Why would any agnostic be a theist?

There is no 'agnostic philosophy'. There are just individuals who question the existence of a god.

Myself, I'm not an agnostic, I'm an atheist.
 
There is no 'agnostic philosophy'. There are just individuals who question the existence of a god.

Myself, I'm not an agnostic, I'm an atheist.

so I'm I

but the only way an agnostic would be a theist is by the lack of knowledge

Ancient Historical knowledge

and the only way a theist would be a theist is also the same , lack of the same knowledge
 
Oh, right, UFOs, ancient Aliens as gods, all the rest of that woo-woo.

I forgot for a moment that you were into that silliness.
 
Oh, right, UFOs, ancient Aliens as gods,

first , to the Sumerians and Akkadians they were not considered gods


all the rest of that woo-woo. I forgot for a moment that you were into that silliness.

of course one who ingnorant of the past would have this silly " woo-woo " response to the past

it is written down after all , on cuniforms , clay tablets

its not strange that those who don't know , have a silly woo-woo response , but this doesn't take away from what is recorded in Ancient History
 
And I heard that they were cross-breeding with us(never mind the biological impossibility of that) too, which is odd because they should be much more technologically advanced than that.
 
Well I wouldn't want to make the boldfaced assumption that they even have DNA, they probably use some other molecule as their genetic template.
 
To the question of this thread: I have several agnostic theist friends... and having discussed the matter with them it seems that the same reason applies to them all: they accept that God is possibly unknowable, and they know that at present all they themselves have to go on is popular understandings, ancient books, and teachings of people they respect (i.e. none claim a direct experience of God as of yet, but do not all discount the possibility).
But they also have a metaphorical "itch" that can only be scratched by their belief in God.
They try to imagine that God doesn't exist and the uncomfortable itch returns.
 
Last edited:
a lack of knowledge is the basis of the agnostic

I agree with that, which fits with my observation that for religions, less dogma tends to be the better approach. I'm pretty agnostic and since we don't know, I'd prefer to minimize speculation or basically making stuff up.

so I'm I

but the only way an agnostic would be a theist is by the lack of knowledge

Ancient Historical knowledge

and the only way a theist would be a theist is also the same , lack of the same knowledge

In my case, I basically discount all accounts of God, present and past as nonfactual stories. I say basically because there might be an exception to my disapproval of such stories that I can't think of right now. So, the god I have some hope in is unknown and yet good. Don't ask me how that would be possible because I don't know and I'd rather not speculate.
 
So, why do you like them [the agnostic sort of religious mystic]? Do you 'like' theists too? Where do you draw the line?

Well, these theistic agnostics are theists, so in a sense there isn't any line.

Why do I like them?

Believing that God is ultimately unknowable in a cognitive, propositional sense, they typically make fewer claims about God than other theists do.

That involves them in fewer epistemological difficulties.

They are less likely to set themselves up as God's earthly mouthpiece, proclaiming the minute details of what God supposedly thinks and commands.

They are less likely to proselytize.

Their emphasis on personal experience means that they often recognize that everyone needs to experience things for themselves and hance has their own path to follow.

They are far less apt to anthropomorphize God, to imagine God as if God was a human personality blown up really large.

Hence their non-conceptual concept of God (so to speak) seems to me to be more likely to be true and accurate when it's applied to the transcendent dimension of life and to whatever it is that may or may not ultimately account for the universe and Being itself. Whatever lies out there (if anything does) is probably something very unlike us and unlike anything we've ever imagined.

They acknowledge and speak to the emotional and spiritual side of life in ways that others don't.

They help show us a hermeneutical way to 'read' the world's various religious traditions in such a way as to preserve what's good in them, their art, their beauty and their wisdom, without throwing it all away in a fit of atheistic anger.

They show a way that the worlds religions, so different and so inconsistent on the doctrinal level, can be reconciled at a higher experiential level that transcends words.

There's less chance of them getting into any turf-battles with science.

They teach and practice contemplative and meditative disciplines that I think can be very valuable.

Perhaps as a result of that, their inner peace and calm, their depth and emotional resonance, and their ethical behavior sometimes impress me.
 
well, these theistic agnostics are theists, so in a sense there isn't any line.

why do i like them?

believing that god is ultimately unknowable in a cognitive, propositional sense, they typically make fewer claims about god than other theists do.

That involves them in fewer epistemological difficulties.

They are less likely to set themselves up as god's earthly mouthpiece, proclaiming the minute details of what god supposedly thinks and commands.

They are less likely to proselytize.

Their emphasis on personal experience means that they often recognize that everyone needs to experience things for themselves and hance has their own path to follow.

They are far less apt to anthropomorphize god, to imagine god as if god was a human personality blown up really large.

Hence their non-conceptual concept of god (so to speak) seems to me to be more likely to be true and accurate when it's applied to the transcendent dimension of life and to whatever it is that may or may not ultimately account for the universe and being itself. Whatever lies out there (if anything does) is probably something very unlike us and unlike anything we've ever imagined.

They acknowledge and speak to the emotional and spiritual side of life in ways that others don't.

They help show us a hermeneutical way to 'read' the world's various religious traditions in such a way as to preserve what's good in them, their art, their beauty and their wisdom, without throwing it all away in a fit of atheistic anger.

They show a way that the worlds religions, so different and so inconsistent on the doctrinal level, can be reconciled at a higher experiential level that transcends words.

There's less chance of them getting into any turf-battles with science.

They teach and practice contemplative and meditative disciplines that i think can be very valuable.

Perhaps as a result of that, their inner peace and calm, their depth and emotional resonance, and their ethical behavior sometimes impress me.

eye opening!
 
1 - Existence of God [ No]
2 - Your belief in God [dont]
3 - Your view on Religion [anti-religious]
4 - Your social stance [ anti-theist, however i do find their faith fucking hysterical and maybe will keep a couple around to study and for my own personal ammusement]:D
 
Back
Top