does god exist

[Storm]

I know that there's always questions like "what is real knowledge"... that doesn't mean that you can't try to reinforce what you believe.

If I come to an unmarked fork in the road, I'll try to decide which way looks like it's more likely to get to my destination and then take the one I choose... but even after that, I'll keep looking for landmarks based on what I expect to see: "if this is the road to Town X, then I'll pass Highway A soon."

That's kinda what I'm talking about. You say you arrived at your beliefs through convincing experience; that's great, but if those beliefs are based in truth, wouldn't they have implications that you could look to confirm or deny?

That's a good question. I'm tired, though and I can't think of an example. Would you be so kind as to provide one?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That's a good question. I'm tired, though and I can't think of an example. Would you be so kind as to provide one?

Well, for me, I don't believe in God, so I don't expect to see either miracles or, well, a god. I expect that what we learn of the natural world, the universe and its history will be consistent with random, undirected change rather than deliberate design. So far, my expectations have been met.

I won't presume to tell you what you believe, so I don't really know how to say what predictions your beliefs would make... but hopefully you get the idea of what I'm talking about.

 

[Runewolf1973]

This could be a very long discussion. I hope you all can come to some agreement. Or at least some form of understanding. I don't really disagree with any of you, we are all entitled to our own views.
There is some truth to be found in ALL things. Look for that truth. There are more than a few places to find it....

If I said anything that did not make sense, forgive me. I am only human. Peace.


Wanna know something really odd? I used to be a Satanist. They don't even actually believe in Satan. They are actually atheistic. Even in that belief I found some truth, but not as much as I wanted to find. I kept on searching. It found me.:run:

 

[S-word]

That contradict the Lord’s teachings.
Mat 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart! For they shall see God.
Also consider: Job 19:26 and even after they corrupt my skin, yet this: in my flesh I shall see God,

As the words which were quoted from 1 Tim 6: 16, were not my words but those of Paul, are you saying that Paul is in error, or that the Bible contradicts itself?

 

[Storm]

Wait, Penguin, are you asking about what I see that I think supports my theology?

 

[rojse]

Which I guess is belief in something.

Only that I might understand people better by understanding the thought processes behind religion. There's nothing metaphysical or spiritual behind it,, which is what you are most likely after.

So can you explain a bit more about this belief of yours. Can you show evidence of what it is you believe in? I'm open-minded and willing to listen to your thoughts. Sorry if I was being ignorant. I'm only human too.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Only that I might understand people better by understanding the thought processes behind religion. There's nothing metaphysical or spiritual behind it,, which is what you are most likely after.

If it works for you, then that is all you REALLY need. At least we both can say in a way we found what we were looking for, for the most part. There is some wisdom in that. That of just being content. Thank you.
Even if there really is no divine connection involved or not, who knows? Maybe there is. At least in some small way I can understand why I am here. Take care.

 

[Autodidact]

Auto, I'm cranky today, and I'm trying not to take it out on you, but it REALLY seems like you're being deliberately obtuse. My position in this thread has always been that there's no proof EITHER way. That doesn't make me an agnostic, and you know better.

No, I don't. Isn't that what an agnostic is? Someone who says there's no proof either way? I'm confused.

 

[Storm]

No, I don't. Isn't that what an agnostic is? Someone who says there's no proof either way? I'm confused.

No, an agnostic is someone who doesn't take a position, which I have. Anyone with a measure of reason understands there's no proof.

And I want to apologize for that last post. I really was cranky. :sorry1:

 

[Willamena]

I would amend that to say there is no position that the agnostic philosopher can take on the ontological issue of the existence of "God", though this distinction is more limited. I don't consider people who are ambivalent or indecisive to be agnostic.

 

[crystalonyx]

An agnostic denies the possiblity of ultimate knowledge, it's not just about belief-disbelief in some deity.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No, an agnostic is someone who doesn't take a position, which I have. Anyone with a measure of reason understands there's no proof.

And I want to apologize for that last post. I really was cranky. :sorry1:

I would amend that to say there is no position that the agnostic philosopher can take on the ontological issue of the existence of "God", though this distinction is more limited. I don't consider people who are ambivalent or indecisive to be agnostic.

I consider agnosticism to be a response to a completely different question than responses about belief like atheism, theism, deism, pantheism, etc.

To me, terms like "theist" and "atheist" are statements about belief in deity/ies. In contrast, the term "agnostic" is a statement about knowledge of deity/ies: it's the position that the existence or non-existence of God/god/gods is unknowable, either merely currently (weak agnosticism) or for all time (strong agnosticism).

Because of this, I think that a person can simultaneously be an agnostic and an atheist (e.g. "I don't think we can ever know for sure, but I don't believe God exists") or agnostic and theist (e.g. "I believe in God, even though He tests our faith by not revealing Himself").

 

[Storm]

I consider agnosticism to be a response to a completely different question than responses about belief like atheism, theism, deism, pantheism, etc.

To me, terms like "theist" and "atheist" are statements about belief in deity/ies. In contrast, the term "agnostic" is a statement about knowledge of deity/ies: it's the position that the existence or non-existence of God/god/gods is unknowable, either merely currently (weak agnosticism) or for all time (strong agnosticism).

Because of this, I think that a person can simultaneously be an agnostic and an atheist (e.g. "I don't think we can ever know for sure, but I don't believe God exists") or agnostic and theist (e.g. "I believe in God, even though He tests our faith by not revealing Himself").

Very balanced, thank you.

Despite my stance that there is no objective proof of any kind for either side, I am not an agnostic. I do not claim faith on the question of God's existence, I claim knowledge, based upon personal experience. This is the antithesis of agnosticism.

That said, I consider myself a reasonable woman, and I do not expect anyone else to accept my subjective experience as any kind of compelling evidence. (Which is rather frustrating, honestly.) Nor do I think any sort of objective proof is possible.

Does that clarify my stance?

 

[Autodidact]

No, an agnostic is someone who doesn't take a position, which I have. Anyone with a measure of reason understands there's no proof.

And I want to apologize for that last post. I really was cranky. :sorry1:

Oh no, I don't think so. In fact, I think an agnostic actively asserts that it is not possible to know. Let's see what wiki says:

Agnosticism (Greek: α- a-, without + γνώσις gnōsis, knowledge; after Gnosticism) is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims — particularly metaphysical claims regarding theology, afterlife or the existence of deities, ghosts, or even ultimate reality — is unknown or, depending on the form of agnosticism, inherently impossible to prove or disprove.

 

[Autodidact]

That contradict the Lord’s teachings.
Mat 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart! For they shall see God.
Also consider: Job 19:26 and even after they corrupt my skin, yet this: in my flesh I shall see God,

As the words which were quoted from 1 Tim 6: 16, were not my words but those of Paul, are you saying that Paul is in error, or that the Bible contradicts itself?

What are you talking about? And to whom are you talking?

 

[logician]

An agnostic denies the possiblity of ultimate knowledge, it's not just about belief-disbelief in some deity.

One question that arises is if ultimate knowledge is obtainable, or how do you know when you have ultimate knowledge? Maybe a wise alien will show up on our doorstep someday and give us the handboook to all knowledge, one never knows.

 

[Willamena]

One question that arises is if ultimate knowledge is obtainable, or how do you know when you have ultimate knowledge? Maybe a wise alien will show up on our doorstep someday and give us the handboook to all knowledge, one never knows.

Another question that arises is, what the heck is "ultimate knowledge"?

 

[Storm]

Oh no, I don't think so. In fact, I think an agnostic actively asserts that it is not possible to know. Let's see what wiki says:

And I DO claim to know.

 

[rojse]

Another question that arises is, what the heck is "ultimate knowledge"?

It's like anything that is deemed ultimate - it is really unneccessary and has far too many things that you do not want or need, and tries to show off without any real cause at all. Examples include ultimate DVD compilations, ultimate fast-food meals, and ultimate knowledge.

 

[crystalonyx]

Does having ultimate knowledge make you a god? Or it that when someone says:

Game Over.