For example, when discussing general notions of a "God", I am an "agnostic atheist".
Is agnostic and atheist the same thing?
666_Maggots~PassionForGlory BN-1
2012/06/11 00:04:34
|
|
|||||
|
7 votes
|
|
4% | |||
|
147 votes
|
|
88% | |||
|
14 votes
|
|
8% | |||
Agnostic, as I said, is a sub-group of atheist, much as beagle is a sub-group to canine.
"That it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can provide evidence which logically justifies that certainty."
That's all it means. It doesn't mean "God is unknowable" or anything like that. It's not even about religion specifically. If you agree with the principle that it's wrong to claim certainty about something for which you have no logically satisfactory evidence, then you're an agnostic.
A 'theist' is defined as someone who believes in the existence of a god or gods, so an atheist is anyone who is not a theist.
I'm an agnostic atheist.
Also, did not Jesus said he had 'other flocks' to attend to? No substantiated reports of Him (don't buy the Mormon account) showing up elsewhere.
The non-religious nature of this belief, is by definition: atheistic. It is not anti-theistic, but it is atheistic.
Sounds like you have confused Religion with Politics.
I'm a Pre-Destined Free-Thinker (can accept both simultaneously), have plenty of (Protestant) priests & a couple of imams that accept this with no problem.
I missed the part where you're half-way between deism and fundamentalist. My bad.
May take DECADES to finally iron out my (beyond?) Belief System. Just reconciled the Existence of Evil a couple months ago, Pentecostal approved. (Work at 5 Protestant churches, was in Catholic School, need I say why?)
I've always thought of general agnosticism, as the humble recognition of our inability to be certain, and the unwillingness to continue to spend the little time we have alive, trying to figure it out.
To clarify the confusion I 'noticed' in your 1st sentence.
If you live Godly, He leaves you alone (Job being an exception, talk about Evil later), if you're a disgrace, He'll teach ya a lesson, but often not overtly (Karma?).
Hence me using Deism & Theism as a sliding scale.
In Judges, the Jews get complacent (repetitively) & then wonder, Huh! What did We do wrong?
Or, in the NT, Jesus is quoted: "If you're not for me, you're against me". My 1st impression was that doesn't seem to fit His character but now accept that it's from the Niceaen revisionists instead.
My 'take' on the context is; "the more Godly, the Better", Jesus was using the Carrot approach, he was INVITING converts, while the Niceaens 'flipped' it to the Stick, "Be Perfect or be Damned", a THREAT.
I view the Bible as Allegory, not Literal & I'm doing some "Serious Forensic Analyzing" to glean the Real Message
Have You Kept Up (so far)? If your brow is as convoluted as most human brains are, take a break, Save this memo, relax/imbibe as needed & use your cranium as a Crock Pot, not a Microwave. Took a quarter century for this...&
&
&
&
<><><>
&
&&
&
To clarify the confusion I 'noticed' in your 1st sentence.
If you live Godly, He leaves you alone (Job being an exception, talk about Evil later), if you're a disgrace, He'll teach ya a lesson, but often not overtly (Karma?).
Hence me using Deism & Theism as a sliding scale.
In Judges, the Jews get complacent (repetitively) & then wonder, Huh! What did We do wrong?
Or, in the NT, Jesus is quoted: "If you're not for me, you're against me". My 1st impression was that doesn't seem to fit His character but now accept that it's from the Niceaen revisionists instead.
My 'take' on the context is; "the more Godly, the Better", Jesus was using the Carrot approach, he was INVITING converts, while the Niceaens 'flipped' it to the Stick, "Be Perfect or be Damned", a THREAT.
I view the Bible as Allegory, not Literal & I'm doing some "Serious Forensic Analyzing" to glean the Real Message
Have You Kept Up (so far)? If your brow is as convoluted as most human brains are, take a break, Save this memo, relax/imbibe as needed & use your cranium as a Crock Pot, not a Microwave. Took a quarter century for this "Dog's Breakfast à la Kitchen Sink" for this diaspora of ideas to jostle 'round, then… a 'Critical Mass' was achieved & "I Saw the Light (or the 'Big Bang?)".
To me, conversion MUST be willful, NOT compelled, recall the D-T gradient above. Heard most Protestants aren't that Anal about Original Sin nowadays, the more Good Work you do is the road to Salvation. This "Good Conduct" is common in World Faiths (Mayan blood sacrifices or Kali thuggery need not apply).
The Bible is not (absolutely) mandatory, just knowing what (& doing) Good (gnosis) rather than reciting the Word (logos) by rote.
This is how I think pre-literate humans (Adam to Abram via Oral history?), regard the start of ACTUAL writing being mentioned in Genesis. 15:5 Psalm 147:4.
That seems to be my "Intellectual Gift(?)": Whereas (most?) "Militant/Fanatical Theists strive to be Eternally Certain about 'How Things Are', I'm damned to be Infernally Ambiguous about (most of) the same." The former insist on discreet 'Facts', while I permit some 'latitude' (modest variable, vagueness) for this.
The Predistination/Free Will debate is commonly used as an argument for the "Agnosti·Atheism" (routinely 'cyclotron' new words too, can give Lewis Carol a run for his money) Camp but I've "Twisted/Warped" it (using Ambivalence) into an argument for the Deis·Theist Side instead. Didn't really change anything, just re·arranged the Equation (ReNormalization in Quantum circles) to produce the opposite result which are more to my liking.
Looks like I've spliced Quantum's Uncertainty Principle with Kierkegaard's Absurdism/Christian Existentialism…
♫♪ "Think Music" from Jeopardy ♫♪
…& maybe a kind of Jungian "Symbiotic Pantheism" (just found this term 2 days ago, so this 'quatenary' isn't worked out, likely take a letter like this to explain, later).
Yes, I know the Pentecostals revolt at this 'Gnostic Syncretism' but they tolerate my presence if I'm discreet & some of them admire the Presbyterian Church (where I do Prophet study). Who knows? Maybe I can tenable a merger of both into the "Church of the Repentant Elder" ;-P
Supporting your 2nd (or last) sentence (you appear ambiguous), trying to figure out what God (exactly) is impossible, but rather than spending ALL my mortal time on the specifics ('how many angels can dance on the head of a pin') I'm content with spending SOME of this getting in the neighborhood.
I'm blending (from Icarus above our correspondence) Huxley's definition of Agnostic with that of Theism so, technically, I'm an Agnostic Theist (Syn. Deist?), definitely on the "Pro" side of the Fence (Apatheism or True Agnosticism) somewhere among:
Unitarianism <-> Binitarianism <-> Trinitarianism <-> Quatenarianism (like an electron orbiting a proton).
Just found (minutes ago) http://freethinker.co.uk/2009... which depicts Gnosis & Theos as axes on a 2D plane.
As I said prior, new "stuff" keeps falling into my lap. Other crap, like Ignosticism, Pantheism, Kathenotheism? etc. will take time to work out.
Maybe I'll start a new Church based on these principles (to start):
Freedom of & openness (pro & con) with Information.
(Mutual) Respect & Tolerance (within reasonable bounds)
Merit·ocracy, if you do well (for others) you'll be rewarded or privileged (decided by the same others) if not…?
Sounds like (ethical?) Survivor
If you don't mind me saying, while I was able to follow your logic, it seems like you're complicating it even more than the Counsel of Nicea.
It seems (and I say this as an observation, not a judgment) like you're trying to have it both ways. Part of you appears to want to believe that God is good and benevolent; while the other part seems not to be able to reconcile that with the reality it sees.
I call myself an atheist, but I suppose "agnostic" would be a more specific term for what I am. I don't believe there is a god, but I'm not so closed-minded that I don't recognize the possibility that I'm wrong, about that or anything else. However, I'm as certain as I can be. I think Caesar Marcus Arelius best sums up my philosophy on the matter
If I have to twist and turn myself into a pretzel in order to explain what I believe, I just think I'd be trying to convince myself, more than I'm trying to convince others. But that's just me.
Did pay money to get an assessment for Asperger's, but it looks like I 'screwed up' the Ph.D. After the initial visit, she said I definitely had it, but she asked me in for a follow-up, didn't tell me anything. When her Report came out, she said I didn't have it & I was delusional.
This has been a life-long battle between Me & the Rest of Humanity. They say I'm Wacko, I say I'm just 'confused' & need only more detailed communication to understand
Looks like I'm some sort of Analytical Prodigy (family & associates have long reported), heard that most Analytical types tend to be Atheists, so was I until my 'Awakening' and have 'flipped' (changed polarity?) into Theism.
I agree with the Aurelius quote you've supplied, we're just on opposite sides of the FAITH(theos) fence but on the same with SCIENCE(gnosis) one.
Thought Science/Faith were two sides of the same coin, but since seeing that diagram I've sent you last night, now KNOW they can be operated as variables.
G...&
Did pay money to get an assessment for Asperger's, but it looks like I 'screwed up' the Ph.D. After the initial visit, she said I definitely had it, but she asked me in for a follow-up, didn't tell me anything. When her Report came out, she said I didn't have it & I was delusional.
This has been a life-long battle between Me & the Rest of Humanity. They say I'm Wacko, I say I'm just 'confused' & need only more detailed communication to understand
Looks like I'm some sort of Analytical Prodigy (family & associates have long reported), heard that most Analytical types tend to be Atheists, so was I until my 'Awakening' and have 'flipped' (changed polarity?) into Theism.
I agree with the Aurelius quote you've supplied, we're just on opposite sides of the FAITH(theos) fence but on the same with SCIENCE(gnosis) one.
Thought Science/Faith were two sides of the same coin, but since seeing that diagram I've sent you last night, now KNOW they can be operated as variables.
Got some (real-time) Living to do, doing "Introspective dialogues" with NeuroTypicals (as with you) seems to be therapeutic to me & give me ideas that (I think) could help the world.
Chat with you soon. insha allah
I know that faith and science can co-exist. Different people interpret evidence differently; and believers can always fall back to "God made it that way", while still acknowledging the facts.
In any case, all my best to you, and I'll see you down the road.
No, I see Agnostic as more of a "spiritual but not committed" sort of stance on belief, which is perfectly fine.
An atheist does not believe in God in any way, shape or form.
1.
a. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.
2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.
adj.
a·the·ist (th-st)
n.
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.
My other definition is for what I call "Rabid Atheist"
a. One who not only denies the existence of God, but does their best to make sure that no one else believes either.
b. One who will ridicule or belittle others for having a belief in the existence of God.
c. Going to Hell in a handbasket.
For example, when discussing general notions of a "God", I am an "agnostic atheist".
Deism is usually a more specific term. Do you normally reject religious dogma, miracles, a God that interacts with humans, etc... ? If so, then Deist may be a good moniker for you as well. "Theists", generally speaking, tend to believe in a living, interactive God with dogmatic definitions. Deists tend to be a bit more... skeptical of those things.
_____________________________... That is being atheist.
Atheism is the rejection of god claims. If you do not believe in gods, you are an atheist, period. The term itself does not in any way imply any sort of certainty or uncertainty, just as size does not imply a colour.
Agnosticism is a statement of a level of certainty or uncertainty.
Most atheists are also agnostics, because the vast majority of atheists do NOT claim absolute certainty about their disbelief.
The spectrum is as follows.
Gnostic Theism > Agnostic Theism > Agnostic Atheism > Gnostic Theism.
You will find that most atheists are agnostic atheists, whereas a lot more christians are gnostic theists, who do claim absolute certainty that there are gods.
Oh, and by the way, people who just call themselves "Agnostics" as if they are in the neutral middle, are just cowards.
Comment on people that call themselves "agnostic": I would also suggest another possibility could be pure apathy. Some of them literally just have not thought about it enough, or care to do so.
"I am an agnostic; I do not pretend to know what many ignorant men are sure of." -Clarence Darrow
Latin = ignoramus
Atheist = Mind wide shut.