Fed up of non believers

[ivanava]

 

 

Gnostic from the Greek gnosis is one single word meaning knowledge and only that. You have chosen to add in a connation that does not apply to the word itself. Various religious groups have used the word Gnostic in particular the Syrian-Egyptian theists.

 

The word does not however belong to them, and should not be used only when referencing them.

 

The IRA do not own the word Provisional, you cannot own a word in common usage and contained in a dictionary.

 

And I think we are all aware of the meaning of esoteric, it doesn't apply here.

 

From the Greek, 'a' = without + gnostic = knowledge.

 

Very simple and straightforward really.

 

---------- Post added 04-03-2014 at 10:11 ----------

 

 

You really have not been paying any attention at all have you?

 

I do not know what is behind the wall, but I am willing to concede that there may be something behind the wall. And also willing to concede that there may be nothing behind the wall, understand?

 

Atheists believe, without any proof, that there is nothing behind the wall.

 

Theists believe, without any proof, that there is something behind the wall.

 

Agnostics concede that they do not know what is behind the wall, and require proof before accepting that they know.

 

'a' = without + gnostic = knowledge.

 

I'm quite happy with that definition of the word gnostic, the problem you have though is if you call your self agnostic, you are in fact claiming to have no knowledge, which is clearly ridiculous, because it is clear that you do have some knowledge. So when we use the word in relation to God we are in fact being quite specific about the knowledge you lack.

[boyfriday]

Not a mystery at all. They exist, they are proven to exist...like Australia, never been but I know it's there.

 

..and you'd fall off the edge of the earth if you ever tried

 

---------- Post added 04-03-2014 at 12:34 ----------

 

How is the force of spirituality measured

ABV

and what are its units?

 

Single or a double.

[ivanava]

 

 

 

You really have not been paying any attention at all have you?

 

I do not know what is behind the wall, but I am willing to concede that there may be something behind the wall. And also willing to concede that there may be nothing behind the wall, understand?

 

Atheists believe, without any proof, that there is nothing behind the wall.

 

Theists believe, without any proof, that there is something behind the wall.

Agnostics concede that they do not know what is behind the wall, and require proof before accepting that they know.

 

'a' = without + gnostic = knowledge.

 

No they don't, some theists have all the proof they need, and some do in fact believe without proof.

 

Some atheists have all the proof they need, and some don't deny the possibility of a God but don't currently believe that it exists because they have no proof of its existence.

 

---------- Post added 04-03-2014 at 12:41 ----------

 

Yes, but ivanana said that she/he 'knows' that claims knowledge, and to assert that you have knowledge of a subject can and does demand proof.

 

Had the claim been 'believe' then that would have been fine.

 

But they said they knew.

 

I hope they do otherwise my dreams of amassing a fortune are looking bleak.

 

I know God doesn't exist for the same reasons that I know that elephants aren't going to stampede out of my ass. I don't believe that elephants aren't going to stampede out of my ass, I know it as an indisputable fact. But I couldn't prove it to someone that is willing to believe that it's possible.

 

---------- Post added 04-03-2014 at 12:44 ----------

 

Those who says they merely believe what they see must find the operation of their TV, radio and microwave, to give just a few examples, a mystery as they do not accept the existence of the invisible waves received or generated by these devices that full the rooms where they are sitting. In truth, what appears as space is full of elecromagnetic waves and who knows what else that is outside our limited range of perception. Consider how easily we accept invisible forces like gravity and magnetism - early physicists who rejected Newton's idea of an invisible force of gravity considered it to be too occult-like. We have seen a similar reaction to the forces encountered in Spiritualism.

 

Interesting paragraph, why do we only believe what we can see ...I am open minded

 

We don't, I believe in lots of things that I haven't seen, but the most important thing for that belief is that they have to be possible.

Edited March 4, 2014 by ivanava

[danot]

Until some evidence is presented, we should act as if no god exists.

 

That's the same with all of our understandings of the universe. The current theory is good until more evidence is discovered and we need a new theory. At the moment there is simply no evidence for anything like a god as described in any of the myriad religions we've made up.

So assume that they're all rubbish and get on with your life. Anything else is just wish fulfilment.

But the current theory is nothing more than an alternative nonsensical explanation for why the universe exists without any apparent beginning or cause. To accept the notion that something can exist without having gone through an initial stage of formation and not requiring a cause is stupidity to the extreme and equally ridiculous as any belief in creationism. I don't accept that there are certain things that exist without cause, in my personal opinion, nothing could and that includes -Gods and the universe.

Edited March 4, 2014 by danot

[janie48]

It's called a joke janie48, at the expense of a community I'm part of-don't think any of them would take it too grievously

 

Didn't you know...Religion and hoomer dunt mix.

[skinz]

 

Sorry janie, I stand corrected and you quite rightly put me in my place..

 

 

5:50

 

also..

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV5m77_HHKw

 

Without religious humour and satire our lives would be overwhelmed with oppression.

Edited March 4, 2014 by skinz

[salsafan]

..........

 

Gnostic means relating to knowledge, especially esoteric mystical knowledge.

Esoteric means intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest: esoteric philosophical debates

 

So you are right that Agnostic is someone without knowledge.

The Pope could be referred to as a Gnostic theist because he as esoteric knowledge.

Bob from down the pub believes in God for no reason other than he just believes, would be a Agnostic theist, because he has no Esoteric knowledge but still believes.

 

The same would apply for atheist, your professor friend would be an Gnostic atheist because he has Esoteric knowledge but still doesn't believe that God exists.

 

If Bob changed his mind without acquiring any Esoteric knowledge he would be an agnostic atheist.

 

So you can see that Agnostic simply means you have no Esoteric knowledge, and doesn't describe your belief or lack of belief in God.

Never asks questions. I just know that I am a Taoist. If pushed, I like to 'want' to be a practising Taoist.

 

A searcher or a believer can continually practise the belief and to also seek answers. So what do you define one of those then ? The time factor actually push out the above definition, cos a person is not static or monolithic in their beliefs throughout their entire life.

 

It really is also not a case of "I chose to be one". Some people know intrinsically that they are a believer. Maybe the word "know" do not do it justice.

 

At the end of the day, these terms are actually a form of deduction and classification for Man to understand the world around him but nothing more. To me, it is rewriting new ideas based on old ideas, and rewording it to make Man feel better. In reality, those ideas are too hard to grasp and a human's mind is probably much more simpler than that alone.

 

It is also said that if Man thinks too much, by spiritual standard he is actually a "possessed" person. There is also a biological effect on his own body too, because he is pushing it to its extreme of what it could possibly do. Stephen Hawkins is one good example. Also his words were that modern day Philosophy has not kept up with "science", but if you actually studied theology, science came from religion to begin with. He has come around in full circle, and he is just paraphrasing what had been done before,, and fail to acknowledge and accept what was known or practised years before his knowledge discovery.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking

 

It is all very silly when you think about it.

 

---------- Post added 04-03-2014 at 14:07 ----------

 

Gravity and magnetism can both be measured (and directly observed). How is the force of spirituality measured and what are its units?

 

jb

 

Dr Emoto !

 

http://www.masaru-emoto.net/english/water-crystal.html

 

His experiment is a simple one. Say good words actually has an impact to your environment. So, be good to people. Cos you will affect their energies also. As a human body is made up of 80% of water, and why do people "feel" stressed ?

[ivanava]

But the current theory is nothing more than an alternative nonsensical explanation for why the universe exists without any apparent beginning or cause. To accept the notion that something can exist without having gone through an initial stage of formation and not requiring a cause is stupidity to the extreme and equally ridiculous as any belief in creationism. I don't accept that there are certain things that exist without cause, in my personal opinion, nothing could and that includes -Gods and the universe.

 

Why do you think that something needs a cause? and why are you assuming that nothing was more likely than something?

 

When you are presented with only two possibilities, one or the other will be the default position, so why are you finding it so difficult to consider that something is the default position.

[mjw47]

No mate. Theists speculate there is a god - and BELIEVE it to be true. I find no good reason to believe their guesswork(god existing); so I have an absence or lack of belief in god: making me atheist. I could speculate, but because I don't know, I don't assert or believe my guesswork to be true.

 

That doesn't make sense to me I'm afraid.

 

You say that you don't believe theists speculation, I have no problem accepting that. But your following statement takes some believing, are you saying that you have never given a thought to what the alternative is?

 

In the absence of something there must be nothing, agreed?

 

You have come to the conclusion that as the theists are wrong, there must be nothing, yes?

 

However, you cannot prove that is true can you?

 

Therefore, it is a conclusion you have reached without evidential proof. That is known as a supposition, a guess, or a belief.

 

You are an atheist because you 'Believe' that there is nothing.

 

I don't believe it is possible to hold a point of view without some thought process taking place, once that has happened then you have either learned the truth ,or come to an opinion which you feel is the most probable, but without actual positive proof it is only your belief.

[skinz]

science came from religion to begin with.

 

That's because the church stifled education outside its own parameters. Science didn't come from religion it came from educated individuals within the church who benefited. If the population at the time had access to the luxury of education rather than the limitations imposed then science may have took an even greater leap forward. Church and state would have non of that as ignorance is a useful tool when subjugating a populous...still goes on today sadly...even in this country, albeit subtle.