God for atheists, agnostics, doubters, religious humanists and others

Thomas said:
But, Quirkybird, you're just the other extreme, you assume the Bible can only be read literally, and then proceed to judge it accordingly. You're not different in that regard.
Click to expand...


So you how else do you interpret it then?
 
I imagine every cook reads a cookbook a little differently. If I read a 'how to' book, it requires much more than reason to really begin to understand it.
 
voiceofwood said:
I think you are an agnostic, not an atheist. An Atheist believes there is no god, an agnostic, occupies the logical position, not believing there is nor believing there is no god
Click to expand...

I believe there is no God. To my understanding, an agnostic claims you can't know whether there is a God or not*. True, you can't know anything, with absolute certainty. I've been wrong before, I'll be wrong again. I could be wrong about God, but I don't think so. My non-belief is 99.9%, so I call myself an atheist. I would have to bring it closer to 50% to call myself agnostic.

The only things that distinguishes me from some of the better known atheists is that I don't care to argue about it. (Conversation is another matter.) And I think I "get" spirituality, although mine is a non-theistic one.

But if you still want to think of me as agnostic go ahead. It's close enough.

*From Merriam Webster dictionary online: agnostic: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the non-existence of God or a god.
 
"And I think I "get" spirituality, although mine is a non-theistic one."

--> Then we should call you a humanist.
 
Marcialou said:
I believe there is no God. To my understanding, an agnostic claims you can't know whether there is a God or not*. True, you can't know anything, with absolute certainty. I've been wrong before, I'll be wrong again. I could be wrong about God, but I don't think so. My non-belief is 99.9%, so I call myself an atheist. I would have to bring it closer to 50% to call myself agnostic.

The only things that distinguishes me from some of the better known atheists is that I don't care to argue about it. (Conversation is another matter.) And I think I "get" spirituality, although mine is a non-theistic one.

But if you still want to think of me as agnostic go ahead. It's close enough.

*From Merriam Webster dictionary online: agnostic: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the non-existence of God or a god.
Click to expand...

Ok, I had misread you
 
Quirkybird said:
So how do you reason the deity is good, when the deeds supposedly attributed to it are bad?
Click to expand...

You're questions are always too open for a reasonable answer, and you bring a lot of preconceptions into the discussion that are self-evident to you, but not to many other here.

Everyone here wants to discuss religion, but for me, you give no common ground to start from.

May I ask a question to start from. You were bullied into Christianity and rejected it as a 19 year old, is it, according to you, conceivable that your experience, emotional connection and questionable(?) source or learning makes your opinions on Christianity as a whole, as NJ would say, suspect?
 
Nick the Pilot said:
"And I think I "get" spirituality, although mine is a non-theistic one."

--> Then we should call you a humanist.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm a humanist, too but I'm also an existentialist (in so far as I know what that means.) I don't believe the universe holds any inherent meaning for us. My only answer to "why are we here," is "There is no reason. The best we can do is find meaning in our own ways."

Oh yeah, and you call me anything you like. Just don't call me late for dinner.
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
You're questions are always too open for a reasonable answer, and you bring a lot of preconceptions into the discussion that are self-evident to you, but not to many other here.

Everyone here wants to discuss religion, but for me, you give no common ground to start from.

May I ask a question to start from. You were bullied into Christianity and rejected it as a 19 year old, is it, according to you, conceivable that your experience, emotional connection and questionable(?) source or learning makes your opinions on Christianity as a whole, as NJ would say, suspect?
Click to expand...

I have read the Bible from cover to cover many times in my 64 years, and while some of the authors do make some sensible statements, I cannot find anything good about the Biblical deity. What ground am I supposed to give?
 
See, I make mistakes all the time, so I'm sorry for misjudging you.
But I can't do anything but declare that you give me nothing to work with, I can't see any reason to ask you a single question or answer any of yours. I hope you see the reason for that and don't take that as a personal attack.
 
Quirkybird said:
Please elucidate what you mean by that.
Click to expand...
I mean I don't just go with what the text says to me ... I look to informed commentary and criticism to see if there's something I might have missed ... and there usually is, or at least there's something more that I didn't know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top