• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Should I call myself a theist, an atheist or neither but something else entirely?

sandandfoam

sandandfoam

Veteran Member
I believe in the idea of God. I believe that this idea is real to me. I believe in the universe around me. Does the 'theist' label apply to someone who holds these views?
 
BucephalusBB

BucephalusBB

ABACABB
michel

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
stephenw said:
I believe in the idea of God. I believe that this idea is real to me. I believe in the universe around me. Does the 'theist' label apply to someone who holds these views?
Click to expand...

What does "The idea of God" mean? Does it mean that you do believe in some kind of supreme being? - if the answer is "yes" then you are not an atheist; you could perhaps describe yourself as an agnostic.

Word IQ:-http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Agnostic
Agnosticism is the philosophical and theological view that the existence of God, gods or deities is either unknown or inherently unknowable. The term and the related agnostic were coined by Thomas Henry Huxley in 1869 and are also used to describe those who are unconvinced or noncommittal about the existence of deities as well and other matters of religions. The word agnostic comes from the Greek a (no) and gnosis (knowledge). Agnosticism is not to be confused with a view specifically opposing the doctrine of gnosis and Gnosticism—these are religious concepts that are not generally related to agnosticism.
 
doppelganger

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
michel said:
Agnosticism is not to be confused with a view specifically opposing the doctrine of gnosis and Gnosticism—these are religious concepts that are not generally related to agnosticism.
Click to expand...
I disagree with this last part. Gnosis and Agnosticism are intricately woven together.

Knowing that one does not know is knowing at its best,
But not knowing that one does not know is suffering from a disease.
Thus, the reason the sages are free of disease
Is because they recognize the disease as a disease.
That is why they are not afflicted.

Tao Te Ching

What the gnower knows is that no truth can be reduced to words and symbols. Thus, the gnostic knows that "God," "Tao," "Brahman," "The Absolute" all represent the fundamentally unknowable and inexpressible. By this very same knowledge, the gnostic is thereby also agnostic.

Robert M. Price has a nice essay about this: Sermon - The Agnostic a Gnostic by Robert M. Price

We know what the word “agnostic” means and probably also what the word “Gnostic” means. The one denotes a claim not to know what most people think they know, the other a claim to know what most people do not dream of knowing. They might sound far distant from one another, even polar opposites. But this morning I mean to suggest that they are one and the same.
Click to expand...

And the agnostic shares this knowledge with the Gnostic. The main difference, as I hope to show, is one of terminology, and of mythology. The ancient Gnostics, claimers of esoteric knowledge, could not yet escape the mythic form of consciousness, but they did manage to do the next best thing. They escaped the gravity of the dominant myth. They managed to snap out of the collective delusion that I have just described, the supposed knowledge of the masses, of the pew potatoes . . .

But however that may be, my point is that even here the agnostic and the Gnostic are one, for the Gnostic claims to know not only the unknown but the unknowable. Tillich says the revelation to the Gnostic is not a solution of the mystery, but the revelation of that mystery as a mystery. One does not decode it; rather, one basks in it. That is something some people experience. Ontological or not, it is ontic. But at any rate it is not discursive knowledge. It is of such knowledge that the Te Tao Ching warns, “Those who know don’t say. Those who say don’t know.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
sandandfoam

sandandfoam

Veteran Member
doppelgänger;1218362 said:
Why would you want a label?
Click to expand...

Good question.
I think labels can be of assistance in determining where one is at. And I'm not sure where I'm at. I'm getting there (I think).
I feel that neither the theist or atheist label (as I see them applied here) fits me. I think part of where I am at can be determined by examining my position in relation to others.
It's a little bit like when I study something,if I try to express it and find I cannot, then it indicates to me that my knowledge is not as good as I had presumed. Know what I mean?
 
BucephalusBB

BucephalusBB

ABACABB
doppelgänger;1218362 said:
Why would you want a label?
Click to expand...

To give someone else a short description of his beliefs without losing half an hour and having to answer 20 questions? Isn't that were a label is for? Because that's where I use them for.
 
doppelganger

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
Bouncing Ball said:
To give someone else a short description of his beliefs without losing half an hour and having to answer 20 questions? Isn't that were a label is for? Because that's where I use them for.
Click to expand...
That's one reason. Though as you'll see above, it's not Stephen's main reason. I'm okay with using labels, as long as one doesn't start thinking they are really all that representative of what various people so labeled believe or do. That just leads to sloppy thinking and divisiveness.
 
Willamena

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
I like the ring of "Hello. My name is Stephen and I'm a practicing 'something else entirely'."


Edit: I think Chico Marx just rolled over in his grave.
 
Last edited:
BucephalusBB

BucephalusBB

ABACABB
doppelgänger;1218377 said:
That's one reason. Though as you'll see above, it's not Stephen's main reason. I'm okay with using labels, as long as one doesn't start thinking they are really all that representative of what various people so labeled believe or do. That just leads to sloppy thinking and divisiveness.
Click to expand...
That's why I think labels are not for yourself, but for all others. Yet it seems Stephen wants the label specially for himself.
 
R

Random

Well-Known Member
I used to suffer the same confusion; the desire for identity is strong. You want to be able to say "I am a...(insert label)" with conviction so everyone knows what you're about, so you have a definitive position to defend, so that all your musings and speculations about God and religion can have more meaning than they actually do.

But identity is a fiction, as the Zen mind reveals. When you stop trying to dictate your experience in life, and just let-it-be, then all the ideation and mentation that results in self-attachment and the desire for an irreversible, unchanging sense of identity in a transient world evaporates like dew-drops off a dying plant in the midday Sun.

However...if you believe in the idea of God, you accept the Universe as real, and the other things you say in your OP, then you're a theist if you logically conclude that these things exist because a higher power or deity made it so.

If not, then agnostic. But as Brendan said, it might be better not to bother with the merry-go-round of the theist/atheist/agnostic debate, and just allow the inner life of your heart and soul its intimate privacy.
 
sandandfoam

sandandfoam

Veteran Member
doppelgänger;1218369 said:
What the gnower knows is that no truth can be reduced to words and symbols. Thus, the gnostic knows that "God," "Tao," "Brahman," "The Absolute" all represent the fundamentally unknowable and inexpressible. By this very same knowledge, the gnostic is thereby also agnostic.

Robert M. Price has a nice essay about this: Sermon - The Agnostic a Gnostic by Robert M. Price
Click to expand...

Thank you Dopp. that was very helpful.
That is a really, really great essay. I think the Gnostic label fits for now. I think neither the atheist/theist label fits because I have decided the question to which theism or atheism is the answer is not a pertinent question.
I now know what I think, I can demonstrate it to my own satisfaction by my ability to express it.
I appreciate the leg up.
 
Bishadi

Bishadi

Active Member
stephenw said:
Good question.
I think labels can be of assistance in determining where one is at. And I'm not sure where I'm at. I'm getting there (I think).
I feel that neither the theist or atheist label (as I see them applied here) fits me. I think part of where I am at can be determined by examining my position in relation to others.
It's a little bit like when I study something,if I try to express it and find I cannot, then it indicates to me that my knowledge is not as good as I had presumed. Know what I mean?
Click to expand...

does your representation also share the wisdom of............?

Knowing that one does not know is knowing at its best,
But not knowing that one does not know is suffering from a disease.
Thus, the reason the sages are free of disease
Is because they recognize the disease as a disease.
That is why they are not afflicted.

Tao Te Ching


perhaps you are just not 'diseased'


in the stead of the 'unforgiven'

how about the 'unlabeled' or the non-biased... staring StephenW.... and you can have a line ..... 'so do you feel lucky believer....... well, do ya?'

personally i forget names anyway.............. all that matters is what you do, with what you know............

appears, you not knowing is better than having to fib to maintain friends

you may be far more 'good' and trustworthy than you give yourself credit for.........

representing, almost what many of the old teachers suggested........humility!

and then thre is me, the punk of arrogance............. a born and raised catholic stuck on knowledge who knows that Jesus was not the messiah or God incarnate.....and screams Understanding.... like a broken record.

appears maybe being at the end of the line has its merit....... i.e... last to first, first to last...

be honest and forget being accepted, labeled or branded....

or do like I do; and say..... i.m a nobody..... shorts are yellow in the front, and brown in the back...... just like most any middle aged man ever to walk the earth....... human
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
stephenw said:
I believe in the idea of God. I believe that this idea is real to me. I believe in the universe around me. Does the 'theist' label apply to someone who holds these views?
Click to expand...

I'd call myself whatever is most confusing to other people. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top