PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Mar 5, 2017 21:26:25 GMT
JD I thought you believed there is no correct definitions? I didn't say anything about correct definitions above. You seemed to be implying there is a correct definition, I guess I was wrong. Either way you are committing the Etymological fallacy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2017 21:36:22 GMT
I didn't say anything about correct definitions above. You seemed to be implying there is a correct definition, I guess I was wrong. Either way you are committing the Etymological fallacy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacyInternet has made evolution of knowledge, languages, theories, meanings so fast that it is very hard to stay up to date, and each day you see a new version of the data/information. How does one keep up?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 5, 2017 21:41:08 GMT
I didn't say anything about correct definitions above. You seemed to be implying there is a correct definition, I guess I was wrong. Either way you are committing the Etymological fallacy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacyI explicitly talked about conventional educated definitions a number of times. And I said nothing about those being the conventional educated definitions because of their etymology. In other words, I didn't say that the etymology was causal to those being the conventional educated defniitions. They're the conventional educated definitions because that's the way they're used conventionally in academic contexts. In that context, they haven't drifted from reason the words were coined as they were.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Mar 5, 2017 21:50:23 GMT
Internet has made evolution of knowledge, languages, theories, meanings so fast that it is very hard to stay up to date, and each day you see a new version of the data/information. How does one keep up?
Not easily, that's for sure.
|
|
vomisacaasi
Sophomore
@vomisacaasi
Posts: 186
Likes: 44
|
Post by vomisacaasi on Mar 5, 2017 21:50:35 GMT
One who does not believe in the existence of a god or gods. Put it this way : if somebody says to you "Do you believe god exists?" and you truthfully answer "Yes", you are a theist. If you truthfully answer with anything else, you are an atheist.No. I can say "I don't know" and that makes me an agnostic. I refuse to be classified as an atheist, in case i get fried in hell for denying Divine Grace and Providence Looks like I am going to have to break it to you again. Based on that answer you are an atheist. You can refuse anything you like but if god of the bible, the one you do not want to deny, exists your answer of I do not know will get you burned in hell as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2017 21:57:56 GMT
No. I can say "I don't know" and that makes me an agnostic. I refuse to be classified as an atheist, in case i get fried in hell for denying Divine Grace and Providence Looks like I am going to have to break it to you again. Based on that answer you are an atheist. You can refuse anything you like but if god of the bible, the one you do not want to deny, exists your answer of I do not know will get you burned in hell as well. really? Do you have any quotes?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 5, 2017 22:00:47 GMT
|
|
vomisacaasi
Sophomore
@vomisacaasi
Posts: 186
Likes: 44
|
Post by vomisacaasi on Mar 5, 2017 22:02:25 GMT
Looks like I am going to have to break it to you again. Based on that answer you are an atheist. You can refuse anything you like but if god of the bible, the one you do not want to deny, exists your answer of I do not know will get you burned in hell as well. really? Do you have any quotes? You bet. tinyurl.com/whyyourgoingtohell
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2017 22:05:36 GMT
Click here to buy TheBibleGateway.com for your website name!
|
|
vomisacaasi
Sophomore
@vomisacaasi
Posts: 186
Likes: 44
|
Post by vomisacaasi on Mar 5, 2017 22:35:40 GMT
Yeah I entered the wrong url. Hopefully you get my point. If you claim you do not then you are what I expect you are.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2017 22:42:16 GMT
Yeah I entered the wrong url. Hopefully you get my point. If you claim you do not then you are what I expect you are. Ok whatever
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Mar 5, 2017 23:43:49 GMT
Think of it like this: if I say I'm an "atheist" all that really tells you is I don't believe in God. If I say I'm an "agnostic atheist," you'd probably take that to mean that I don't believe in God, but I'm not certain that he doesn't exist. I don't know how you can claim that this hasn't moved your understanding of my belief forward. Now, it's still somewhat ambiguous because it doesn't tell you HOW sure I am, which is one reason I like Dawkins's probability scale posted above. We could be much more precise by eliminating the terms and just telling each other of how sure of God's (non-)existence we are. If you change "agnostic" to refer to "I'm not certain," then we've lost the term for "knowledge is not possible." Do we invent a new term for the view that knowledge about it isn't possible, then, or maybe call those folks "agnostic agnostic atheist agnostics" or something? Do we really need a term for the view that knowledge of God is impossible? It just seems to be one of many potential qualifiers explaining why someone is a theist or atheist, in fact one of many that would be unsupported by evidence.
|
|
islandmur
Sophomore
All religions have messages of peace and love yet all religions are used for wars and hatred...
@islandmur
Posts: 320
Likes: 180
|
Post by islandmur on Mar 6, 2017 1:22:00 GMT
Did you actuallly read what I wrote? Because you seem to have reworded my statement and proceeded to critisize me at the same time. I don;t see how you could have thought I reworded your statements. Belief in Gd can easily and routinely have skepticism to the pint that one can say they believe in God but show they don;t by their actions ror stop worshipping altogether. In short, it is very easy to be an agnostic theist. People do it all the time. If you said the same thing as this than I apologize for misunderstanding. Well you've moved the point I was trying to make. I was refering to the part where I said anything in religion could be doubted (you went on about things people doubted in religion). Of course people refer to themselves as agnostic theist the term as I stated in my very first reply. I do not dispute what people call themselves. People also call themselves christians while acting in a way that belies that statement all the time. (this board is full of exemples). What I am arguing against is that people who refer to themselves as such, if they really do believe in the existence of god, are mistaken in applying that label to themselves. While I can not prove the existence of a higher power to you or anyone else, my personal belief in his exsistence is 100%, I do not have doubts about wheter he is real or not. My knowledge may down the road be proven wrong since it's personal knowledge. But haven't many scientific knowledges change over the years also as proofs were given and discovered or reworked? Science is not static what is believed today may not be what is believed tomorrow because of new discoveries new methods...
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Mar 6, 2017 12:04:02 GMT
If you change "agnostic" to refer to "I'm not certain," then we've lost the term for "knowledge is not possible." Do we invent a new term for the view that knowledge about it isn't possible, then, or maybe call those folks "agnostic agnostic atheist agnostics" or something? Do we really need a term for the view that knowledge of God is impossible? It just seems to be one of many potential qualifiers explaining why someone is a theist or atheist, in fact one of many that would be unsupported by evidence. Well, it's a view that quite a few people have, and it's handy to have a term that represents the view rather than having to explain it every time it comes up. How would someone who believes that knowledge about gods isn't possible be a theist or atheist in your view?
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 6, 2017 12:14:23 GMT
I don;t see how you could have thought I reworded your statements. Belief in Gd can easily and routinely have skepticism to the pint that one can say they believe in God but show they don;t by their actions ror stop worshipping altogether. In short, it is very easy to be an agnostic theist. People do it all the time. If you said the same thing as this than I apologize for misunderstanding. Well you've moved the point I was trying to make. I was refering to the part where I said anything in religion could be doubted (you went on about things people doubted in religion). Of course people refer to themselves as agnostic theist the term as I stated in my very first reply. I do not dispute what people call themselves. People also call themselves christians while acting in a way that belies that statement all the time. (this board is full of exemples). What I am arguing against is that people who refer to themselves as such, if they really do believe in the existence of god, are mistaken in applying that label to themselves. While I can not prove the existence of a higher power to you or anyone else, my personal belief in his exsistence is 100%, I do not have doubts about wheter he is real or not. My knowledge may down the road be proven wrong since it's personal knowledge. But haven't many scientific knowledges change over the years also as proofs were given and discovered or reworked? Science is not static what is believed today may not be what is believed tomorrow because of new discoveries new methods... I think the notion of doubt within the religion was more significant than the doubt ones have outside the religion. It is a foregone conclusion that if people are not in religion there would be doubt, but from your words, it seemed that you thought the religious could not have doubt so, as a religious person, I wanted to counter that. It's the duck scenario. You are a thing if you meet the criteria so the possibility of doubting God exists among the religious is a thing. There are tons of people who are religious solely for the cultural significance of it and either don't follow or believe God as laid out by their religion which could make them agnostic or even atheist. This is true as well, but it is the sign of a person who has faith (Although I would argue that faith is not based on the individual, but on the information.)
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Mar 6, 2017 20:24:58 GMT
Hey, CoolJGS☺ , how did you manage to copy mur's avatar, timestamp, and linked name the second time? I've been trying to figure out if there's a way to do that on here and finally gave up.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 6, 2017 20:59:20 GMT
Hey, CoolJGS☺ , how did you manage to copy mur's avatar, timestamp, and linked name the second time? I've been trying to figure out if there's a way to do that on here and finally gave up. I have no idea how I did that.
I think I just hit reply.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Mar 6, 2017 21:04:24 GMT
Hey, CoolJGS☺ , how did you manage to copy mur's avatar, timestamp, and linked name the second time? I've been trying to figure out if there's a way to do that on here and finally gave up. I have no idea how I did that.
I think I just hit reply.
I was afraid you'd say that. I've tried to do it but it seemed impossible to copy the original quote with the avatar/timestamp/name... until I just saw your post where somehow it's on there twice. See, if I try to copy yours all I get is this:
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Mar 6, 2017 21:43:56 GMT
How has this topic managed to go on for seven pages? I am too lazy at the moment to read through all the comments, but let the record show that I am an agnostic atheist. As most atheists are. Meaning, I believe there are no gods, but of course I do not pretend to know with absolute certainty. This makes me an agnostic. However, I do believe with a great deal of certainty that deities cannot exist. This makes me an atheist.
There is no conflict between agnosticism and atheism. Or theism, for that matter. Gnosticism/agnosticism has to do with how one relates to the concept of knowledge, whereas theism/atheism has to do with how one relates to the concept of gods. Why should they not be compatible?
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Mar 6, 2017 22:33:54 GMT
How has this topic managed to go on for seven pages? Because people don't get how language works.[/thread]
|
|