• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are Atheists just close minded Agnostics?

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
And I still don't accept this double definition business. I would say that on this topic: existence or non-existence of God, there is no such distinction between knowledge and belief. How would such knowledge be demonstrated? Everyone who claims to know, is ultimately just describing how much they believe.
"Knowledge" is belief that has been justified and, as it happens, is true. Based on this definition of knowledge alone a person can come to the conclusion that they cannot know the "true" status for "god," the proposition, and so that they cannot "know".

That's agnosticism (one flavour of it).

Edit: This is in no way an "open minded" stance (on knowledge).
 
Last edited:

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
It might be a reach, but the first time I heard of atheist/agnostic was on the Richard Dawkins Foundation website. I wasn't aware of it previously if it was created by someone else.

I've classified myself as both for as long as I knew how I each was used, and I've never read a lick of Richard Dawkins, nor visited his website.
 

work in progress

Well-Known Member
"Knowledge" is belief that has been justified and, as it happens, is true. Based on this definition of knowledge alone a person can come to the conclusion that they cannot know the "true" status for "god," the proposition, and so that they cannot "know".

That's agnosticism (one flavour of it).

Edit: This is in no way an "open minded" stance (on knowledge).
Sounds totally confusing to me, and I am still left with that "brain in a vat" dilemma -- the whole world we think is out there could always end up being a carefully constructed illusion, like in the Matrix...just a carefully constructed illusion that provides the proper sensory information....and that would eliminate having any absolute knowledge if such a thing was even theoretically possible.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Sounds totally confusing to me, and I am still left with that "brain in a vat" dilemma -- the whole world we think is out there could always end up being a carefully constructed illusion, like in the Matrix...just a carefully constructed illusion that provides the proper sensory information....and that would eliminate having any absolute knowledge if such a thing was even theoretically possible.
"Brain in a vat" solipsism is self-defeating. If the "real world" (somewhere "out there") is what's true, then there is no "true" in the world as we know it, including the truth of the proposition "brain in a vat."

I believe in truth.
 

Tristesse

Well-Known Member
It might be a reach, but the first time I heard of atheist/agnostic was on the Richard Dawkins Foundation website. I wasn't aware of it previously if it was created by someone else.

Thats weird, because the idea of atheist/agnostic has existed since.......well....the idea of a god has.
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
It seems quite sensical and orderly to me. The mess seems to come from people who have a tendency to confuse semantics with ideas.

We may all have been enlightened by this thread, but many folks still identify with the Agnostic label while others choose to be labeled Atheists.

I don't recall anyone listed as Atheist/Agnostic.:shrug:
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Atheist, have a lack of belief, agnostics dont know what to believe

We are all born with that lack of belief in a deity



a deity is something we only believe in because our parents teach us what they want us to learn by attending social gatherings with like minded beings.


You have only percieved natural events and the weakness of the human mind as a deity as it is a natural responce to have a mythical parent figure who will take care of you.
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
We may all have been enlightened by this thread, but many folks still identify with the Agnostic label while others choose to be labeled Atheists.

I don't recall anyone listed as Atheist/Agnostic.:shrug:

You don't recall the several posts where I stated I was both agnostic and an atheist?

C'mon, you're not that old, yet.
 

TruthSeeker94

New Member
I don't want to believe in a god, particularly the christian god. But if it's true that a god exists, I would change my mind, but I wouldn't necessarily worship that god, thats a different discussion.

From your statement, that you especially don't want the Christian God to exist I gather you view Him as someone who commands atrocities such as some spoken in the Old testament. I would also suppose you think Him a very unfair person in the way He punishes, because He give sinners infinite punishment for finite sins in hell.

I don't believe in either. First I don't believe in those atrocities. I'm not an inerrantist. And second I'm an annihilationist. I've posted a letter written by C.S Lewis that sums up my Biblical inerrancy views and a quote from William Craig. Second I've posted verses that support my view that the soul is destroyed for nonbelievers.

"If we Christians can't find a good answer to the question before us and are, moreover, persuaded that such a command is inconsistent with God's nature, then we'll have to give up biblical inerrancy."
William Craig

"Dear Mr. Beversluis

Yes. On my view one must apply something of the same sort of explanation to, say, the atrocities (and treacheries) of Joshua. I see the grave danger we run by doing so; but the dangers of believing in a God whom we cannot but regard as evil, and then, in mere terrified flattery calling Him 'good' and worshiping Him, is still greater danger. The ultimate question is whether the doctrine of the goodness of God or that of the inerrancy of Scriptures is to prevail when they conflict. I think the doctrine of the goodness of God is the more certain of the two. Indeed, only that doctrine renders this worship of Him obligatory or even permissible.

To this some will reply 'ah, but we are fallen and don't recognize good when we see it.' But God Himself does not say that we are as fallen at all that. He constantly, in Scripture, appeals to our conscience: 'Why do ye not of yourselves judge what is right?' -- 'What fault hath my people found in me?' And so on. Socrates' answer to Euthyphro is used in Christian form by Hooker. Things are not good because God commands them; God commands certain things because he sees them to be good. (In other words, the Divine Will is the obedient servant to the Divine Reason.) The opposite view (Ockham's, Paley's) leads to an absurdity. If 'good' means 'what God wills' then to say 'God is good' can mean only 'God wills what he wills.' Which is equally true of you or me or Judas or Satan.

But of course having said all this, we must apply it with fear and trembling. Some things which seem to us bad may be good. But we must not consult our consciences by trying to feel a thing good when it seems to us totally evil. We can only pray that if there is an invisible goodness hidden in such things, God, in His own good time will enable us to see it. If we need to. For perhaps sometimes God's answer might be What is that to thee?' The passage may not be 'addressed to our (your or my) condition' at all.

I think we are v. much in agreement, aren't we?

Yours sincerely, C. S. Lewis"

And for annihilationism

Mathew 10:28 very clearly supports the fact that God destroys souls and that He does so in Hell.

"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die"
Ezekiel 18:20

"let him know that [a]he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins. "
James 5:20

"but now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel, "
2 Timothy 1:10

But [a]we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul.
Hebrews 10:39

"and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter;"
2 Peter 2:6

"But these, like unreasoning animals, born as creatures of instinct to be captured and killed, reviling where they have no knowledge, will in [a]the destruction of those creatures also be destroyed, "
2 Peter 2:12

"But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men."
2 Peter 3:7
 

TruthSeeker94

New Member
I would love to see that study, and any evidence supporting the statement about atheists having depression because they can't believe in a God. I would bet it was written by a Christian. Just guessing.

Still searching for the study. As for depression, for one, myself. When I was agnostic I suffered from depression for a while. I''ve heard people say the thought that they will stop existing is extremely scary. Losing your faith can be a terrible experience.
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
Still searching for the study. As for depression, for one, myself. When I was agnostic I suffered from depression for a while. I''ve heard people say the thought that they will stop existing is extremely scary. Losing your faith can be a terrible experience.

Yes, throwing away a security blanket can be a traumatizing experience for those who are overly dependent on it. Doesn't mean it's not a good idea to grow through the experience.
 
Top