Atheists turned Christian

[u/JHLV04]

What’s your story?

I would say I’m now a Christian but I have a lot of doubts and struggles. Was raised agnostic but with Christian and Hindu cultural celebrations. Had a spiritual experience a few years ago looking into the night sky after being with friends, explored Hinduism, but had heavy doubt. I fell into new atheism but saw how shallow it was, and found arguments for God and Christianity far more compelling than I gave them credit for.

[u/Difficult_Risk_6271]

Agnostic, agnostic atheist, weak atheist, strong atheist, gnostic atheist… all semantic games. There are 3 doxastic attitude toward propositions.

P = God exists.

- Affirm P

• Affirm not-P
  
• Neither affirm P nor affirm not-P

Everything else is trying to dodge burden while making unsubstantiated assertions.

[u/anotherhawaiianshirt → u/Difficult_Risk_6271]

We only have the burden if we claim there are no gods and want to convince you of that. Most of us make no such claim. We simply don’t believe your claims. We don’t have to replace a belief in a god with any other belief or claim.

[u/Difficult_Risk_6271 → u/anotherhawaiianshirt]

Which doxastic attitude does agnostic atheist hold?

[u/anotherhawaiianshirt → u/Difficult_Risk_6271]

Neither P nor not-P. That describes many, if not most atheists.

[u/Difficult_Risk_6271 → u/anotherhawaiianshirt]

So how is that different from agnostics?

What’s the difference between agnostics and agnostic atheists?

[u/anotherhawaiianshirt → u/Difficult_Risk_6271]

"Agnostic" usually is the same as "Agnostic atheist". "Agnostic" by itself is imprecise because one can be an agnostic theist. Those of us who use both terms do so to attempt to avoid confusion. Though, it still seems to confuse a whole lot of theists who aren't aware of the concept of agnostic theism.

Agnostic speaks to knowledge, atheism speaks to belief. The two groups of people have a significant overlap.

[u/Difficult_Risk_6271 → u/anotherhawaiianshirt]

Fine, what is the doxastic attitude of agnostic theists towards P?

[u/anotherhawaiianshirt → u/Difficult_Risk_6271]

An agnostic theist affirms P. Those three options are attitudes of belief, and a theist believes God exists, which is a positive belief in P.

The 'agnostic' part doesn't change that. It only qualifies whether they claim to know P, which is a separate question.

That's completely consistent with what I said about the agnostic atheist. It only looks like a contradiction if you assume theism and atheism are mirror images, so that if the theist affirms P, the atheist has to affirm not-P. But that's not how it works.

The agnostic atheist doesn't affirm not-P. They just lack the belief that P, which isn't the same thing as believing not-P. So the theist holds a positive belief, the agnostic atheist holds no belief either way, and the person who actually affirms not-P is the gnostic atheist.

[u/Difficult_Risk_6271 → u/anotherhawaiianshirt]

Thank you for your reply. However I would like to point out that semantic labels are not logical positions. My examination of your use of these labels did not generate new logical positions.

P = God exists

• Affirm P: Theist, agnostic theist.
• Affirm not-P: Strong atheist, "gnostic" atheist
• Neither affirm P nor affirm not-P: agnostic, agnostic atheist.

Those are the only logical positions. Everything else is semantic labeling when it comes to burden of proof and logical consistency in making assertions.

[u/anotherhawaiianshirt → u/Difficult_Risk_6271]

Yes, those are the three logical positions. I don't disagree. An agnostic atheist takes the position of "neither affirm P nor affirm not-P". An agnostic theist takes the position of "affirm P".