It differs for people.

For me it's an attempt to shore up sloppy logic and maintain a more accurate description.  Some realize that atheism is a more shocking term and brings more attention to an issue that people tend to avoid.


One is knowledge based, the other belief based. One is based on what you know, the other on what you believe.

I know of no evidence for god, therefore, I don't believe in a god or gods.  Further, the term god is problematic at best and many concepts that approach coherency are unverifiable.

We can drop the labels entirely and discuss the issues if you wish - they don't change based on terms.  We have tried to have discussions based on the issues and we have defined our terms - something theists rarely feel the need to do, it seems.

What is your motivation for opposing it?  Why don't you accept the definition we offer and argue from there?  Where is your charity?

Then you should appreciate our efforts. We are trying to establish "atheist" as the correct meaning: "A"(without)-Theism(god belief).

I can't help it if there are jerks in any group.

You are welcome to call yourself an agnostic - I don't blame you, since so far the theist side has proven their view, while atheists simply aren't waiting for them to and taking advantage of the 1,000 months we live.

Don't judge an intellectual position by its adherents. If you have no god belief, you are an atheist by definition.

You can be an agnostic atheist, and call yourself Hal.

Perhaps you should read the Bible.

It was a joke - as in, maybe if you read the Bible, you'd be on our side. wink.

It wasn't meant to be a logical argument.



I understand your point. I think you are wrong, but I understand that this is probably a fairly common view of theists and agnostics.

Your definitions alone show that you are interested in pushing your "opponents" (so to speak) into untenable positions.

How easy it would be to argue against your atheists and theists: they would cease to exist.

However, we have an opportunity to see two other categories that align very well with the greek meanings of the root words.

Theism = god belief
Atheism = without god belief

Do you agree that people of these definitons exist (regardless of the term I equate them with)?

What do you call them now? Are both agnostic? How then do you distinguish between two very real positions?


So, what would you call some one who:
believes a god or gods exist?
lacks a god belief?

I will use your terms if they are reasonable.

This is a great post.  Thanks BD, I was hoping an agnostic would share their view.  Your view seems common with most agnostics I know.

So, everyone is agnostic. Why have the other terms?

That is a concise and accurate summary.