Double Agent Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I'm sort of a Christian agnostic. I'm not sure there is or isn't a God, but I believe in most of the Christian values and the beneficial aspects of a church community. +1. Was raised going to church. Will raise my kids in the church. I'm Christian on the outside...but more agnostic on the inside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I was born a snake handler and I'll die a snake handler... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Agent Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I was born a snake handler and I'll die a snake handler... He said denomination...not masturbation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I chose that one. I'm sort of a Christian agnostic. I'm not sure there is or isn't a God, but I believe in most of the Christian values and the beneficial aspects of a church community. You don't have to believe in an invisible, jealous man in the sky to be moral. Religion does not own morality. It is often quite the opposite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Agnosticism, in and of itself, is about knowledge, or specifically, lack of knowledge. Exactly. I dunno, so I went for agnostic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 We attend a non-denominational Christian Church Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 (edited) I dunno . . . That makes you an atheist. Say the following statement: I believe that god exists. Your statement can be 1) true or 2) not true. There is no middle ground. If you don't know, or you're not sure, it was not true. If you were telling the truth, you are a theist. If you were not telling the truth, you are an atheist. Edited January 6, 2011 by Furd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 That makes you an atheist. Say the following statement: I believe that god exists. Your statement can be 1) true or 2) not true. There is no middle ground. If you don't know, or you're not sure, it was a false statment. If you were telling the truth, you are a theist. If you were not telling the truth, you are an atheist. Incredibly flawed argument here. Your conclusions are based upon him making the statement that he believes God exists. But he's clearly not making that statement (and why would he since he says that he does not know). But beyond that, let's pretend that he did make that statement. Your conclusions are still wrong. Making a statement of belief can turn out to be untrue, but that does not make you a liar if you indeed believe it in good faith before you are proven wrong. And even then, if someone makes a statement of belief in God, and it is knowingly not true, that does not mean that the person is an atheist, it just means that the person told a lie, and we don't know what the person really believes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 That makes you an atheist. Say the following statement: I believe that god exists. Your statement can be 1) true or 2) not true. There is no middle ground. If you don't know, or you're not sure, it was not true. If you were telling the truth, you are a theist. If you were not telling the truth, you are an atheist. I disagree. By the earlier post, being agnostic would make me either an agnostic atheist or agnostic theist. An agnostic atheist / theist is not the same thing as an atheist / theist. The agnostic prefix carries weight, it cannot simply be detached. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 (edited) Ssvage does a great job above, but I want to chime in. It is not black and white, you can and should allow for the belief that ANYTHING is possible. Some folks are open-minded enough to realize there are many things they don't KNOW for a fact, yet may actually be true. There are also many things people can believe in that could POSSIBLY (and in some cases probably) be false. Edited January 6, 2011 by cre8tiff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 (edited) Incredibly flawed argument here. Your conclusions are based upon him making the statement that he believes God exists. But he's clearly not making that statement (and why would he since he says that he does not know). But beyond that, let's pretend that he did make that statement. Your conclusions are still wrong. Making a statement of belief can turn out to be untrue, but that does not make you a liar if you indeed believe it in good faith before you are proven wrong. And even then, if someone makes a statement of belief in God, and it is knowingly not true, that does not mean that the person is an atheist, it just means that the person told a lie, and we don't know what the person really believes. Its not flawed. I do not understand your reasoning. I don't think that the point can be made in a simpler manner. Its about belief. You either believe that a god exists or you don't. It has nothing to do with proof or certainty or knowledge. You are not denying anything. Edited January 6, 2011 by Furd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 The agnostic prefix carries weight, it cannot simply be detached. I agree. But by the same token, the atheist component cannot be detached. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Ssvage does a great job above, but I want to chime in. Well, maybe you can explain it to me. It is not black and white, you can and should allow for the belief that ANYTHING is possible. Some folks are open-minded enough to realize there are many things they don't KNOW for a fact, yet may actually be true. There are also many things people can believe in that could POSSIBLY (and in some cases probably) be false. I don't disagree with any of this. I'm not sure why you posted it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Its not flawed. I do not understand your reasoning. I don't think that the point can be made in a simpler manner. Its about belief. You either believe that a god exists or you don't. It has nothing to do with proof or certainty or knowledge. You are not denying anything. Seriously? I'm not allowed to have the opinion that I don't know whether or not God exists? I'm forced to pick yes or no and stick to it? Dang... I am of the opinion that you can spend your whole life trying to answer that question with confidence and maybe still not be able to do it at the end. There's nothing wrong with being unsure, and uncertainty is not the same thing as atheism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 <======= There can be only One... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Seriously? I'm not allowed to have the opinion that I don't know whether or not God exists? I'm forced to pick yes or no and stick to it? Dang... I am of the opinion that you can spend your whole life trying to answer that question with confidence and maybe still not be able to do it at the end. There's nothing wrong with being unsure, and uncertainty is not the same thing as atheism. If you don't know, then you are not a believer. If you can't grasp that concept, its kind of pointless. My point is that the term atheist has become so demonized (and misunderstood) that people will go through great lengths (see above) in order to avoid it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Its not flawed. I do not understand your reasoning. I don't think that the point can be made in a simpler manner. Its about belief. You either believe that a god exists or you don't. It has nothing to do with proof or certainty or knowledge. You are not denying anything. meh... can't someone be agnostic if they allow for some higher power or force - but are yet unwilling to call it 'God'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I am of the opinion that you can spend your whole life trying to answer that question with confidence and maybe still not be able to do it at the end. We are given the ability to question and chew on things a try to find answers for a reason - because without it, who knows what all we'd allow ourselves to blindly worship. So long as you are looking on some level Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuke'em ttg Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 He said denomination...not masturbation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 Its not flawed. I do not understand your reasoning. I don't think that the point can be made in a simpler manner. Its about belief. You either believe that a god exists or you don't. It has nothing to do with proof or certainty or knowledge. You are not denying anything. Your argument is contingent upon someone making a positive statement believing in God. Agnostics do not make that statement, therefore all of your conclusions about them do not apply, because they do not say "I believe in God". But again, let's pretend that an Agnostic for some really weird reason would indeed make the statement "I believe in God". You then go on to say that if the statement is not true, then that person is an Atheist. So, you are the one setting the condition of truth here in your argument, so your argument is NOT just about belief. I didn't do that, you did. What if I said that I believe that the halocaust never occurred? That is a statement of belief. I woudl be a denier. But then, what if someone showed a bunch of evidence showing that the truth is that the halocaust really did occur. By your logic, that would automatically switch me from being a denier, even though I haven't acknowedged belief in the event. It is simply sloppy and flawed logic that you are trying to employ here. What you aren't grasping is that Atheism is when someone is willing to say definitively that there is no God. Agnostics do not make a statement either way for or against the belief in God. Are all babies Atheists because they haven't made a positive statement of belief in God? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I was born a snake handler and I'll die a snake handler... A subtle little Simpson's reference. Nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 What if I said that I believe that the halocaust never occurred? the halocaust Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 (edited) Your argument is contingent upon someone making a positive statement believing in God. Agnostics do not make that statement, therefore all of your conclusions about them do not apply, because they do not say "I believe in God". But again, let's pretend that an Agnostic for some really weird reason would indeed make the statement "I believe in God". You then go on to say that if the statement is not true, then that person is an Atheist. So, you are the one setting the condition of truth here in your argument, so your argument is NOT just about belief. I didn't do that, you did. What if I said that I believe that the halocaust never occurred? That is a statement of belief. I woudl be a denier. But then, what if someone showed a bunch of evidence showing that the truth is that the halocaust really did occur. By your logic, that would automatically switch me from being a denier, even though I haven't acknowedged belief in the event. It is simply sloppy and flawed logic that you are trying to employ here. What you aren't grasping is that Atheism is when someone is willing to say definitively that there is no God. Agnostics do not make a statement either way for or against the belief in God. Are all babies Atheists because they haven't made a positive statement of belief in God? Well, by the statement that I highlighted (among other things), you demonstrate that you are not comprehending what I'm typing. Perhaps that is my fault for not being clear. But you're also making one of my points about atheism being misunderstood. In any event, with respect to your reference to the holocaust, you either believe that it happened or you don't. If the basis for your disbelief was lack of evidence, its possible that one could show you sufficient evidence such that you became a believer. If you're an atheist (having no belief in god) because of lack of evidence, perhaps you encounter a burning bush (or somesuch) which provides enough evidence for you to become a theist (having a belief in a god) Not believing that the halocaust occurred is not the same as denying that it occurred. The same prinicple applies to a belief in the existence of god. I think that you, like many others, are confusing the belief portion of the equation (theism/atheism) with the certainly/knowledge portion (gnostic/agnostic) Contrary to your assertion, an agnostic may certainly believe that god exists. That person is an agnostic theist. They believe in the exisitence of a god, but they acknowledge that they do not and cannot know this with any certainty. With respect to you question regarding babies, belief requires just that (not a "positive statement") Since it is unlikely that a baby believes in (let alone comprehends) the existence of a god, then by definition the baby is an atheist. We all are atheists of some sort until the time that we manifest a belief that god exists. Can a 5 year old do that? I don't know. Edited January 6, 2011 by Furd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 There are four options, right? Gnostic theist Agnostic theist Gnostic athiest Agnostic athiest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLAYER Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Until he comes down and taps me on the shoulder and says "Hey I'm real"" then I'll believe. So what am I? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.