GIT, this is becoming ridiculous waste of both our time. Again I ask you to cite where I have implied or stated I was a theist. By using your falacious logic I could likewise state that doubting agnosticism is a reality check as you have yet to prove Christianity or any form of theism is a 'delusion' for that matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gettin' In Tune  Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaius There is doubt amongs almost all Christians. Most of the great fathers of the faith have said that its what makes faith grow. When I find my way through doubt I usually find that my faith is stronger than ever. Faith by defenition excludes proof. Its part of His will that wants to make us truly free creatures with a decision to love since love cannot work coercively. By choice it becomes magical. | Vinterland, do you believe in this or reality?
When you doubt your faith it is called a reality check. Why do you see it differently? |
Quote:
Originally Posted by epicureious Quote:
Originally Posted by Searcher
There is not supposed to be any middle ground. If you believe in Jesus and his teachings, you must also accept that he claimed Divinity. If you don't agree with me on that point, then I think you need to go read the Bible. If you accept that, accepting the existence of God must be a given.
| Apparently there is middle ground. People don't always fit into nice categories they are supposed to. |
Yep, and weak theism and atheism is as much a middle ground as agnosticism is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gettin' In Tune Agnosticism claims that mysticism and the supernatural are inherently unknowable or not known at the present.
Today's sloppy and watered-down version of agnosticism means: *shrug shoulders* and state, "well God could exist or God could not, but I really do not know." Even this sloppy version of agnosticism does not fit Vinterland's position. |
I've stated it time and time again, my definition is from Huxley himself:
"That it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can provide evidence which logically justifies that certainty. This is what agnosticism asserts and in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism. ["Agnosticism and Christianity," 1889]"
Show me where in any definition, it is required that one must be a "gnostic" in order to be a theist.
Your own words:
Quote:
|
My road to atheism was not smooth sailing. I do not have doubt because I do not believe. I have simplified the creation of the cosmos into two choices:the universe has a natural explanation or it does not. I am agnostic in the sense that it is possible that there is a supernatural explanation of the universe. I am skeptical, but cannot claim for certain. If by chance the cosmos were created by a supernatural entity, then this entity is currently beyond our comprehension. It is probably nothing like our projections.
|
Your own definition matches Huxley's. Your own dogmatic beliefs demonstrate that one can be "agnostic towards a deistic God"(paraphrasing your own words) and also be fanatical about belief in another God-concept, the Christian god. In that aspect, you are not agnostic.
An agnostic atheist/theist is simply defined as one who lack/has belief and possesses the knowledge that God is currently unknowable. Believing in God does not require some form of gnosis if one realises they ar emere assumptions.
Linear Mode
