Why are so many 'christians' 'hellbent' on trying to prove that an 'atheist' is really an 'agnostic'?

Question

I have noticed with many christians,christian videos and preachers/teachers this common theme off trying to convince christians that an 'atheist' is really an 'agnostic'. Its seems to be the first order of business when discussing 'atheism'. if you have noticed this also, in your view, what is the agenda behind this 'redifinition'?
I would say i am an atheist, I am without belief in god/s.I was once a christian for many years,but never had this problem with the words atheist and agnostic. But christians seem to take strong issue with the word 'atheist' nowa days, and try and convince me i am really an agnostic? Whats the 'hidden' purpose of this?
or another way of asking it is, Why the focus for christians on this simple word?
I hope i explained myself clearly enough :)
'christians' feel free to answer

'angeltress' thanks for your mockery of me.
I guess i asked for it. I did say 'christians' feel free to answer. I can tell by your tone, you are a christian. (I guess i could tell you by your fruits)

to Cosmo....... you are confusing now with then. i once did have a belief in God. I now dont.

To cosmo. You are quite right, I never was a christian. I desired truth. Have alot more commpasion for people from any religion. And desired strongly to be of good character. all of which I now know is inconsistant with christianity.

Answer 1

The main purpose of it is that atheist carries a much stronger tone to it. People generally think of atheism as antitheism, the fervent belief in the lack of God. Agnostics, on the other hand, are considered to be doubting whether or not God exists. Therefore, if they can convince you to change your label from atheist to agnostic, they feel they will have weakened your stance.

Answer 2

Cause it's hard for a lot of theists to understand that someone could plainly and honestly not believe in their God.
They think the atheist must really be a doubting or rebellious theist--they couldn't possibly 'know' that God does not exist.

Nevermind that atheism is about non-belief, not knowledge. Agnostic just means 'don't know' or 'can't know'. So we should call all Christians agnostics too 'cause they have no way to know for sure that their God exists.

Because there are both agnostic theists and agnostic atheists. As for me, I don't need *absolute* proof before I'll believe with some level of confidence that something *doesn't* exist. Just inference from my experience and logical argument is enough for that.

Answer 3

I never hear other christians speak about atheism and agnostism. But, some people who are proclaimed "atheist" keep saying things like "God doesn't answer pray" or "God is laughing at us". So, if they are talking about God like he exist then they are not atheist. They just don't believe that God can do anything for them and that's not what my understanding of an atheist is. That is more agnostic. However, if they say God doesn't exist and don't acknowledge him then that's a true atheist. Doesn't matter to me though cuz either way they are unsaved so why spend so much time trying to separate the unsaved into categories. There's just saved and unsaved to me.

Answer 4

Speaking as an agnostic and an atheist, I'd say that Phil hit the nail on the head.
Most people in the general public think that an atheist is someone who claims to know that there are no gods. There are many atheists who do claim to know this.
Most atheists use the term atheism to mean the broader "not believing in any gods." This includes the first category- those who claim to know there are no gods- but also includes those who don't claim to know but simply don't believe there are any gods.

I don't believe in any gods, hence I am an atheist. But I don't claim to know for certain.

Agnostic is a much misused word. Traditionally it means someone who thinks we can claim to know things when there is enough objective evidence for them but who doesn't claim to know something when there isn't, or can't be, enough evidence. To the agnostic there isn't, and maybe can never be, enough empirical evidence to say that gods definitely exist or definitely don't exist so we don't say that we know either way.

The term atheist focuses on what you believe (or, more specifically, don't believe), the term agnostic focuses on what you claim to know. I personally am both atheist and agnostic. I use the word atheist when I want to make it clear I don't believe in any gods. I use the word agnostic when I want to make it clear that I don't claim to be able to prove there are no gods and the type of evidence I would accept to show that gods exist or don't exist is objective evidence and not feelings.
Bertrand Russell shared a similar approach in deciding which to call himself in what situation: http://www.luminary.us/russell/atheist_agnostic.html

With that as a long background: I side with Phil on this one- Religious people and "Strong" Atheists (those who claim to know there are no gods) see agnostics as wishy-washy fence sitters who are on the verge of believing in a god. So they figure that being an agnostic is a weakened position that makes one vulnerable to conversion to theism. This view is supported by all those who include among agnostics all those theists who claim to know there's a god but just aren't sure which brand to buy into (I wish they'd get their own name for such a belief, but what can you do?)
I argue that the truth is quite the contrary. The agnostic is a skeptic who admits not to know for certain and thus is open to evidence from all sides. But the agnostic has some very tough standards to be met- how the heck is anyone going to prove that the supernatural exists using only rational, empiricial arguments?
There are some "Strong" atheist, however, who have the sort of gnostic style certainty that is very similar to religious certainty. They seem far more likely to convert to theism because their thought process is similar- they reach their conclusions with a certainty and based upon types of arguments that us agnostics just don't see philisophically supported.
Religious people are right in a sense about agnostics, though, we are open to arguments if anyone has any good ones.

Answer 5

I think as the first the answerer pointed out it's all about semantics. The strict definition of an agnostic is one who holds that the existence/non-existence of a God is irrelevant. A person who feels that a God is possible but not likely is a soft atheist. A person who denies any possibly of a God is a hard atheist. So people are talking past each other.

Answer 6

I think Steve pretty much covered it.

I also had some fool last week emailing me these ridiculous strawmen arguments trying to convince me that I was agnostic, as well. I asked this person in fact, what his purpose was for emailing me. He never would say. But I could see no reason why this person wanted so avidly to argue little pointless things like semantics with me. It served no one, least of all him. Eventually he just became insulting, as per usual, as his strawmen kept catching fire. I finally had to tell him to go away.

I really should keep a blog of all the ignorant emails I recieve from Christians. I got some doozies from "nathan d?" yesterday. He's a real brainiac. :)


Edit - Look at Stulleri's response below - CASE IN POINT, PEOPLE! CASE IN POINT! What does that have to do with ANYTHING?!! :)

Answer 7

To me a true atheist wouldn't be on a site like this bloging about religion if they don't care about it. It shouldn't even be in your interest at all. It would be like a Christian bloging about Satanism and how to become a better Satanist. And agnostics make nostics look bad. Nostics have a stronger believes that most other religions, it's based on truth. Nostics are very intelligent. I consider myself more nostic than Christian because I enjoy the learning process involved in it. Plus I hate the church and have no problem telling them or anyone else where they can go. God is my judge not no human, I'm sure it trips him out how dumb they are also. Agnostics are just the opposite of an nostic. They don't care about learning anything they just like being a pain in the ***. Like a woman that likes to ***** about everything so she feels like she matters. Common sense tells me the atheist on here are agnostics because if they were atheist they shouldn't care about any of this.

Answer 8

I did that prolonged in the past and this used to be the influence: proof? Plenty of it. You readily have no longer viewed within the correct places. Peace ******************** There will also be honestly something that the peoples of the sector, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly give, and are the subjects of 1 God. The change among the ordinances beneath which they abide have got to be attributed to the various specifications and exigencies of the age in which they've been found out. (Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 217) The Jews assume the Messiah, the Christians the go back of Christ, the Moslems the Mahdi, the Buddhists the 5th Buddha, the Zoroastrians Shah Bahram, the Hindus the reincarnation of Krishna, and the Atheists - a bigger social organization! Baha'u'llah represents these kinds of, and hence destroys the rivalries and the enmities of the quality religions; reconciles them in their primitive purity, and frees them from the corruption of dogmas and rites. For the Baha'i faith has no clergy, no religious ceremonial, no public prayers; its most effective dogma is notion in God and in his Manifestations (Zoroaster, Moses, Jesus, et al., Baha'u'llah). (Abdu'l-Baha, tablets of Abdu'l-Baha v1, p. Vii)

Answer 9

You sound confused. You say that your and atheist, and that is a belief with out god/gods, Then your statement about you being a Christian is false. You never were a christian to begin with. Because to be a born again believer you have to ask Jesus into your heart and acknowledge Him as King over your heart. If you don't have a belief in anything, then you never asked Jesus in and this would mean you never were a christian to begin with, because to know God and then to turn away from Him is really really bad.

Answer 10

I have not noticed any Christians being "hellbent" on this point
however I believe that indeed most Athiests are truly Agnostics
though there seems little point in arguing the semantics...
The only point in Christians doing this, if they actually are,
is that an Athiest is an opponent and An agnostic is neutral...