A plea to all religions

Weedasaurus

Weedasaurus

Well-Known Member
I don't consider myself an athiest, but an agnostic. I do not know for sure if GOD exists nor do I pretend to know.

Its not that atheists and agnostics are dis-believers or are uncapable of faith, love or transcendent experiences. We have the same abilities, we are just as human as those who believe in GOD. Its just that we believe in the pursuit of truth through research and observations instead of just pure faith. We are no more or less capable of commiting evil acts or acts of kindness.

Thankyou
[video=youtube;ptwEV0xhTzI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptwEV0xhTzI&feature=related[/video]
 
Zaehet Strife

Zaehet Strife

Well-Known Member
Technically bro, and this has been said over and over again. If you do not "believe" -claim truth to- in god, you are considered an atheist. If you do not tell yourself that you "believe" -claim truth to- that god does not exist, this makes you an agnostic atheist. If you "believe" -claim truth to- that god does not exist, this puts you in the same catagory of a theist (claiming truths in the absence of it)... but you would be considered a hard atheist.

You cannot be an agnostic, agnostic is a position you take on a certain subject.

Example: If you were completely agnostic, you wouldn't even be able to say "i am hungry" because you could never be sure weather or not that you were even hungry.
 
M

Matthew Rapley

Member
Why do you care what followers of a religion believe?

If you concerned yourself with the feelings of every minority group, you would go insane.
 
bud nugbong

bud nugbong

Well-Known Member
i just see religion as a major waste of time and resources. not to mention the violence and molestation.
 
scroglodyte

scroglodyte

Well-Known Member
speaking for the Norse pagans, i say............
By Thor's Hammer, we reject your plea. now prepare for battle.
 
Weedasaurus

Weedasaurus

Well-Known Member
[video=youtube;CzSMC5rWvos]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzSMC5rWvos[/video]

I am agnostic. I don't know nor do I pretend to know. tyson explains it best. Stereotyping is an oversimplification of what obviously is a complex issue. It doesn't matter if someone is a priest, scientist, or an average nobody. Any claim must be proven for it to become fact.
 
drive

drive

Active Member
Crom I do not pray to you I have no tounge for it. After we die no one will remember if we were right or wrong only that a few stood against many. I ask only one request VENGENCE and if you refuse my request then to hell with you
 
Zaehet Strife

Zaehet Strife

Well-Known Member
When some people who BELIEVE in science are asked about the great metaphysical questions of humans (e.g. “Does God exists?”, “Why do we exist?” etc), they answer that the lack of evidence does not allow them to carry an opinion on these issues. Can this be a possible answer? No.The reason why agnosticism is not a viable answer for someone who believes in science, is simple, believing in science contains the notion of “faith”. So one cannot see the “lack of evidence” as a problem, while deciding to just ignore the same problem in another field of knowledge (you believe that all frogs are green because the great frogologist told you so, even though you have not observed ALL the frogs in the Universe).So the possibilities are:

1. You are a complete agnostic: You do not believe in absolutely ANYTHING, since believing in anything means having observed ALL possible data, KNOWING that your mind works correctly, being CERTAIN that your mind can think for what you think and so on.

2. You have an opinion, since knowing equals observing + analyzing logically + believing (see above). We can never actually “know” something, but we use that word often. That is acceptable, provided that we understand the true nature of the words we use.

3. You say that you DO NOT WANT to have an opinion. That is an absolutely valid option to choose.However it must be noted that this has nothing to do with the often heard agnostic motto: “I do not have evidence to draw an opinion”…And it is even more weird (at least) to be a scientist and try to understand how everything in the universe works, but not want to learn why do you exist or what is the reason behind the existence of the whole universe…

In other words, if you have no problem using number or the square root of 2, then you do not have the “right” to use the excuse of “lack of evidence” when it comes to questions like “does God exist?”. If you use the idea of “infinite” in mathematics, then you cannot say that people who claim that God is infinite and exists do not have reliable evidence. If you believe in the existence of a number you cannot even write down on paper, then how can you use the excuse of “we cannot know” or claim that “I don’t want to know” when it comes to the meaning of your own life or the existence of god?


Most of us apply agnosticism selectively to specific aspects of knowledge. As I have demonstrated above, human knowledge must always be based on evidence and faith at the same time – we can never be certain of something beyond any doubt! So agnosticism in some things and “knowledge” of others is not an option! Either believe, not believe or state that you do not WANT to decide – but don’t use the “lack of evidence” as an excuse for you “not knowing” in matters that may discomfort you!

And do not forget that no matter how many times an agnostic might say “I don’t know” he still cannot hide the fact that he/she constantly makes deliberate choices in his life: an agnostic who “does not know” if there is a God goes or goes-not to the church. So in his mind he does have an inclination towards one of the two possibilities. In the same way an agnostic who “does not know” if causality exists in the worlds, looks for cause or does not look for causes in his everyday life. So in most cases the “I don’t know” is accompanied by more than specific choices that are made.

It's really very simple, if you do not believe in god... then that catagorizes you as an atheist, even if you do not like that word. If you do not believe in god, but you are not certain about its existence you take an agnostic position. Which makes you an agnostic atheist (someone who does not believe in god, but is not certain of its existence or non-existence)

You either do or you don't beleive, or you can take a position of... i refuse to have an opinion, which is the same thing as philisophical suicide.
 
C

chongsbuddy

New Member
if religion is so special and wonderful then why are the majority of deaths in the history of the world directly attributed to it?
 
C

chongsbuddy

New Member
we as humans have to believe that there is something after death,its in our psyche.we have to believe this to make death less scary.
 
420IAMthatIAM

420IAMthatIAM

Active Member


Agnosticism is the view that the truth values of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—are unknown or unknowable.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP] Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. In some senses, agnosticism is a stance about the difference between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief. In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who is undecided about the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively.[SUP][2][/SUP] In the strict sense, however, agnosticism is the view that human reason is incapable of providing sufficient rational grounds to justify the belief that deities either do or do not exist. Within agnosticism there are agnostic atheists (who do not believe any deity exists, but do not deny it as a possibility) and agnostic theists (who believe a deity exists but do not claim it as personal knowledge).may be we should stop using the word god..and say the energy or the power that be:?:
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
420IAMthatIAM said:
Agnosticism is the view that the truth values of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, but also other religious and metaphysical claims—are unknown or unknowable.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP] Agnosticism can be defined in various ways, and is sometimes used to indicate doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. In some senses, agnosticism is a stance about the difference between belief and knowledge, rather than about any specific claim or belief. In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who is undecided about the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively.[SUP][2][/SUP] In the strict sense, however, agnosticism is the view that human reason is incapable of providing sufficient rational grounds to justify the belief that deities either do or do not exist. Within agnosticism there are agnostic atheists (who do not believe any deity exists, but do not deny it as a possibility) and agnostic theists (who believe a deity exists but do not claim it as personal knowledge).may be we should stop using the word god..and say the energy or the power that be:?:
Click to expand...
Imo that's merely "transferring the problem" using semantics. "Energy" and "power" posit just as much magic as any other God-concept:
a) that soul is a real and useful concept, and
2) that soul has an effect on the world of the senses. cn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top