It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I am not an atheist by choice

page: 11
23
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ParasuvO
Atheist have made a decision NOTHING exists,


That is not true.


OK, then how do you distinguish between an atheist and an agnostic?


Already posted that.

You picking and choosing?


You posted a definition of an atheist agnostic. I'm not an atheist agnostic. I'm an agnostic.


Is this a trick question?

Basically agnostic means god can not be proven or disproven.


Agnosticism & Thomas Henry Huxley How Did Huxley Understand Being an Agnostic?

By Austin Cline Agnosticism/Atheism Expert


The term "agnosticism" itself was coined by Professor T.H. Huxley at a meeting of the Metaphysical Society in 1876. For Huxley, agnosticism was a position which rejected the knowledge claims of both "strong" atheism and traditional theism. More importantly, though, agnosticism for him was a method of doing things.

Thomas Henry Huxley (1825-1895) was an English natural scientist and author who became widely known as "Darwin's Bulldog" because of his fierce and uncompromising defense of Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection. Huxley's career as a public defender of evolution and antagonist of religion began most fully when he stood in for Darwin at a 1860 meeting in Oxford of the British Association.
atheism.about.com...



No, agnostic means that I am open to evidence proving that God exists. There's a difference.




posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: arpgme
Theistic Gnostic - you claim to Know God exists
Theistic Agnostic - You don't claim to Know God exist but only have Faith.
Atheistic Gnostic - You claim to know God doesn't exist
Atheist Agnostic - You don't claim to know for sure God doesn't exist but you don't believe.

Misotheist/Antitheist - someone who hates God



Has it occurred to you to let the agnostics define agnostic and let that atheists define atheist?



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: arpgme
Theistic Gnostic - you claim to Know God exists
Theistic Agnostic - You don't claim to Know God exist but only have Faith.
Atheistic Gnostic - You claim to know God doesn't exist
Atheist Agnostic - You don't claim to know for sure God doesn't exist but you don't believe.

Misotheist/Antitheist - someone who hates God



I desperately hope you don't try to explain this to people in real life..
95% of Christians have no idea what gnosticism is or that gnostic is even a word by itself.

Theist Gnostic aka religious
Theist Agnostic aka sort of religious.
This 3rd one bugged me. You changed the word slightly to make it seem different but...it's not
Atheist Gnostic = Atheist
Atheist Agnostic = Agnostic


Looks to me like you just added a/theist to each phrase & it's pointlessly convoluted.
edit on 15-2-2015 by Eunuchorn because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

I became Agnostic when I applied good ole fashioned skepticism to every theory. I try to take all valid arguments from all sides of an argument and the argument that you can't disprove god is valid. Sure, you can default to the Null Hypothesis to discount it, but that is a technicality. I can't say for sure that the ancients or spiritual people are lying 100% of the time about spirituality. That is actually statistically unlikely. This leads me to believe that there is something that science can't currently explain to account for these things. OR it could mean that it is all in these people's heads. We need more evidence for both arguments.

This goes for religion, pseudo-sciences (really 20th/21st century religion), and many of the more outlandish conspiracy theories. Occam's Razor is your friend.



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

This whole issue has been the main issue of my 63 years of life. I have been trying to read through everyone's replies, but they are mostly missing one thing. Except for the ones saying to try Buddhism or entheogens, which I think might be a good idea as a shortcut, they are all saying that faith in something external to yourself is something to be desired and they are saying that God is separate from you. I was raised as a Catholic and around puberty I realized that this whole description of us all having only one life that starts with sin, redemption, a judgmental God, heaven and hell and being required to believe in it just did not make sense at all, especially when I looked at the stars at night. Since I must have meaning, this whole thing severely disturbed me until I finally gave up trying to believe and decided to believe what I know. I started meditating (Transcendental Meditation, but that is almost irrelevant) and wound up having out of body experiences and discovering that I am is what I am and that is my soul and I am conscious of I am all the time that I am quiet, and that I am is what God is, basically God is that I am that we all are an extension of. In that regard, the atheists are right. There is no separate God, but we can be aware of an I am that is bigger than we think we are, eventually reaching what some might call God, but not the separate, anthropomorphic God that religions preach about. You can pray to God and that is a good thing, but you will be praying to your higher self. The problem with atheists is that they think we are bodies and that the physical universe is all that is. My out of body and other mystical experiences have proven to me that the physical universe is not what is real, that the yogis are right.
edit on 15-2-2015 by sorgfelt because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: ParasuvO
Atheist have made a decision NOTHING exists,


That is not true.


OK, then how do you distinguish between an atheist and an agnostic?


Already posted that.

You picking and choosing?


You posted a definition of an atheist agnostic. I'm not an atheist agnostic. I'm an agnostic.


Is this a trick question?

Basically agnostic means god can not be proven or disproven.


Agnosticism & Thomas Henry Huxley How Did Huxley Understand Being an Agnostic?

By Austin Cline Agnosticism/Atheism Expert


The term "agnosticism" itself was coined by Professor T.H. Huxley at a meeting of the Metaphysical Society in 1876. For Huxley, agnosticism was a position which rejected the knowledge claims of both "strong" atheism and traditional theism. More importantly, though, agnosticism for him was a method of doing things.

Thomas Henry Huxley (1825-1895) was an English natural scientist and author who became widely known as "Darwin's Bulldog" because of his fierce and uncompromising defense of Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection. Huxley's career as a public defender of evolution and antagonist of religion began most fully when he stood in for Darwin at a 1860 meeting in Oxford of the British Association.
atheism.about.com...



No, agnostic means that I am open to evidence proving that God exists. There's a difference.


Well, so much for posting the info on the guy who invented the word.

I choose to go with the guy who invented the word.



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Tangerine

I became Agnostic when I applied good ole fashioned skepticism to every theory.


As far as I'm concerned, everyone is an agnostic. No one knows.

You can believe or lack belief all you want, but you simply do not know if their is a "religious God" or not.

Any honest atheist will claim "agnostic atheist". But, it's like the silent word that's there -- but doesn't need to be used every time. Atheist only shows that you lean toward no god. Agnostic theist means you lean toward a god, but you dont know.

So, I would actually be, if I used all the "words" -- an Agnostic Spiritual Atheist.

Spritual (for Iack of better word) because I've had Paranormal (also for lack of better word) exoerience since first memory.



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Again, I don't lead towards either direction. There are certain concepts that I lean away from, like the Christian god being real, but that isn't the only way to define god. It isn't fair to say all versions of god are likely not real just because you can say that one isn't.

The biggest problem with the god argument is that god is so ill defined. There isn't a definitive idea of what god is supposed to be, and until there is, we cannot make a valid argument in either direction of belief



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 03:24 PM
link   
a reply to: sorgfelt

I do believe "I am my own God", but that's a whole other discussion.

Or as you put it, "I am is what God is".

It's a metaphysical, energy, we are all ripples in the same pond kind of thing that would need it's own thread.



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Annee

The biggest problem with the god argument is that god is so ill defined.


Yes. I consider myself atheist as I lack belief in any religious God. I lack belief in an all empowering mystical being.

But, I do have beliefs.

Honestly, my physical world/universe belief leans toward the Terra Papers. Not saying they are exactly accurate, but along those lines seems most logical to me. Earth may be a newer planet able to sustain life. I tend to believe ancient mythology is probably more accurate (and real) then any newer religion.

NOTE: I know age of planets is debatable. Depends on what you read and if talking about formation or when each became able to develop life. That's another topic all together.





edit on 15-2-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

I just don't think about it. It's not worth contemplating until I get more evidence. To be honest, we won't know until we die.



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 04:41 PM
link   
When asked whether or not you believe in god and you reply: 'yes' you're a theist

If you reply anything else, including 'I don't know' you're an atheist.

It's the lack of belief in a god/s, nothing more, nothing less, as all dictionary definitions confirm.

Anything else you attempt to attach to the definition is arbitrary and subjective.

I get the feeling those that want that label consider themselves fence sitters without an opinion, when it's all about the response to a single question....



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369

But AGAIN you ignore how not only do I lack belief in a god, I ALSO lack disbelief in a god. You are trying to broadly widen the definition of atheist when you don't fully understand what it means to be an agnostic. Agnostic is the middle ground. Just like you can be politically left, politically right, or moderate. You are falling for the same us vs them fallacy that plagues political debates. That there are only two sides to an argument.



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Annee

I just don't think about it. It's not worth contemplating until I get more evidence. To be honest, we won't know until we die.



I spent 20 years as the receptionist of my husband's & my business.

What else did I have to do but surf the net and contemplate life?



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Annee

I just don't think about it. It's not worth contemplating until I get more evidence. To be honest, we won't know until we die.



I spent 20 years as the receptionist of my husband's & my business.

What else did I have to do but surf the net and contemplate life?


There is plenty to research about what we DO know about the universe that should hold your attention before you ever get to what we don't have evidence to prove.



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Prezbo369

But AGAIN you ignore how not only do I lack belief in a god, I ALSO lack disbelief in a god. You are trying to broadly widen the definition of atheist when you don't fully understand what it means to be an agnostic. Agnostic is the middle ground. Just like you can be politically left, politically right, or moderate. You are falling for the same us vs them fallacy that plagues political debates. That there are only two sides to an argument.



There are only two sides! theists claim a god exists, atheists do not accept that claim.

You do not accept that claim, otherwise you'd be a theist.....

You're still attempting to attach more meaning to the word than actually exists. And you're the one attempting to widen the definition to include claims of knowledge, when it's about belief or the lack thereof....



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369

Why do you think there are only two sides to an argument? Dualism is a failed idea and as a student of science you should know that the universe very rarely works that way. There is a reason you cannot describe the universe in binary. Quantum computing makes a strong case for the yes, no, maybe paradigm, so I'd say that your yes/no argument is too constraining. It's more complicated than that.



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 06:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Annee

I just don't think about it. It's not worth contemplating until I get more evidence. To be honest, we won't know until we die.



I spent 20 years as the receptionist of my husband's & my business.

What else did I have to do but surf the net and contemplate life?


There is plenty to research about what we DO know about the universe that should hold your attention before you ever get to what we don't have evidence to prove.


Kay: A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.

Science tends to be limited to repetitive testing of known knowledge.

We'd be in a world of hurt without visionaries. IMO



posted on Feb, 15 2015 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Prezbo369

But AGAIN you ignore how not only do I lack belief in a god, I ALSO lack disbelief in a god. You are trying to broadly widen the definition of atheist when you don't fully understand what it means to be an agnostic. Agnostic is the middle ground. Just like you can be politically left, politically right, or moderate. You are falling for the same us vs them fallacy that plagues political debates. That there are only two sides to an argument.



I agree. Atheists want to claim agnostics to bump up their numbers. At least that's my theory. Agnostics are not atheists nor are they believers. Both believers and atheists have taken firm positions not shared by agnostics.



posted on Feb, 16 2015 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Just like atheist.

Atheist has one meaning: lack of belief in a God.

How each individual atheist interprets it is their "atheist philosophy".



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join