Conchobar

Atheism says that the person lacks a god belief.

Agnosticism says there there is no evidence to make a conclusion.

Theism is an emotional intuitive belief based on desire and gullibility to indoctrination because of a deficit is rational mental processing. Rational processing is that upon which both Atheism and Agnosticism are based.

Conchobar

Jackalope

Strong Atheist. Or perhaps secular naturalist.

This could qualify as "weak atheist."

Here, I'd say that the belief part is that it is impossible to know, therefore judgement must be withheld.

Deist. God-belief but no associated religion.

Here's where it gets sticky again. Theist could be divided into "weak" and "strong" as atheist is, or perhaps "liberal" and "fanatical." Liberal theists are likely to acknowledge that other religions may have their own bits of wisdom.

[Insert name of religion/sect here], fanatical variety. Fundamentalists of all stripes fall into this category, because they believe that they follow the one and true way.

GrandDesigner

Good question and I've always wondered what people consider each to mean.

I would say an athiest is someone who doesn't believe in anything other than what has been proven. As one of my athiest friends said, he sees people as 'walking bags of chemicals'. Thoughts and 'feelings' are just chemical processes and surely there's no such thing as supernatural events.

Agnostics, which I fall under mostly, are those who have realized the possibility of a superior being, or God but they also feel that no adequate description of said God has been presented by any religion. For me, it seems there's bits and pieces which sound good in a lot of religions but single one has it right, absolutely.

I do have ways to see both sides though. Since I cant prove, entirely, the exitence of a God or something supernatural makes me also realize the possibility that we are just 'bags of chemicals'.

But, it's good to see a few varying views on the subject.

Grand Ol Designer