Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It all depends on what is meant by the word "God".
Well I did not define the word God. I'm pretty sure he knew what I meant. He just didn't really seem to care for the topic so I dropped it immediately. I just got this vibe about him.
But lets say it was the definition of God as being eternal and forever and God who created everything.
Was I correct in labeling him agnostic?
Originally posted by Daredevil1
Well I did not define the word God. I'm pretty sure he knew what I meant. He just didn't really seem to care for the topic so I dropped it immediately. I just got this vibe about him.But lets say it was the definition of God as being eternal and forever and God who created everything.
Was I correct in labeling him agnostic?
OK, I will give you an abstract example:
What if there was a person who did not believe in the god defined above? Lets say this person does not believe in a creation or a creator. However, what if this person believed in a natural god, like the universe as a living being? This person would be a theist, but not believe in a conventional god. To another theist, that person could seem to be an atheist, but not claim to be.
This person would not be an agnostic, they would be a theist.
Originally posted by Daredevil1
If someone claims they don't support the idea of God and also claims they don't support the idea of no God. What are they?Because I asked him what idea does he claim himself to be.
He then told me that I can label him the word to choose for him. I then told him, that I think your agnostic.
And then he replied. So you say. After that I just simply didn't ask him anymore about it.
Was I right?
He didn't really provide enough information. So, probably you were, but we don't know for sure.
A lot of people are against labels. They feel it's somehow limiting, or don't want some societal label on them (correct or not). He'd probably resist you trying to label him. The fact remains, however, that a lot of our labels are nuanced enough that yes, they do in fact describe a person's beliefs accurately, even if it's just in general terms.
Because when it comes down to it, we need words to describe or even think about our beliefs. Words, phrases, and descriptions are just longer, drawn-out labels. Most times they can be boiled down to a key word or idea.
If you want more answers, ask him to describe his beliefs and philosophy at more length to you. He'll probably be more receptive to that.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
What an ignorant statement.
Hatred and ignorance exists toward atheism, and due to low numbers it's not something that needs to be hidden most times like racism. I see anti-atheist sentiments pop up in my Facebook news feed occasionally, for example. It's usually not an overt attack - though those can be found as well - but embedded in some flowery Christian message that uses a strawman of "godlessness" to bolster its position. And while my work means I'm "friends" with an eclectic bunch on FB, it's far from the most conservative group of people.
What gets me is that, while granting that people of any religious persuasion can be stupid and hateful, no one seems to be able to point to an evil that groups or individuals have done specifically in the name of atheism. It's just incredibly basic in-group programming that manifests as fear. There's almost no rational backing for it. We can argue for hours about whether or not religion is a net positive or negative in the world, but it's undeniable that there have been and still are many instances we can point and say that evil was done not just by religious people but because they were religious.
My mom and sister still get approached about my atheism. I want to punch those people, because they're too spineless to talk to me, and it's awkward for my family.
Originally posted by Daredevil1like someone said it depends what u define as god.
If someone claims they don't support the idea of God and also claims they don't support the idea of no God. What are they?Because I asked him what idea does he claim himself to be.
He then told me that I can label him the word to choose for him. I then told him, that I think your agnostic.
And then he replied. So you say. After that I just simply didn't ask him anymore about it.
Was I right?
also many would say they are neutral.
If someone doesn't know about a real life cosmic anomaly in space and has no opinion on it does it mean he is against it or pro?
Originally posted by Shakyamunisonyou?
What jerk could that have been? 😂
I always laugh or get really annoyed when ppl cant understand or wont accept the sentence mention above, it isnt that hard.
If God is some weird asian cult leader that wants everyone to drink the kool aid and blow up subways obviously if he is accepted by his followers as God. He is God to them.
I would say that is your god and if he is your definition of god, sure why not, he is god. he is just not my god. Its the same way with guys like the Caesars, emperors who were worshiped as gods.
Than u got guys like Einstein who was a Pantheist at least I think that is what it is called. He didnt believe in the judeo/Christian god or any other personal god. he was pretty much an atheist in that sense. but, he called nature god, the order, the chaos the universe as a whole was god to him right down to its mathematics.
Originally posted by Nietzschean
you?...
Than u got guys like Einstein who was a Pantheist at least I think that is what it is called. He didnt believe in the judeo/Christian god or any other personal god. he was pretty much an atheist in that sense. but, he called nature god, the order, the chaos the universe as a whole was god to him right down to its mathematics.
Well, at least Einstein was talking about something real. And yes it was me, and I was joking.
The other part of your post, made no sense to me. I don't really know what you were talking about.
Originally posted by Nietzschean
what ppl call or define god. 😠
I'm sorry, what do people call or define god?
All I said was "It all depends on what is meant by the word "God"." The word god is a power word that means many different things to different people. Last I could tell, you were agreeing with me.
Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
i'll believe in god if i see an afterlife.
I'd believe in an afterlife if I experienced an afterlife. That wouldn't be sufficient for me to believe in God, at least in a traditional Western sense of the word. All it would provide evidence for is the existence of a reality outside our own universe.
Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
i don't know & don't believe in a god.how could anyone believe in something off faith? :l
i'll believe in god if i see an afterlife.
which I doubt i will
1) I believe in God. And I believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross for my sins. I've never seen God, and I don't need to. I know He's there. I didn't see Jesus die and rise from the dead, and I don't need to see it. I know it happened, and I know that because it happened I can be with God forever in heaven. The Bible says this about faith:
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Ephesians 2:8-9)
"But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." (Hebrews 11:6)
2) If you wait that long it'll be too late.
Originally posted by Digi
I'd believe in an afterlife if I experienced an afterlife. That wouldn't be sufficient for me to believe in God, at least in a traditional Western sense of the word. All it would provide evidence for is the existence of a reality outside our own universe.
Originally posted by Digi
I'd believe in an afterlife if I experienced an afterlife. That wouldn't be sufficient for me to believe in God, at least in a traditional Western sense of the word. All it would provide evidence for is the existence of a reality outside our own universe.
Bam.
This is kind of how I'm leaning towards, today.
Even those super interesting and "unexplained" NDEs do not confirm Judeo-Christian God's existence. If anything, I think the "best" NDE cases prove Buddhism to be correct...especially the part about reincarnation.
And what are Buddhists? That's right...atheists. 😐
The only thing I really desire from the eternities is a continuation of consciousness without all of the biological drawbacks the brain-body creates. If I live long enough to witness the true transhumanist movement, cool. If there is an afterlife, cool. Mormonism is the best explanation, personally, so far.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
I think it's this kind of goalpost moving that pushes me toward Humean views on beliefs 😛
There's definitely nothing wrong with that approach. He still demands evidence for anything which fits nicely into a Humean empiricism. It is more like he is agnostic towards an afterlife...which pretty much everyone should be as there is not clear-cut evidence for it besides dying and finding out. There is some evidence for and against it.
1. For: Compelling cases where people shouldn't be remembering shit or recalling details they had no way of knowing (based on our understanding of the situation).
2. Against: the mind ends and is fully contained and explainable within the construct of the brain. Brain dies, your consciousness (soul) dies. Aristotelian approach, basically.