RootsBooster Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Have either of you two considered contacting the council of Cardinals & asking them to reopen the debate on how many Angels can sit on the head of a pin? Because I've got to tell you it sounds like something that would be right down your streets. My definitions were also taken from the Oxford Dictionary, only, being an old guy I use a book, remember them? Those definitions are fine by me & I have no interest in dissecting them further. You mean this definition?... Definition of atheism noun [mass noun] disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. If you had bothered to read the lower part of post#22 it should have all made sense to you by now I am neither an atheist agnostic, nor a theist agnostic, 'not knowing' means precisely that. You're still confusing knowledge with belief. The difference is explained clearly in post #22 There is no need to deviate one way or the other. There is no need, it is just a state of being. Belief is an absolute, a binary thing. You either DO or you DON'T have belief in God or gods. You DON'T have belief in gods, in addition to this you don't think anyone can know if God/s do or don't exist (belief and knowledge). Thus you are an agnostic atheist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 I am neither an atheist agnostic, nor a theist agnostic So you don't know what you believe? This is like a multiple choice question with only two possible answers, and you deciding what the correct answer is, and still failing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 RootsBooster. I don't know if you are being deliberately obtuse here, but let me try one more time to get it over to you. I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in your views on the particular semantics of religious or atheist theology. Do I make myself clear? you are beginning to bore me excreta less with your interminable explanations of things I do not want explaining. It appears to have escaped your attention, but I did explain, that not only am I agnostic but I am a true agnostic in that I do not tend toward either side of atheist or theist. There is no way mankind will ever be able to prove the case either way. Therefore, it is a total waste of time speculating. Now, I asked a question about Buddhism previously, that I am interested in, anyone able to supply the requested information? ---------- Post added 18-04-2013 at 22:20 ---------- So you don't know what you believe? This is like a multiple choice question with only two possible answers, and you deciding what the correct answer is, and still failing. Oh dear me we've got another one here now. What part of agnostic don't you get? Only two possible answers? Well lets see, if I answer yes I believe in God that would make me a Theist wouldn't it? And not an agnostic. On the other hand if I were to answer no it would make me an Atheist wouldn't it? And not an agnostic. The clue quisquose is in the fact that there are actually THREE choices not two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 RootsBooster. I don't know if you are being deliberately obtuse here, but let me try one more time to get it over to you. I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in your views on the particular semantics of religious or atheist theology. Do I make myself clear? you are beginning to bore me excreta less with your interminable explanations of things I do not want explaining. It appears to have escaped your attention, but I did explain, that not only am I agnostic but I am a true agnostic in that I do not tend toward either side of atheist or theist. There is no way mankind will ever be able to prove the case either way. Therefore, it is a total waste of time speculating. Now, I asked a question about Buddhism previously, that I am interested in, anyone able to supply the requested information? I am able to answer the question. The scriptures state (without dealing with the subject as a topic in and of itself) that the universe is beginningless. As far as I am aware there is no explanation as to how life first began, such information is irrelevant to the Buddhist path of practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 RootsBooster. I don't know if you are being deliberately obtuse here, but let me try one more time to get it over to you. I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in your views on the particular semantics of religious or atheist theology. Do I make myself clear? you are beginning to bore me excreta less with your interminable explanations of things I do not want explaining. It appears to have escaped your attention, but I did explain, that not only am I agnostic but I am a true agnostic in that I do not tend toward either side of atheist or theist. There is no way mankind will ever be able to prove the case either way. Therefore, it is a total waste of time speculating. You're still not getting it. Belief isn't about speculating, a belief is something you are convinced of and accept. You either have it or you don't, there's no middle ground. I agree that it is pointless to speculate, if I was to accurately label myself I would be an agnostic atheist apatheist. Agnostic - I think nothing can be known about the nature or existence of any gods Atheist - I do not have a belief in any gods Apatheist - It doesn't matter to me if any gods exist You might not like it and I suggest that if you don't want to be "bored" by me you are free to leave the thread, just as I am free to continue posting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 I am able to answer the question. The scriptures state (without dealing with the subject as a topic in and of itself) that the universe is beginningless. As far as I am aware there is no explanation as to how life first began. That's interesting I will look into that when I have more time. Although I am not religious I have a soft spot for certain religions which seem to me to have a gentleness about them. Buddhists & Quackers always seem as though they at least have their hearts in the right place. I was raised a Catholic but was always a natural agnostic. I can recall as a child of about 12 sitting in religious education classes thinking 'you've got to be having us on here'. It became clear to me very quickly that questioning the teaching was not a good idea. Those were the days of corporal punishment, as it was known or violence against minors, as it actually was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Oh dear me we've got another one here now. What part of agnostic don't you get? Only two possible answers? Well lets see, if I answer yes I believe in God that would make me a Theist wouldn't it? And not an agnostic. On the other hand if I were to answer no it would make me an Atheist wouldn't it? And not an agnostic. The clue quisquose is in the fact that there are actually THREE choices not two. No, it's not a "third" choice. The positions of gnostic and agnostic run parallel/in addition to the positions of theist and atheist, they do not replace them. Gnosticism deals with knowledge, what we may know or not know, theism deals with belief, what we believe or don't believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Oh dear me we've got another one here now. What part of agnostic don't you get? Hiya mjw. Here comes yet another one. The long and short of it so far is that you are using words you have misconceived the meaning of and, when knowleadgeable posters are attempting to put you right, you are sticking your metaphorical fingers in your metaphorical ears instead of doing what the truly open-minded would do - checking your facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 How can you self identify as someone who has a lack of belief in something? In the same way as I can identify with being a non-murderer, or a non-meat eater, or a non-gerbil lover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 You're still not getting it. Belief isn't about speculating, a belief is something you are convinced of and accept. You either have it or you don't, there's no middle ground. I agree that it is pointless to speculate, if I was to accurately label myself I would be an agnostic atheist apatheist. Agnostic - I think nothing can be known about the nature or existence of any gods Atheist - I do not have a belief in any gods Apatheist - It doesn't matter to me if any gods exist You might not like it and I suggest that if you don't want to be "bored" by me you are free to leave the thread, just as I am free to continue posting Keep posting by all means, you obviously find yourself interesting, & that's a good thing if it keeps you from annoying other innocent people, I shall look upon it as my good deed for the day. as to leaving the thread I think I'll make my own mind up about that if it's OK with you. And although loath to admit it, you appear to have actually come up with something I find mildly interesting. YES I KNOW! who'd have thought it! If you are correct in the spelling & definition of Apatheist (spell check says not, maybe close enough?) The etymology of that word would appear to be connected to Apathetic? Feel free to continue, I shall feel free to ignore where appropriate. ---------- Post added 18-04-2013 at 23:26 ---------- Hiya mjw. Here comes yet another one. The long and short of it so far is that you are using words you have misconceived the meaning of and, when knowleadgeable posters are attempting to put you right, you are sticking your metaphorical fingers in your metaphorical ears instead of doing what the truly open-minded would do - checking your facts. And what none of you appear able to grasp, is that I have no interest in being 'educated' about a subject which is complete & utter tripe. As I keep trying to get across to the seemingly terminal obtuse, if there is no way of knowing, then the exercise is mind numbingly pointless. What possible advantage can there be in having a complete grasp of the intricacies of a fairy story? If someone on this thread was attempting to put me right on the nuances of the Jedi belief system as opposed to the Klingon religion & I expressed a certain disinterest in their efforts would you be on here asking me to 'open my mind'? Well, hate to break it to you my friend, but every single religion & non religious belief on the face of this planet was dreamed up in the mind of man. Just like those science fiction story's. None of which proves whether or not a Creator exists or doesn't exist. Which is why I am an agnostic. I do not KNOW, & the truth is of course, that neither does anyone else no matter what they may claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.