Bible - Fiction?

[RootsBooster]

I wasn't talking about me, I was talking about the position of an agnostic theist.

Yes, although in my opinion its an odd position, I believe that God exists but I have no idea what it is, what it can do or whether it actually exists.

You might want to make it a bit clearer next time then, it looks like you're stating your own position

But you asked, so I will answer.

I describe my self as ignostic because whether I believe in God rather depends on the definition of God being used.

In my opinion ignosticism (in theism) is a redundant position, the position of "there's no unified definition for me to make a decision on" falls pretty flat because there's no need for a unified definition of something for you to be able to come to a conclusion about it.

 

---------- Post added 19-12-2013 at 17:25 ----------

 

And the chair- how did that come about, please?

 

from many contributing factors

[SnailyBoy]

And the chair- how did that come about, please?

 

We know who makes chairs, you can actually go and see someone make a chair.

[RootsBooster]

Lets not forget Atheist control has a relatively short history of which to judge from.

Take into account the legacy of atheist tyranny and control in the last century and now North Korea, before you start talking about "opium"

 

With regard to your views on education "now with good education" get a little more education yourself, and do some research.

You could start by reading which Professor of Physics it was who proposed the "Big Bang Theory" as has been mentioned by mjw47 on a previous post for instance.

 

The insinuation that because you are an atheist your own level of intelligence must rate higher then those who aren't, demonstrates ignorance in my opinion.

 

Shame on you Janie, trying to pull the "Evil atheist overlords" card. You know full well that no tyrants have ever committed atrocities in the name of atheism. The fact that they didn't believe in gods is simply a coincidence, as you well know.

[Jeffrey Shaw]

We know who makes chairs, you can actually go and see someone make a chair.

So you would not agree that they're manufactured unless you yourself could see the process? How naive.

[SnailyBoy]

So you would not agree that they're manufactured unless you yourself could see the process? How naive.

 

Not at all, evidence supports the fact that chairs are manufactured.

[Jeffrey Shaw]

Not at all, evidence supports the fact that chairs are manufactured.

Good start. So an inanimate chair must have been created deliberately; whereas living creatures...?

[janie48]

Shame on you Janie, trying to pull the "Evil atheist overlords" card. You know full well that no tyrants have ever committed atrocities in the name of atheism. The fact that they didn't believe in gods is simply a coincidence, as you well know.

I'm not pulling any "evil atheists card" I'm referring to the atrocities they have committed in order to ban religion,

They are the same as the religious tyrannical leaders in history, those that some of you atheists like to keep referring to.

Both act the same, in their greed for power and domination and both will suffer the same fate.

[mjw47]

Your analogy makes no relevant sense. Are you saying (in a drawn-out way) that there's a weather prediction and you have to either believe it's true or believe it's not true, but can't simply be without belief?

 

 

There's no belief required in atheism

 

 

That can happen, or it could just be that there's not enough reason or evidence to form a belief.

 

 

What makes you think this?

 

OK lets make it as simple as possible.

 

Christianity

Judaism

Buddhism

Hinduism

Islam

Sikhism

 

All of the above are described as Beliefs. They are correctly defined in that way because whilst each of them holds a view as to God, none of them can actually prove the existence of such a being.

 

Therefore ,what they have is a Belief, as opposed to a Truth.

 

Atheism

 

The Belief that there is no God.

 

Once again we come up against the little matter of Proof.

There is none. In exactly the same way that religions cannot prove their beliefs neither can Atheism.

 

Admittedly, it's a far more basic premise requiring a minimum of thought process, but that is still all it is, a Belief.

 

Atheism makes a statement as to the existence of God - admittedly only a brief one - it is therefore in the realms of theology as opposed to Truth.

 

Atheists are believers, just negative ones .

[SnailyBoy]

OK lets make it as simple as possible.

 

Christianity

Judaism

Buddhism

Hinduism

Islam

Sikhism

 

All of the above are described as Beliefs. They are correctly defined in that way because whilst each of them holds a view as to God, none of them can actually prove the existence of such a being.

 

Therefore ,what they have is a Belief, as opposed to a Truth.

 

Atheism

 

The Belief that there is no God.

 

Once again we come up against the little matter of Proof.

There is none. In exactly the same way that religions cannot prove their beliefs neither can Atheism.

 

Admittedly, it's a far more basic premise requiring a minimum of thought process, but that is still all it is, a Belief.

 

Atheism makes a statement as to the existence of God - admittedly only a brief one - it is therefore in the realms of theology as opposed to Truth.

 

Atheists are believers, just negative ones .

 

Actually if we're talking definitions, an Atheist is someone who isn't a Theist. Also the lack of belief is with all gods.

[angos]

And the chair- how did that come about, please?

 

Billions upon billions of random events over billions of years.

 

---------- Post added 19-12-2013 at 18:04 ----------

 

You might want to make it a bit clearer next time then, it looks like you're stating your own position.

The first part of the sentence made it clear.

No, an agnostic is of the position that nothing can be known about the existence of god/s. They can still believe or not believe.

 

Yes, although in my opinion its an odd position, I believe that God exists but I have no idea what it is, what it can do or whether it actually exists.

 

 

 

In my opinion ignosticism (in theism) is a redundant position, the position of "there's no unified definition for me to make a decision on" falls pretty flat because there's no need for a unified definition of something for you to be able to come to a conclusion about it.

In my opinion one can't decide whether something exists before knowing what the something is. So it leaves ignostic, for those people that have given it some thought, and atheist for those that aren't interested.