Agnostic theism - Your thoughts on this?

[rpeg]

"Agnostic theism is the philosophical view that encompasses both theism and agnosticism. An agnostic theist believes the proposition at least one deity exists is true, but per agnosticism also believes that this proposition is unknown or inherently unknowable. The agnostic theist may also or alternatively be agnostic regarding the properties of the god(s) they believe in.[1]...

Christian Agnostics (distinct from a Christian who is agnostic) practice a distinct form of agnosticism that applies only to the properties of God. They hold that it is difficult or impossible to be sure of anything beyond the basic tenets of the Christian faith."

- Agnostic theism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Is anyone here familiar with this subject? Does anyone think they fall into that category?

 

[drich0150]

That is not the definition of atheism. I recommend we all double check definitions to avoid confusion:

"Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.[1] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[2] Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.[3]"

Atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I do believe either your cheese has slipped from your cracker or you misunderstand the point.

 

[rpeg]

I do believe either your cheese has slipped from your cracker or you misunderstand the point.

I'm just commenting on the other person's definition of atheism but

Let's talk about agnostic theism. Is anyone familiar with the topic?

 

[drich0150]

I don't have faith.

It sure sounds like it to me:

We know what's observable around us because we do . We get credit for that much.

We know much more beyond the fact that Earth is not flat. So no, I don't contend that.

"we" is not you. "We" identifies the work of others and your belief/FAITH in their findings.

So again either you have at least some measure of faith, or it is as you have stated. "we only believe in what we observe." and again if you have not witnessed for your self the earth from orbit, then YOU have not observed anything other than the flat surface of the earth.

 

[drich0150]

I'm just commenting on the other person's definition of atheism but

Let's talk about agnostic theism. Is anyone familiar with the topic?

What is their to discuss. It's a paradoxical term that someone has found a loop hole to connect the two with.

 

[AlexBP]

Let's talk about agnostic theism. Is anyone familiar with the topic?

I would have to say, without intending to offend anyone, that I'm always amused and entertained by the way that some folks are continually splitting off more and more specific and convoluted definitions of their religious viewpoints. I am an orthodox Christian and my position, I feel safe to say, is defined clearly. Most of those outside of religion will say that they find Christianity's claims trivial and easy to reject. That's their prerogative if they feel like saying it. However, I'm obliged to wonder if they really think that's the case, then why the need for all this hair-splitting of definitions? Those who don't believe in astrology--myself included--feel no need to split ourselves up into aastrologers, agstrologers, anti-astrologers, agnostic astrologers, strong and weak aastrologers, and so forth.

 

[rpeg]

What is their to discuss. It's a paradoxical term that someone has found a loop hole to connect the two with.

I'm sorry but this isn't necessarily a comment on your general worldview but I've had enough conversations with theists here and elsewhere to know that contradiction and paradoxes do not concern them. Why should this spectre of a "paradox" concern you? Not that I agree that it's a paradox. I'm going to guess that there are many religions people can practice while still admitting that details of a deity are "unknown". Did you read the description?

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT


This thread has undergone a small clean up.


Again - if you are a non-Christian and not the OP, do not post in the thread.
​

 

[drich0150]

I'm sorry but this isn't necessarily a comment on your general worldview but I've had enough conversations with theists here and elsewhere to know that contradiction and paradoxes do not concern them. Why should this spectre of a "paradox" concern you? Not that I agree that it's a paradox. I'm going to guess that there are many religions people can practice while still admitting that details of a deity are "unknown". Did you read the description?

Agnostics believe that God is completely unknowable.

The bible describes the God as infinite, which means a finite being will never be able to have a complete understanding of God.

However this does not mean that we can not know and understand what God has given us to know about Him.

In fact in the three years I have been here I have seen well educated atheist and agnostics arguments/challenges beaten back with the simplest understanding of a God given precept.

 

[solarwave]

I'm not familiar the term, but I have heard of the theory before and it seems that more Christians probably come under this term than actually know the term. It seems to me that many Christians believe in God by faith only and can't be fully justified by reason.

 

[rpeg]

Agnostics believe that God is completely unknowable.

The bible describes the God as infinite, which means a finite being will never be able to have a complete understanding of God.

However this does not mean that we can not know and understand what God has given us to know about Him.

In fact in the three years I have been here I have seen well educated atheist and agnostics arguments/challenges beaten back with the simplest understanding of a God given precept.

Agnostics can take the position that the qualities or existence of a god are unknowable. So are you sticking with your "paradox" sentiment on this subject (which is highly ironic).

 

[Ave Maria]

Agnostic Theism is not true. It is true that you can believe in God but not be sure of His existence. However, that is not Agnostic Theism. If you believe in God but you are unsure of His existence then that simply means that you have doubts.

Did you know that many saints struggled with doubts? Many of them were also very firm in their faith. However, many of them did struggle with doubts from time to time as well. The Catholic Church has a thorough explanation of things that helps with doubts. There were many prolific and very intelligent writers in the Catholic Church. You should read some of the writings of the saints. I think you would be surprised at just how intellectual these people were. They were very smart and had an intimate relationship with our God.

 

[Beth-Zur]

Hmmm...Wikipedia.

When you are going to offer a definition of something, it's appropriate to post the complete definition, or at the least, insert (...) so people will know that it is incomplete.

"Christian Agnostics (distinct from a Christian who is agnostic) practice a distinct form of agnosticism that applies only to the properties of God. They hold that it is difficult or impossible to be sure of anything beyond the basic tenets of the Christian faith. They believe that God exists, that Jesus has a special relationship with him and is in some way divine, that God should be worshiped and that humans should be compassionate toward one another. This belief system has deep roots in Judaism and the early days of the Church." Wikipedia

Now we can see that part that was left out, was the very part that speaks of Jesus.

Christian [N]
the name given by the Greeks or Romans, probably in reproach, to the followers of Jesus. It was first used at Antioch. The names by which the disciples were known among themselves were "brethren," "the faithful," "elect," "saints," "believers." But as distinguishing them from the multitude without, the name "Christian" came into use, and was universally accepted. This name occurs but three times in the New Testament ( Acts 11:26 ; 26:28 ; 1 Peter 4:16 ). Easton's Bible Dictionary

"Followers of Jesus" follow his teachings. Followers do not stop short of declaring Jesus' deity, that He is God made flesh, that we are doomed in our sinful state, that only by the Blood of the Lamb of God can we be rescued/redeemed from this state, that He arose after being dead.

"Test the Spirits
1 Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world. 4 You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. 5 They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them. 6 We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood. " 1 John 4:1-6

According to the definition of a Christian, the word is improperly used in the phrase Christian Agnostic.

 

[rpeg]

Agnostic Theism is not true. It is true that you can believe in God but not be sure of His existence. However, that is not Agnostic Theism. If you believe in God but you are unsure of His existence then that simply means that you have doubts.

Did you know that many saints struggled with doubts? Many of them were also very firm in their faith. However, many of them did struggle with doubts from time to time as well. The Catholic Church has a thorough explanation of things that helps with doubts. There were many prolific and very intelligent writers in the Catholic Church. You should read some of the writings of the saints. I think you would be surprised at just how intellectual these people were. They were very smart and had an intimate relationship with our God.

I'm not sure why you'd say it's not true. Do you believe the definition is wrong or that it's impossible? If you're saying it's impossible, how come? You don't realize that some people could identify as agnostic theists or fall within that category?

"Furthermore, a philosopher such as Søren Kierkegaard believed that knowledge of God is actually impossible, and because of that people who want to be theists must believe: 'If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe.'"​

Kierkegaard is known for a collection of writings creating the idea of "Christian existentialism". Anyway, I'm afraid agnostic theism is real despite your suggestion that it is not. Does the idea of this subject offend you?

 

[solarwave]

Hmmm...Wikipedia.

When you are going to offer a definition of something, it's appropriate to post the complete definition, or at the least, insert (...) so people will know that it is incomplete.



Now we can see that part that was left out, was the very part that speaks of Jesus.

The quote you presented doesn't say that agnostic theists don't believe that Jesus is God. Christians do believe that Jesus has a 'special relationship' with God (if Jesus didn't have a special relationship with God then Jesus would be just a human). Christians also believe Jesus is 'in some way divine'. The phrasing is vague because Christians understand how this is possible in different ways.

 

[rpeg]

The quote you presented doesn't say that agnostic theists don't believe that Jesus is God. Christians do believe that Jesus has a 'special relationship' with God (if Jesus didn't have a special relationship with God then Jesus would be just a human). Christians also believe Jesus is 'in some way divine'. The phrasing is vague because Christians understand how this is possible in different ways.

But I was speaking of the larger phenomenon of agnostic theism. Not just the Christian version.

 

[solarwave]

But I was speaking of the larger phenomenon of agnostic theism. Not just the Christian version.

And I have no problem with that.

 

[Beth-Zur]

Hi solarwave. You should win some sort of trophy for your avatar. Have you seen 'Dark Nite's' avatar?

My post was addressing the 'definition' of Christian Agnostics (and not Agnostic Theists).

The quote you presented doesn't say that agnostic theists don't believe that Jesus is God. Christians do believe that Jesus has a 'special relationship' with God (if Jesus didn't have a special relationship with God then Jesus would be just a human). Christians also believe Jesus is 'in some way divine'. The phrasing is vague because Christians understand how this is possible in different ways.

My point is that one cannot logically be both a Christian and an Agnostic simultaneously. Perhaps one could be a "Jesus-leaning Agnostic", but a Christian is a follower of the teachings of Jesus (Yeshua). Until one 'signs on', freely confessing that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, who voluntarily offered up His life as a sacrifice for our sins, shedding His very blood for our redemption, and arose from the dead, how could he remotely call himself a Christian.

Back to the "definition":

"Christian Agnostics (distinct from a Christian who is agnostic) practice a distinct form of agnosticism that applies only to the properties of God. They hold that it is difficult or impossible to be sure of anything beyond the basic tenets of the Christian faith. They believe that God exists, that Jesus has a special relationship with him and is in some way divine, that God should be worshiped and that humans should be compassionate toward one another. This belief system has deep roots in Judaism and the early days of the Church." Wikipedia

"...applies only to the properties of God." This can be compared to someone practicing Hinduism, for example, since, because Ganesh is not real, they are, in effect only engaged in the properties of Ganesh.

"They hold that it is difficult or impossible to be sure of anything beyond the basic tenets of the Christian faith." Doubt is a fact of life. We will all have doubt on some level, up until the day we die. Faith exists in the presence of doubt.

* As we know, without faith it is impossible to please God. The Scriptures testify to this and it is there that this gap of doubt, of uncertainty, is identified. With all the incredible strides we make through science, God yet maintains that gap, because faith is an absolute requirement. He never intended us to be devoid of a measure of doubt. *

"They believe that God exists, that Jesus has a special relationship with him and is in some way divine, that God should be worshiped and that humans should be compassionate toward one another."

Ah, back to my original post. "a special relationship and in some way divine. These statements couldn't be more vague considering how deeply the Bible addresses these points, and there is no lack of detail. "Special" relationship? I'm thinking Moses, David, Solomon, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Peter, John, James, etc. "In some way divine. Why are these assertions so very vague and impotent?? These sort of statements minimize who Jesus is and what He did for us. (Please refer back to my original post.)

~ Until one is walking in a state of BELIEF one is not a BELIEVER. ~​

Peace to you.

 

[rpeg]

Quick note: Your formatting is difficult to read. Green letters. Red letters. What gives?

That aside:

My point is that one cannot logically be both a Christian and an Agnostic simultaneously.

Your either misusing the word "logic" or something else is askew. I know you don't represent the majority of Christians and that I should not paint with broad brushstrokes but I've had enough conversations with theists to know that they regard "logic" as a man-made province incapable of understanding "spirituality". If you're suggesting that logic must be used in this instance while others argue logic should not be used in other instances of experiencing faith then again, something is wrong here.

Moving on...

Here's a list of Christian denominations: List of Christian denominations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Each sect more or less engages in their own variation on how to arrive at "the truth". You may decide that some or many of them are "illogical" however they will disagree. I however think there is no way clear way to apply "logic" to the way in which people interpret ambiguous information and "feelings". In other words, I don't see what's wrong about a person who follows the Christian faith but believes that the properties of a "God" are unknowable. If you read the wiki articles again it states that they, "practice a distinct form of agnosticism". So it is not the more common form of agnosticism.

It sounds as though you saying that these kinds of Christians are not really Christians? Is this what you're trying to say?

Until one 'signs on', freely confessing that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, who voluntarily offered up His life as a sacrifice for our sins, shedding His very blood for our redemption, and arose from the dead, how could he remotely call himself a Christian.

I don't think that definition explicitly excludes what you're saying.

Back to the "definition":

"...applies only to the properties of God."This can be compared to someone practicing Hinduism, for example, since, because Ganesh is not real, they are, in effect only engaged in the properties of Ganesh.

You've got it backwards. The definition of Christian agnosticism says they believe in a "God" but don't claim to know the properties of this "God".

 

[Beth-Zur]

"You've got it backwards."

Res ipsa loquitor.

Originally Posted by Beth-Zur
My point is that one cannot logically be both a Christian and an Agnostic simultaneously.

rpeg said: "Your either misusing the word "logic" or something else is askew. I know you don't represent the majority of Christians and that I should not paint with broad brushstrokes but I've had enough conversations with theists to know that they regard "logic" as a man-made province incapable of understanding "spirituality". If you're suggesting that logic must be used in this instance while others argue logic should not be used in other instances of experiencing faith then again, something is wrong here."

Moving on...

"...then again, something is wrong here." Indeed. Let's have a look....

‪Is God a Logical Necessity? Dr. William Lane Craig‬‏ - YouTube

‪1 question that every intelligent Atheist must answer‬‏ - YouTube

btw: You would do well not to put words in other people's mouths in a feeble attempt to invalidate their arguments. (I'm not speaking only of myself.) We'll see....

<Hmmm...Wikipedia.> It seems you missed the quiet hint. Wikipedia does not remotely qualify as an acceptable source of data.