Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The part that says they wrote as they were inspired by God to write shouldn't be given any credence, then?
Not all atheists have faith that there is no God, merely lack faith that there is. Subtle distinction, but important.
Well, no one thinks he literally penned it, but he did inspire the men to write as they did--at least that's what the Bible itself states and that's what the church has ratified. Of course, everything we think we know in life could be an illusion.I'm sympathetic with my fellow believers but I'm also honest. If you are referring to 2 Timothy, the authentication of which is in dispute, then that writer was giving his or her opinion about the OT as the NT wasn't yet in existence like we know it today. Even still we can call the Bible inspired by events, but that doesn't mean written by God.
I'm one of those people who think the bible is mostly man made containing many mistakes, revisions etc. But it's all that remains of those distant days so we are left to draw our own conclusions from it. I take it cafiteria style.Well, no one thinks he literally penned it, but he did inspire the men to write as they did--at least that's what the Bible itself states and that's what the church has ratified. Of course, everything we think we know in life could be an illusion.
Meaning, I'd think, that they're embarrassed about being thought to be Atheists.
By the way, what would such Atheists say that the word "Agnostic" refers to, if not what they themselves believe??
If you're without a belief in God, you believe that there is none. If you are unsure, you are Agnostic.
If you're without a belief in God, you believe that there is none.
If you are unsure, you are Agnostic.
That's what I would think. Because if you had knowledge of God you couldn't disbelieve, and there is no way of knowing that there is no God.
Why would the word "gnostic" be part of that? It seems superfluous, but more than that, it seems incorrect since "gnostic" derives from one who has knowledge, but it's not possible to "know" that there is no God, merely that you don't believe there is one (or several or many).
Which is what I was thinking. The answer to the previous question we talked about depends largely about what each of us thinks the Bible is. If it is NOT thought to be divinely inspired, there can't be much of an objection to viewing its contents as one would do with any other historic document.I'm one of those people who think the bible is mostly man made containing many mistakes, revisions etc. But it's all that remains of those distant days so we are left to dew our own conclusions from it. I take it cafiteria style.
A = without, Theist = believer in God.
I am without belief in God.
But that isn't the same as I believe there is no God.
See the difference?
Agnostic usually referring to a lack of knowledge, which would mean I'm also agnostic.
A gnostic atheist would be someone who positively declares that there is no God.
You see, I think that defines an Agnostic, not an Atheist.Incorrect. You are changing my assertion. I have no reason to believe there is no God, but I also have no reason to believe there is one. Lacking any belief at all doesn't mean I believe either way.
It's not that. In this case as with others, I feel it best to go with the dictionary definition of words. Precision in language seems to be important to me. However, I now know that there are a variety of terms used by self-described Atheists in order to make distinctions they think are necessary.It's a differentiation that you don't seem to like.
I have the feeling that "seeker" isn't the best description of your position.I wonder if we can make a sticky thread about the definitions of "atheist" and "agnostic". This "ah, you don´t make a positive assertion, so you are not an atheist" nonsense (which is also completely irrelevant and off-topic) shows up in every second thread. It´s tiresome.
Your personal feelings are irrelevant here.I have the feeling that "seeker" isn't the best description of your position.
No. It´s quite an ok day for me.Having a bad day today?
You see, I think that defines an Agnostic, not an Atheist.
It's not that. In this case as with others, I feel it best to go with the dictionary definition of words. Precision in language seems to be important to me. However, I now know that there are a variety of terms used by self-described Atheists in order to make distinctions they think are necessary.
A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods
That'll do.
It's impossible for the rejection of God to be out of reason, because there is no reason that proposes the universe could have come from anything else.
It's not that. In this case as with others, I feel it best to go with the dictionary definition of words. Precision in language seems to be important to me. However, I now know that there are a variety of terms used by self-described Atheists in order to make distinctions they think are necessary.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?