science says then why don't you become a Christian?

[Banana Jelly]

Or, if you believe there is a god but you also believe a lot of aspects of what science says then why don't you become a Christian?

Yeah, but they don't take in many aspects to consideration in ones religion in your point Christianity. Thats what I am trying to say.

Such as they have a hard time believing that that Jesus or Isa did miracles.

[Playfishpaste]

Agnostic theism is not the belief that god exists but you can't be sure of it, it is the belief that god exists but you cannot scientifically verify or objectively know he does.

Which is a very rational view, mind you, were I a theist, I would definitely go for agnostic hinduism. Or even agnostic gnosticism (just to confuse people).

[Banana Jelly]

Agnostic gnotacism? LOL

Yeah, I know. Its when you doubt there is but you can't be too sure.

But Im asking why. If you doubt it then just stay an atheist as long as you start believe in god.

As if people might think that god will accept them if they have doubful feelings about him

[Playfishpaste]

Agnostic gnotacism? LOL

Yeah, I know. Its when you doubt there is but you can't be too sure.

But Im asking why. If you doubt it then just stay an atheist as long as you start believe in god.

As if people might think that god will accept them if they have doubful feelings about him

Well see that's the thing, you can be cock sure, 100 percent, that god exists and believe in him and praise him daily, but this doesn't mean you have to believe he is scientifically or objectively verifiable. Many people don't consider science or objectivity as the only standards of truth in the world. That said I don't think many people identify as agnostic theists, only because they probably don't know what it means.

Most christian scientists for instance, are probably agnostic theists, like francis collins for instance.

[Playfishpaste]

Agnostic gnotacism? LOL

Yeah, I know. Its when you doubt there is but you can't be too sure.

But Im asking why. If you doubt it then just stay an atheist as long as you start believe in god.

As if people might think that god will accept them if they have doubful feelings about him

Well see that's the thing, you can be cock sure, 100 percent, that god exists and believe in him and praise him daily, but this doesn't mean you have to believe he is scientifically or objectively verifiable. Many people don't consider science or objectivity as the only standards of truth in the world. That said I don't think many people identify as agnostic theists, only because they probably don't know what it means.

Most christian scientists for instance, are probably agnostic theists, like francis collins for instance.

EDIT: However, even if agnostic theism did simply mean the same thing as agnostic atheism, you can't choose your religion. It doesn't matter whether or not god will accept a person into heaven for half believing or not. It's not their choice to half-believe.

[chilon]

Well see that's the thing, you can be cock sure, 100 percent, that god exists and believe in him and praise him daily, but this doesn't mean you have to believe he is scientifically or objectively verifiable. Many people don't consider science or objectivity as the only standards of truth in the world. That said I don't think many people identify as agnostic theists, only because they probably don't know what it means.

I think Christian scientists or educated theists are well aware of what it means. More likely they simply do not see much value in using that term to describe their beliefs.


Like I pointed out in the other thread, the problem lies in these terms creating necessary and sufficient conditions for categorical labeling which
1. Do not correspond to how the brain actually categorizes
and
2. Do not accurately reflect the nuances and complexity of human belief systems.

Most likely anyone whom you might label an "agnostic-theist" would have a better term (or paragraph) to describe their actual belief system.

Another problem is that some people like to insist that others cannot be 'True Neutral Agnostic' that someone must be either Theist-Agnostic or and only or Atheist-Agnostic.

[Ummon]

Agnostic gnotacism? LOL

Yeah, I know. Its when you doubt there is but you can't be too sure.

But Im asking why. If you doubt it then just stay an atheist as long as you start believe in god.

As if people might think that god will accept them if they have doubful feelings about him

I am infact an agnostic gnostic theist, although I opt for a form of gnosticism which is subservient to the revealed, literal content of my religion.

I do believe that whenever there is a strong symbolic node in scripture that hasn't been resolved by literal or authoritative reading of the said scripture, it is the duty of the faithful to investigate it using his inner experience as a guideline.

[Banana Jelly]

I am infact an agnostic gnostic theist,

I never heard of it, so thats why I thought it was wierd. No offense.

[S.L.I.G]

Agnostic gnotacism? LOL

Yeah, I know. Its when you doubt there is but you can't be too sure.

But Im asking why. If you doubt it then just stay an atheist as long as you start believe in god.

As if people might think that god will accept them if they have doubful feelings about him

It's...not a choice dude, its just a rational process leading to a conclusion. I mean, they cant say "Intellectually im an agnostic theist, but come on man, why bother? So I decided to remain an Atheist"

You cant....go against your convictions and beliefs, its not possible, rational, or coherent.

[royfang]

Why is there a need? If you believe there is a god, why lean towards not believing it without facts? This is for Agnostic Theists ofcourse. If you believe there is a god but you also believe alot of aspects of what science says then why don't you become an Atheist? Since if your not following what religion says theres really no point.

I guess this prove we human are label whores?

Why do they need to subscribe to a religion? or rather organized religions? Does it annoyed the religious that they are "standing in the middle"

Certain religious people kept preaching relationship with this divine being is a personal thing yet they "force" people to take a side, convert or perish and no standing in the middle.

[Boer]

I guess this prove we human are label whores?

Exactly. Why does it matter what label a person sticks on their religious views? Is god going to judge them based on the label or their actual views? If an agnostic calls himself a Muslim or a Catholic or an atheist he still believes the same way and the title is meaningless

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

(unless we want to introduce the thought that god in unable to read minds/hearts and must judge people based on their claims and not their beliefs)

.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Agnostic-theist is an oxymoron.

[Taiji]

Agnostic-theist is an oxymoron.

An agnostic theist thinks they can't know about the existance of gods but chooses to believe nonetheless.

An agnostic atheist thinks they can't know about the existance of gods and chooses not to believe.

Much like an astrophysicist should be big-bang agnostic, she thinks she can't know but chooses to believe if she is doing experiments which depend on the theory.

I don't really see a problem unless we make knowing and believing synonymous.

[Tankbuster]

An agnostic theist thinks they can't know about the existance of gods but chooses to believe nonetheless.

Exactly.
An agnostic theist might say: "It is fundamentally unknowable whether there is a God or not, and even if there was, I would never be able to apprehend it. However, come to think of it, if there was indeed a God I'd be pretty screwed in the after-life, so I'm going to do my best to believe in a God anyway.
The Wager of Blaise Pascal (adressed to those who are 'so made that they cannot believe') is in a way a call to be an agnostic theist.

It's indeed a bit of a weird position; that's why it's so rare.
Usually when someone thinks that the existence of God is fundamentally unknowable, they choose to live their life without really caring about this question (but in any case not believing it), effectively becoming agnostic atheists.

[Ummon]

Exactly.
An agnostic theist might say: "It is fundamentally unknowable whether there is a God or not, and even if there was, I would never be able to apprehend it. However, come to think of it, if there was indeed a God I'd be pretty screwed in the after-life, so I'm going to do my best to believe in a God anyway.
The Wager of Blaise Pascal (adressed to those who are 'so made that they cannot believe') is in a way a call to be an agnostic theist.

It's indeed a bit of a weird position; that's why it's so rare.
Usually when someone thinks that the existence of God is fundamentally unknowable, they choose to live their life without really caring about this question (but in any case not believing it), effectively becoming agnostic atheists.

An agnostic theist will just say: "I cannot know, but I have a strong impression that...".

[Tankbuster]

Atheism provides no arguments for why children should be moral, aside from revolting evolutionistic reasons.

Value judgments aside ('revolting' is your emotional response, which is utterly irrelevant), I never knew children asked for intricate justifications for why they, say, shouldn't bully at school. Nor any other child in my family or that I've come into contact with. 'Because I say so' usually cuts it for children, religious or non-religious. Or just the principle of the golden rule; that works like a charm too.
Are you seriously telling me that, wherever you live, it's common practice to scare children with hellfire and eternal punishment as an encouragement for listening to you and obeying society's moral standards? Whatever place might that be?

An agnostic theist will just say: "I cannot know, but I have a strong impression that...".

It's strange to first assert that as an agnostic you think the matter is fundamentally unknowable, and then say that you have a strong impression one way or another.
At some point this of course boils down to simple semantic distinctions, but if we employ the definition that agnosticism is the belief that God's existence or non-existence is fundamentally unknowable and non-apprehendable by us, then an agnostic theist can only have a reason besides evidence to still believe in theism.

An agnostic asserting that it's impossible to know about deities, will usually lack a belief in said proposition, thus being an atheist.

[Valentin the II]

Actually, every one is born atheist. What you need to ask yourself is: Why do I need to be religious? Why do I need to believe in something I have no proof or evidence exists?

[SigniferOne]

Actually, every one is born atheist. What you need to ask yourself is: Why do I need to be religious? Why do I need to believe in something I have no proof or evidence exists?

This is true. Everyone is also born immoral. If you study and investigate little children, they are inherently prone to steal, cheat, lie, defraud other children, escape from punishment, avoid responsibility, and in general perpetuate and grow in immoral behavior ever further until checked. That is why parental guidance is absolutely necessary, and the crux of that parenting consists IN reversing, checking, arresting, and forcefully bringing those children to unnatural honesty, propriety, virtuous and moral behavior.

The same with religion.

Morals taught with religion will be several orders of magnitude stronger and more receptive, when looking at it on a purely secular level.