Neither a Theist nor an Atheist Be?

[SalixIncendium]

I stumbled across this statement whilst puttering around teh interwebz.

"There is, however, no "not atheist nor theist". Anyone who actively believes there is a god is a theist. Anyone who does not (even if they consider the question "unknowable" or the like), is an atheist. There is not any neither theist nor atheist, everyone is one or the other."

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-b...a-person-who-is-neither-religious-nor-atheist

Is this true? Does one have to be either an atheist or a theist? If so, why? If not, what other options are there? Do you know anyone who is neither?

 

[stvdv]

Both Theist and Atheist are concepts in the mind
Those who are beyond the mind, are neither

 

[Fool]

I stumbled across this statement whilst puttering around teh interwebz.

"There is, however, no "not atheist nor theist". Anyone who actively believes there is a god is a theist. Anyone who does not (even if they consider the question "unknowable" or the like), is an atheist. There is not any neither theist nor atheist, everyone is one or the other."

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-b...a-person-who-is-neither-religious-nor-atheist

Is this true? Does one have to be either an atheist or a theist? If so, why? If not, what other options are there? Do you know anyone who is neither?

no, it isn't true. that is dualistic thinking, or thought.

i can be one and then the other obviously by changing my mind with thought; so basically i am capable of both. when one is latent the other is active and vice versa.

 

[Fool]

Both Theist and Atheist are concepts in the mind
Those who are beyond the mind, are neither

one can be beyond thought but nothing can be beyond brahman, conscious, mindful.

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

I stumbled across this statement whilst puttering around teh interwebz.

"There is, however, no "not atheist nor theist". Anyone who actively believes there is a god is a theist. Anyone who does not (even if they consider the question "unknowable" or the like), is an atheist. There is not any neither theist nor atheist, everyone is one or the other."

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-b...a-person-who-is-neither-religious-nor-atheist

Is this true? Does one have to be either an atheist or a theist? If so, why? If not, what other options are there? Do you know anyone who is neither?

The quora question was about religion, not theism.
It is quite possible to be non religious and non atheist.

 

[SalixIncendium]

The quora question was about religion, not theism.
It is quite possible to be non religious and non atheist.

I'm well aware of what the Quora question was. The person I quoted answered it in the first paragraph of his response. I'm not interested in that portion of the discussion. This discussion is not about the original question, but what he said in the second paragraph of his post.

I believe I was quite clear on what the topic of this thread is in both the title and the OP. I'll thank you to not muddy the waters.

 

[Ouroboros]

I stumbled across this statement whilst puttering around teh interwebz.

"There is, however, no "not atheist nor theist". Anyone who actively believes there is a god is a theist. Anyone who does not (even if they consider the question "unknowable" or the like), is an atheist. There is not any neither theist nor atheist, everyone is one or the other."

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-b...a-person-who-is-neither-religious-nor-atheist

Is this true? Does one have to be either an atheist or a theist? If so, why? If not, what other options are there? Do you know anyone who is neither?

What is "god"?

Anyone who believes in "God" believes in their own god. Anyone who doesn't believe in "God" doesn't believe in a god they understand god to be.

But what if you don't know what "god" is even supposed to be? There are so may opinions of what this "god" is or isn't. So if you believe in it or not, it's more evidence for what you think god is or isn't.

 

[HonestJoe]

Is this true? Does one have to be either an atheist or a theist? If so, why? If not, what other options are there? Do you know anyone who is neither?

Both words have different meanings in different contexts. Its really not worth arguing about definitions and it's rarely useful to apply such simplistic labels to individuals, even yourself. Focus on the person and you'll probably find many more similarities than differences.

 

[SalixIncendium]

What is "god"?

Anyone who believes in "God" believes in their own god. Anyone who doesn't believe in "God" doesn't believe in a god they understand god to be.

But what if you don't know what "god" is even supposed to be? There are so may opinions of what this "god" is or isn't. So if you believe in it or not, it's more evidence for what you think god is or isn't.

You make a very good point here. I stopped using the word 'god' simply because whenever I did, someone would come along and anthropomorphize it or assign qualities it doesn't have. There is a tendency for many, even those who consider themselves to be atheists, to default to the God of Abraham when someone uses the word.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Both words have different meanings in different contexts.

Can you provide an example or two?

 

[exchemist]

I stumbled across this statement whilst puttering around teh interwebz.

"There is, however, no "not atheist nor theist". Anyone who actively believes there is a god is a theist. Anyone who does not (even if they consider the question "unknowable" or the like), is an atheist. There is not any neither theist nor atheist, everyone is one or the other."

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-b...a-person-who-is-neither-religious-nor-atheist

Is this true? Does one have to be either an atheist or a theist? If so, why? If not, what other options are there? Do you know anyone who is neither?

Surely that's a false dichotomy, isn't it? What is an agnostic?

 

[SalixIncendium]

Surely that's a false dichotomy, isn't it? What is an agnostic?

Many would consider them to be soft or weak atheists.

 

[Ouroboros]

You make a very good point here. I stopped using the word 'god' simply because whenever I did, someone would come along and anthropomorphize it or assign qualities it doesn't have. There is a tendency for many, even those who consider themselves to be atheists, to default to the God of Abraham when someone uses the word.

Exactly. Since I'm a pantheist, I consider the totality of existence, cosmos, reality, including life, matter, energy, to be God. It's not a personal, in the sense of a single person with one single mind, but a compilation of things and thoughts that constitute the concept of God for me. And as such, God exists, while Abraham's God is a concept I don't believe in anymore. What's annoying is that talking to some religious people, I'm told my god-view is wrong. As well as when I talk to some atheists, I'm told my definition of God is wrong. So in other case, my God is "wrong" to them. Very annoying. So what is God, is the pertinent question before even the label of theist or atheist comes into play.

 

[exchemist]

Many would consider them to be soft or weak atheists.

How offensive of them.

 

[HonestJoe]

Can you provide an example or two?

No. Please read the rest of my reply. The topic is already a source of hate and conflict, I've no interest in feeding it.

 

[Spiderman]

If you believe that there was some sort of a creator but that Creator is either dead or no longer intervenes and cannot be contacted, as I sometimes felt, that person is a not a theist or an atheist in my opinion

 

[Heyo]

Many would consider them to be soft or weak atheists.

Except the Agnostics, of course. I think of Agnosticism as the stronger position - if you can call atheism a position at all.

 

[Quintessence]

I suppose the answer rather depends on how inclusive one is being with god-concepts. I've been around RF long enough that I've had discussions with folks for whom I seemingly don't fit into "theist" or "atheist" because my theology doesn't match with (typically) classical monotheism.

 

[Heyo]

Exactly. Since I'm a pantheist, I consider the totality of existence, cosmos, reality, including life, matter, energy, to be God. It's not a personal, in the sense of a single person with one single mind, but a compilation of things and thoughts that constitute the concept of God for me. And as such, God exists, while Abraham's God is a concept I don't believe in anymore. What's annoying is that talking to some religious people, I'm told my god-view is wrong. As well as when I talk to some atheists, I'm told my definition of God is wrong. So in other case, my God is "wrong" to them. Very annoying. So what is God, is the pertinent question before even the label of theist or atheist comes into play.

It's not that your definition of "god" is wrong, but that "pantheist" is a misnomer (not your fault). Pantheists should be called pandeists since their god is more a deos (non-personal god) than a theos (personal god) - and therefore, using the definition atheist = not a theist, pantheists are atheists.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I suppose the answer rather depends on how inclusive one is being with god-concepts. I've been around RF long enough that I've had discussions with folks for whom I seemingly don't fit into "theist" or "atheist" because my theology doesn't match with (typically) classical monotheism.

I would consider anyone who recognizes, worships, reveres, or works with deities a theist.