Does the (Christian) God Exist?

[Mavorpen]

So you could say that he's.. an agnostic atheist!
gasp shock horror

Yeah, but then the agnostic theist is occupying a rather unfortunate slot in my analysis.

That's their own fault.

[Jormengand]

In a sense, I suppose. He's just an atheist who doesn't specifically think God doesn't exist either.

Right, which is the fundamental definition of atheism. Not sure why you made that unnecessarily complicated.

Hey, I was trying to reduce it from their four categories down to three! Give me some credit!

[Jormengand]

Yeah, but then the agnostic theist is occupying a rather unfortunate slot in my analysis.

That's their own fault.

Well, I would say that anyone who thinks God exists and that he doesn't exist has a fairly big problem, to be sure, but...

[Mavorpen]

Right, which is the fundamental definition of atheism. Not sure why you made that unnecessarily complicated.

Hey, I was trying to reduce it from their four categories down to three! Give me some credit!

This is no free-response test, son.

[Mavorpen]

That's their own fault.

Well, I would say that anyone who thinks God exists and that he doesn't exist has a fairly big problem, to be sure, but...

Go big or go home. *nods*

[Divair]

So you could say that he's.. an agnostic atheist!
gasp shock horror

Yeah, but then the agnostic theist is occupying a rather unfortunate slot in my analysis.

A shame for the few agnostic theists out there.

[Lost heros]

Agnostic by itself is not a third option.

Oh, please. Having "Agnostic atheists" and "Agnostic theists" is like having "Straight bisexuals" and "Gay bisexuals."

The atheist believes that God doesn't exist, and doesn't believe He does exist.
The theist doesn't believe that God doesn't exist, and believes He does exist.
The agnostic doesn't believe that God doesn't exist, and doesn't believe He does exist.

There, three categories, done.

Now can we please resume saving the world?

Not at all, agnosticism means not knowing for sure.
A Gnostic Theist knows there is a God.
An Agnostic Theist thinks there is a God, but isn't sure.
A Gnostic Atheist knows there isn't a God.
An Agnostic Atheist thinks there isn't a God, but isn't sure.
Of course we could separate the theists and atheists down into each religion; for example:
A Gnostic Theist Christian knows there is the Christian God.
An Agnostic Theist Christian thinks there is the Christian God, but isn't sure.
A Gnostic Atheist Christian knows the Christian God doesn't exist.
An Agnostic Atheist Christian thinks the Christian God doesn't exist, but isn't sure.
This second level is rather trivial, however, because it makes it look like theists of one religion are atheists considering a different religion.

[Jormengand]

A Gnostic Theist knows there is a God.
An Agnostic Theist thinks there is a God, but isn't sure.
A Gnostic Atheist knows there isn't a God.
An Agnostic Atheist thinks there isn't a God, but isn't sure.

What about someone who has no opinion on whether or not there's a God? Do they fall into Agnostic Atheist because they don't specifically believe that there is a god? But then, the agnostic theist doesn't really believe there's a god, they just think there might be. Does that mean they're an atheist too?

I have a new idea, let's put all these people together and just call them agnostics for simplicity. Oh, wait.

(Anyway, aren't we supposed to be debating whether or not God exists rather than dreaming up names for people who don't know whether or not He exists?)

[Kzaria]

So, what do you think? Do you think God (the one that is mentioned in the Bible) actually exists? It's a question that I want to hear (hopefully different) answers and explanations for. Remember, nobody should try and force their own religion on others. I just would like to hear your opinion and some explanation as to why or why not, and maybe respectful response to others' arguments.

No I belive in Hellenism (the Greek Gods,Goddess'and Nymphs and such

[Kzaria]

So, what do you think? Do you think God (the one that is mentioned in the Bible) actually exists? It's a question that I want to hear (hopefully different) answers and explanations for. Remember, nobody should try and force their own religion on others. I just would like to hear your opinion and some explanation as to why or why not, and maybe respectful response to others' arguments.

No I belive in Hellenism (the Greek Gods,Goddess'and Nymphs and such

You can look at my factbook a look into Hellenism for deatils

[Lost heros]

A Gnostic Theist knows there is a God.
An Agnostic Theist thinks there is a God, but isn't sure.
A Gnostic Atheist knows there isn't a God.
An Agnostic Atheist thinks there isn't a God, but isn't sure.

What about someone who has no opinion on whether or not there's a God?

Somewhere between Agnostic Atheist and Agnostic Theist, leaning towards Atheist.

Do they fall into Agnostic Atheist because they don't specifically believe that there is a god?

Yes.

But then, the agnostic theist doesn't really believe there's a god, they just think there might be. Does that mean they're an atheist too?

No. If they think there is a God they are a theist. If they aren't sure they are agnostic.

I have a new idea, let's put all these people together and just call them agnostics for simplicity. Oh, wait.

That would ignore all Gnostics.

[Jormengand]

That would ignore all Gnostics.

No, "Gnostics" are theists and atheists. People who actually think they know whether or not god exists. Agnostics are people who don't, regardless of what probabilities they assign to it.

[Kzaria]

So, what do you think? Do you think God (the one that is mentioned in the Bible) actually exists? It's a question that I want to hear (hopefully different) answers and explanations for. Remember, nobody should try and force their own religion on others. I just would like to hear your opinion and some explanation as to why or why not, and maybe respectful response to others' arguments.

No I belive in Hellenism (the Greek Gods,Goddess'and Nymphs and such

[Mavorpen]

That would ignore all Gnostics.

No, "Gnostics" are theists and atheists. People who actually think they know whether or not god exists. Agnostics are people who don't, regardless of what probabilities they assign to it.

Again, wrong.

agnostic
Syllabification: (ag·nos·tic)
Pronunciation: /agˈnästik/
Translate agnostic | into French | into German | into Italian | into Spanish
noun
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.

Agnostic doesn't mean, "I don't believe God does or does not exist." It means that you actively believe that you cannot know. It is NOT, nor can it be, a third option all on its own.

[Jormengand]

Agnostic doesn't mean, "I don't believe God does or does not exist." It means that you actively believe that you cannot know. It is NOT, nor can it be, a third option all on its own.

My point is, there are people who believe that god exists, people who believe he does not and people who believe neither. Those are my categories, and I don't really care what probabilities you assign to God X existing, only whether you think he does exist, think he doesn't or think you don't know.

Now can we please go slightly closer to the topic? Please?

[Mavorpen]

Agnostic doesn't mean, "I don't believe God does or does not exist." It means that you actively believe that you cannot know. It is NOT, nor can it be, a third option all on its own.

My point is, there are people who believe that god exists, people who believe he does not and people who believe neither. Those are my categories, and I don't really care what probabilities you assign to God X existing, only whether you think he does exist, think he doesn't or think you don't know.

Now can we please go slightly closer to the topic? Please?

So your point had nothing to do with our discussion?

...Okay?

[The USOT]

Right, which is the fundamental definition of atheism. Not sure why you made that unnecessarily complicated.

So atheism is not a lack of belief in a god, but a lack of belief in a lack of belief in a god.

Not sure why you made that unnecessarily complicated.

What?
Atheism is literally just that first part.
A lack of belief in a deity.

So if someone says "Im agnostic because I dont know/am undecided" untill they have a belief either way, they are an agnostic atheist.

[The New World Oceania]

So atheism is not a lack of belief in a god, but a lack of belief in a lack of belief in a god.

Not sure why you made that unnecessarily complicated.

What?
Atheism is literally just that first part.
A lack of belief in a deity.

So if someone says "Im agnostic because I dont know/am undecided" untill they have a belief either way, they are an agnostic atheist.

The earlier argument was involved with Mavorpen and he can't be wrong so you have to fight him with sass regardless of whether the argument makes sense or not.
The topic is changing too drastically at this point, however.

[The USOT]

What?
Atheism is literally just that first part.
A lack of belief in a deity.

So if someone says "Im agnostic because I dont know/am undecided" untill they have a belief either way, they are an agnostic atheist.

The earlier argument was involved with Mavorpen and he can't be wrong so you have to fight him with sass regardless of whether the argument makes sense or not.
The topic is changing too drastically at this point, however.

...but he is right? I mean he provided the definition for you...

He claimed

Not believing in God makes you an atheist.

"Agnostic" is not a third option. You either don't believe in a deity/deities, or you don't.

He even provided a quote to demonstrate this. Incidently if you want a real world example of his point in practice, if you want to have agnostic as its own position (despite as shown evidence to the contrary) then Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennet who even accepted the title of "the four horsemen of atheism" would not be atheist. ALL identified as agnostic.

I will give you Mavorpen has Sass, but he provided definitions and demonstrations to back up his point. It was not nonsensical at all.

[Neo Rome Republic]

The earlier argument was involved with Mavorpen and he can't be wrong so you have to fight him with sass regardless of whether the argument makes sense or not.
The topic is changing too drastically at this point, however.

...but he is right? I mean he provided the definition for you...

He claimed

Not believing in God makes you an atheist.

"Agnostic" is not a third option. You either don't believe in a deity/deities, or you don't.

He even provided a quote to demonstrate this. Incidently if you want a real world example of his point in practice, if you want to have agnostic as its own position (despite as shown evidence to the contrary) then Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennet who even accepted the title of "the four horsemen of atheism" would not be atheist. ALL identified as agnostic.

I will give you Mavorpen has Sass, but he provided definitions and demonstrations to back up his point. It was not nonsensical at all.

I thought New Atheists used the Dawkins scale? http://dirkpurvy.files.wordpress.com/20 ... .png?w=640
Which would still allow for a middle ground between Atheism and Theism, but still allow those Atheists not 100% convinced, to still be Atheists.

[The New World Oceania]

The earlier argument was involved with Mavorpen and he can't be wrong so you have to fight him with sass regardless of whether the argument makes sense or not.
The topic is changing too drastically at this point, however.

...but he is right? I mean he provided the definition for you...

He claimed

Not believing in God makes you an atheist.

"Agnostic" is not a third option. You either don't believe in a deity/deities, or you don't.

He even provided a quote to demonstrate this. Incidently if you want a real world example of his point in practice, if you want to have agnostic as its own position (despite as shown evidence to the contrary) then Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennet who even accepted the title of "the four horsemen of atheism" would not be atheist. ALL identified as agnostic.

I will give you Mavorpen has Sass, but he provided definitions and demonstrations to back up his point. It was not nonsensical at all.

You're right in that it wasn't nonsensical, but since several arguments were going on about related (but different) topics at once, it was difficult to maintain clarity.

On an entirely unrelated note, how are we defining the "Christian God?" What's to differentiate between a Catholic interpretation and a Mormon interpretation? And since some churches view Christ and God as one entity, would both have to be proven to prove one, or vice versa?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

We actually had perfectly good words in "Atheist", "Agnostic", and "Theist" for the longest time. Then the semantic bullshit of "Well, if you're agnostic, then you don't really BELIEVE in God, which makes you a kind of atheist" started, which, despite all of my respect for the New Atheist movement, is so smug and cutesy that it makes me want to vomit.

[The Godly Nations]

We actually had perfectly good words in "Atheist", "Agnostic", and "Theist" for the longest time. Then the semantic bullshit of "Well, if you're agnostic, then you don't really BELIEVE in God, which makes you a kind of atheist" started, which, despite all of my respect for the New Atheist movement, is so smug and cutesy that it makes me want to vomit.

I prefer petty fidians, and nullifidians myself.

[Mavorpen]

We actually had perfectly good words in "Atheist", "Agnostic", and "Theist" for the longest time. Then the semantic bullshit of "Well, if you're agnostic, then you don't really BELIEVE in God, which makes you a kind of atheist" started, which, despite all of my respect for the New Atheist movement, is so smug and cutesy that it makes me want to vomit.

Yeah, the New Atheist movement didn't start that battle.

The silly Christian crowd claimed that atheism means "you believe God doesn't exist" and pretended as though this is enough to make atheism an article of faith. Their goal is to prove that atheists are no better than they are and that they also adhere to their own "religion." Thus, they paint agnosticism as the "middle ground," and atheism as a fringe religious belief.

The argument of agnosticism not meaning what they want it to mean was a response to said bullshit.

[The USOT]

...but he is right? I mean he provided the definition for you...

He claimed
He even provided a quote to demonstrate this. Incidently if you want a real world example of his point in practice, if you want to have agnostic as its own position (despite as shown evidence to the contrary) then Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Daniel Dennet who even accepted the title of "the four horsemen of atheism" would not be atheist. ALL identified as agnostic.

I will give you Mavorpen has Sass, but he provided definitions and demonstrations to back up his point. It was not nonsensical at all.

I thought New Atheists used the Dawkins scale? http://ntrygg.files.wordpress.com/2012/ ... -scale.jpg
Which would still allow for a middle ground between Atheism and Theism, but still allow those Atheists not 100% convinced, to still be Atheists.

Not all agree with the Dawkins scale taken literally. Even Dawkins takes it with a pinch of salt placing himself at a 6 but calling himself agnostic.

This chart is what tends to be used.
Its generally useful because it removes all the dilly dallying of theistic/atheistic positioning and can sum up whatever diverse and complex belief system you have regarding the belief in a god in a combination of four words.

Agnostic Atheist
Gnostic Atheist
Agnostic Theist
Gnostic Theist.

As I have said before, people are fine to have whatever definitions they want, but they A) complicate things and B) have to call Richard Dawkins not an Atheist (if you go with the definition of New World Order anyway).