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.

 

What is after agnostic?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 03:42 PM
link   
When I was a child I grew up in a dysfunctional family. The whole family were drop outs and immoral. I was an atheist and the thought of there being a deity seemed stupid.

Then when I was mid twenties I became agnostic and thought I wouldn’t believe in god but if anything ever happened to help justify the existence of god I would be open to that

Now I don’t know what i’m called. I believe there is something with us but I don’t believe in religions. Though it should be mentioned that after I started experiencing things I went to the doctor and told them I was having visions before being asleep. As if a problem with the part of the brain that deals with dreaming. As soon as I said that I was diagnosed schizophrenia. I don’thear Voices or hallucinate while awake with my eyes open and going about life, but when I close my eyes and relax and try to nap (i’m Getting old) I have visions of space and clouds...

What do you call someone who has a belief in a God but is not religious?

I always thought people started religious, then questioned things and became agnostic, then gave it all up and became atheist.

Perhaps a mental distinction is making me go the wrong way and become a believer?
edit on 16-1-2018 by SupremeBeing because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: SupremeBeing




What do you call someone who has a belief in a God but is not religious?


Spiritual.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: SupremeBeing
I always thought people started religious, then questioned things and became agnostic, then gave it all up and became atheist.

My sequence was the other way round. Nominal Christian by upbringing, then atheist, then believer.
If you need to call yourself something, when asked, why not stick with "uncertain"?



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: SupremeBeing



What do you call someone who has a belief in a God but is not religious?

I'm a little confused by this. Are you saying that you believe in the specific deity "God" but don't follow any specific dogma? Or are you using the term "God" as a vague term for "a deity"?

I'm asking that because there are a lot of non-practicing believers in various faiths. They may accept specific tenets like the existence of God, reincarnation, karma, Hell, etc, but they don't believe in the day to day rituals for those specific religions. Is that what you mean?



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: SupremeBeing




I always thought people started religious, then questioned things and became agnostic, then gave it all up and became atheist.

Not true.
I started with no belief system at all. My parents sent me to church at a young age but I never believed in it or felt it in my heart.

Today I am agnostic.
I don't have a real belief in anything even now but I hope that we have an afterlife of some kind. Something along the lines of what NDE people claim to have experienced. The non religious type of NDE.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 04:16 PM
link   
You really need not categorize your beliefs according to an either/or dichotomy vis-a-vis religious belief. It is perfectly possible for you to entertain the ideas of an after-life, soul, reincarnation, ghosts, and the paranormal with no regard whatsoever to deities of any kind, ritual, magical texts, religious dogma and morality, or any attempt by a religion or cult to run your life. You can reject the whole "believer, atheist, agnostic" trichotomy as unnecessary and a diversion to learning more about reality. And though science is a process, not a thing, science could also benefit from taking this approach, rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater and rejecting anything the least bit tainted with religious belief. So reject the whole mess. You don't need to belong to any pre-conceived category and instead be a seeker of truth--with a small 't' because once someone spells it Truth--you know you're screwed.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: SupremeBeing

A Realist



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 05:07 PM
link   
There is an atheist - Doesn't believe in anything.

There is a agnostic - Is willing to say there might be a god, but requires proof.

There is a deist - Thinks there is a god, but that the god is impersonal and doesn't care about us or have direct involvement.

There is a Theist - Thinks there is a God, that is personal and created us for a reason and has a relationship with us.

You would be considered a deist.

Now the question you must ask yourself is if you are willing to take the next step and become a theist.

Are there reasons to be a theist?

I surmise that there is a reason to be a theist. There is proof that the universe didn't come from nothing, there is structure, order, and balance. All of these things in nature is proof of personal investment by a higher being. (I'm not talking to atheists here, but deists)

Now, which theist order would you choose to follow. My suggestion to you is to research history and follow what has the most proof for it.

My faith is based in Jesus Christ, who is God.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: SupremeBeing

Christianity teaches that there is no religion with God, it's a personal relationship based on love, not actions
We love God because of what He did, we do love because it's a response to Gods love, not because we need to
No religion, no ceremony to be closer, no magic or incantations, just faith



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

We do have one ceremony that Jesus told us to perform and that is the Lord's Supper. Other than that there is no dogma except faith in Jesus, that he is God, is the incarnated Son of God, and that he died for us so that our sins would be atoned for.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: SupremeBeing

What do you call someone who has a belief in a God but is not religious?


Some people call them Freemasons.



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 11:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: SupremeBeing
What do you call someone who has a belief in a God but is not religious?


I think you are called a theist just for the God thought.


originally posted by: SupremeBeing
I always thought people started religious, then questioned things and became agnostic, then gave it all up and became atheist.
Perhaps a mental distinction is making me go the wrong way and become a believer?


The idea of God is with us. God is a thought. First of all I will prove to you God exists. God is just word. Nobody denies the existence of the word God. What the word God means is define by its usage in sentences. However, God has some additional meanings. God represents all that is, all that will be, all that could ever be imagined, and all that could ever possibly be realized. God is a semantic container for all possible words and thought. Because of the way God represents everything it touches our brain in a physical way because it is a reference to all of our thoughts. just like up does not have any meaning without down, without God as a reference, we would not be able to appreciate the idea of duality.

Whether God is sitting in chair judging people after they die is an article of faith. Articles of faith are not supported by any evidence. You have to choose an article of faith is true without any evidence. It's choice because if there was evidence it would be a decision not a choice. People choose to have articles of faith to live by so their lives have divine meaning. It's purely delusional but you get to live a meaningful life that is divine in the eyes of God.


edit on 16-1-2018 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 11:24 PM
link   
You cannot know more than what you know.

So being a person who knows only what he knows is the sanest option imo.



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 12:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: MentorsRiddle
a reply to: Raggedyman

We do have one ceremony that Jesus told us to perform and that is the Lord's Supper. Other than that there is no dogma except faith in Jesus, that he is God, is the incarnated Son of God, and that he died for us so that our sins would be atoned for.



Baptism, marriage, communion
But, they are all about community more than ceremony, in my opinion
Its true, the church has turned communion into a waffer and taste of wine as opposd to a meal with the christian community



posted on Jan, 17 2018 @ 01:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
First of all I will prove to you God exists.


There is actually a proof that demonstrates God exists.

However, it's like a math proof, to understand the proof you need a certain educational background.

A sketch of the proof goes something like this.

As a man, you find you can create certain things.

If you understand enough about modern science, you'll know man can now create new forms of living things, and has actually done so: new bacteria, new viruses, GMO crops, cloned a few animals, created new mice with glowing fur..etc..

So, you'll understand that man will soon have the ability to create new types of men.

To essentially, "create man in his own image, after his own likeness".

But, we have a book, called the Holy Bible, reportedly written by people thousands of years ago, who claimed to be inspired by God, to write down what is in that book, and in the very first book of that book, called the Book of Genesis, we see this deed of

"creating man in his own image"

was done before.

Then, when we read the whole Bible, we find it reads somewhat like a "History Book"; it reports events that took place in man's history, not in full detail, but like in "sketches", just reporting a select few of some "essential details".

These recorded "essential details", however, are just enough for us to compare future events with past events, to see if we are "repeating" the same things over and over as a species.

Now the life of a typical man is about, say 80 years, or 120 years tops. So, what man would really care about what happened 5000 years ago, or what will happen 5000 years into the future? He wasn't there, and isn't going to be there, so why bother?

Where does this "impulse" come from, to record these past events, bundle them up into a "religious book", and preach these old facts to people down through the ages, so that they would "remember them" ?

While typical "History" records what happened in the "recent past", like, say last few centuries, what we call "Religion" records what happened in the "distant past", like at the beginning of time. So, in one sense, Religion is just History, but on a very long time scale. So long, in fact, that it's impossible to record it in any great detail, and it can only be represented in "sketches" of conceptual ideas about those early times.

The first question to ask yourself is "Who needs to know about the events on these very long time scales?"

Not man, since he dies in 80 years time. He might take it on as a "fun project", but he doesn't "need to know" about these things.

Also, man can't "prove" these things happened 5000 years ago. Nor can he prove any particular thing will happen 5000 years into the future. He can't test any hypothesis about what happened(s) in these times, because he isn't there.

Man can only "witness" what happens in his own lifetime.

That's a window of 80 years in the time period of millennia.

Any written records reporting on events previous to his lifetime have to be taken on "faith" and be "believed" or "challenged" with arguments.

But, what is happening "right now", can be proven, by simply "witnessing" it with one's own eyes, ears, and mind.

And that is part of the key. The "why" of the existence of the Holy Bible. Because when men start to create man in their own image, once again, they will then "know" and have "proof" that that part of the Holy Bible is truth.

The other observation that contributes to this proof, is the advancement in the communications between men. The minds of men are being gradually "linked" up together to form "one huge global mind."

Currently, we have internet, linking us together, we type on keyboards, watch flat screens, and so exchange information. But, that will soon change, and we'll first have special "helmets reading brain waves" and will hook up directly to the internet, and the screens will be replaced with holographic images broadcast by wifi directly into our brains.

So, we're becoming more than just a collection of individual men. We are becoming "one being," with many "cells" , all contributing thought towards the advancement of life, and towards the transformation of that life, to become the thing that creates everything in the future.

Eventually, these "helmets" used to interface with each other will become unnecessary, as the impact of these artificial devices on an "adaptive biological neurological system" will be to train and develop that brain to perform these activities on it's own. That is, we all become "telepathic", discarding the artificial interfaces, and using the natural neurological one instead.

So, now we've become "one being" composed of billions of "mind cells" all communicating telepathically with each other, deciding on the future course of action for the species.

Everything we do, is by consensus, just like when a man decides to act, all his limbs co-operate to get that action done.

Now, what would you call this being?

That being is what we call God.

And the funny part is, that God is always here, and what we call God at that time in the future is really just "the manifestation of God" expressed in the flesh.

So, now we can understand where the impulse came from to record those historical facts, bundle them up into a "Religious Book" and preach it to every generation down the line. It's just a way for man to "awaken" to the "realization" that "together we are God". That is, once we combine all our minds back into one mind, we become aware that it is we who are God, and we are always here, either existing as "fragments", or together as one "whole" being. And this being is doing everything we see happen in the universe.

So, there you have your proof God. Proof, at least, when the time comes that you too can see and understand all the details that are before us.




top topics



 
3

log in

join