Theological knowledge: Theism, Atheism and Agnosticism – Richard Dawkins is a believer

Posted By on August 8, 2019

Theological knowledge: theism, atheism and agnosticism When we are talking about religious or theological
knowledge, we are talking about faith, in this way, there are three different positions: agnostic, theist and atheist. The agnosticism is a simple understanding. Etymologically – Agnostic from Greek ἀ- (a-), meaning ‘without’, and
γνῶσις (gnōsis), meaning ‘knowledge’ without knowledge Then the supernatural is unknown or unknowable
or “not knowable”. Agnostic is one who considers supernatural
phenomena inaccessible to human understanding. The agnostics are followers of agnosticism,
which considers it useless to discuss metaphysical themes, since there are realities not attainable
through knowledge. The agnostic does not deny the existence of God, because for them he is on a rationally inaccessible baseline. It can sounds unfamiliar, but there are theist
agnostic and atheist agnostic. Peter: Stop. Stop. What is theism? And What
is atheism? Ok. Peter. Theism
Etymologically – from Greek Theos (Θεός), which means “god”. Theism is the philosophical concept that defends
the existence of gods, that is, superior divine entities that would have been responsible
for the creation of the Universe and all the things that exist in it. Atheism
Etymologically – from Greek ἀ- (a-), meaning ‘without’, and
“Theo-” (Θεός), which means “god”. without god Atheism represents the categorical denial
of the existence of divinities and supernatural entities, that is, the presence of God or
other gods in the Universe. Atheism is the opposite concept of theism. Both are based on personal or cultural beliefs,
because it can’t be proved through observations or experimentations, It is theological knowledge
not scientific knowledge. Lilibeth: Could you talk more about theism
and atheism? Yes, I could Lilibeth. But I’d like to talk
more about some believers as Richard Dawkins. Lilibeth: But, he is an atheist!
He isn’t a believer. I don’t think so Lilibeth. For Richard Dawkins, the distance between
the agnostic and the atheist depends on how close to zero a person is willing to evaluate
the probability of the existence of any divine entity. For him, the existence or not of God is a scientific question: either God exists or
does not exist. It is a kind of misunderstanding. Dawkins affirms in his book “The God Delusion”: “I am agnostic only to the extent that I
am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden.”. In the same way, the existence or not of fairies would be a scientific question? Peter: Of course not. It sounds crazy. Yes, Peter. Then we can conclude that the existence or not of God isn’t a scientific question. Because it is a religious knowledge. The question has a binary answer: YES or NO.
Zero or One. It doesn’t become the question in scientific
knowledge. We can’t do experience to prove this kind
of questions. The science has a knowledge boundary. It isn’t science. It is so simple. How you can see it is unverifiable, then it
is theological or philosophical knowledge. But it based on the faith, then it can be
only theological knowledge, not scientific knowledge We can’t mistake the scientist with the
science. It is a common mistake. When Richard Dawkins told about god “Either he exists or he doesn’t. It is a scientific
question”, unfortunately he is wrong. His opinions aren’t scientific knowledge,
because they aren’t verifiable. Every atheist is a believer as an theist.
The atheist believes god doesn’t exist. The theist believes god exists. They are in the opposite side of the same belief. Lilibeth: It’s a truth. Remember, it’s time to break paradigms and
prejudices! “Be bold and carry on”. Subscribe our Channel now, share with your
friends. Do not forget to click on the bell to receive
the notifications of the new videos. Did you like this video? Then click on the
like button and share it. I am waiting for you.
Remember, it’s time to break paradigms and prejudices!
“Be bold and carry on”. See you soon!
Bye Bye! Lilibeth: bye, bye
Peter: bye, bye!

Posted by Lewis Heart

This article has 29 comments

  1. Forget that complicated agnostic/gnostic atheist/theist. There's an easier way. You've got your theists or believers: "I believe a god or gods exist." Your hard atheists or disbelievers: "I believe no gods exist." And in between, the soft atheist; the unbeliever; the non-believer "I can't decide on the god question."
    Since theism and hard atheism are both beliefs, does not the hard atheist share an equal burden of justification with the theist? No. Not even if every religious person in the world described their god as simply some "higher power." OK, what does it look like? Where can we find it? How does it manifest? Why does it hide from us? If you are going to answer these questions respectively with "It's invisible," "It's everywhere," "It can't be told apart from nothing" and "For its own reasons" you have already justified disbelief.
    With Christians it's even worse. They will argue the existence of God with specious and even spurious arguments without realizing the fragility of their position. First of all, you don't get to Heaven by believing in God! It is belief in Jesus and his sacrificial death that's the ticket upstairs. So from a salvation standpoint, it's moot. Secondly, Christians seem to feel that if it can be shown that a god is an explanatory necessity this would justify not only monotheism but their entire theology: Heaven and Hell, Satan, demons, souls, angels, archangels, and a coming apocalypse. The whole Narnia yards. Simply showing the need for a god gets them nowhere, not even Heaven. Finally, the more Christians tie their theism to the bible, the more they justify hard atheism because God is biblically described in contradictory, incompatible ways.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *