- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
I have never claimed there is no God. You have repeated this dozens of times. And I have corrected you dozens of times.
This is you wanting to be an artheist with no burden of proof to feel obligated to.
All burden of proof falls on someone else.
You seem to want the prestiege of people saying "FMF is an atheist" but the escape from any burden of proof with a backup exit stradegy of saying "I am also an agnostic. "
What is the harm to your philosophy to just say "I am agnostic?"
Then you have the benefit of being without burden of proof.
Do you need both no burden of proof as it all belongs to someone else PLUS the prestiege of being called an atheist claiming you know that no God exists?
@sonship saidThis is my "primary reason". I simply do not believe the Bible is credible enough for me to subscribe to the beliefs that Christians have regarding [themselves and] the identity and significance of Jesus' life.
Rather than your primary reason being mythological content of the Bible it appears that the Bible whatever content, is your reason for not believing in God.
@sonship saidI don't have any "burden of proof" whatsoever. I am not proselytizing. I am simply sharing my perspective.
Do you need both no burden of proof as it all belongs to someone else PLUS the prestiege of being called an atheist claiming you know that no God exists?
@sonship saidI think that technically, 'agnostic' is a term applied to one who believes it is not possible to know whether or not there is a god. An atheist is one who lacks any belief in a god or gods. An agnostic atheist is one who does not hold a belief in any particular god or gods but is who doesn't claim to know that none exist.
@FMFI have never claimed there is no God. You have repeated this dozens of times. And I have corrected you dozens of times.
This is you wanting to be an artheist with no burden of proof to feel obligated to.
All burden of proof falls on someone else.
You seem to want the prestiege of people saying "FMF is an atheist" but the escape from an ...[text shortened]... one else PLUS the prestiege of being called an atheist claiming you know that no God exists?
@josephw saidIn classically taught British English, there is no such word as 'obligated'. It is what we refer to as an Americanism.
Obligation- The action of binding oneself by oath, promise, or contract to do or forbear something; an agreement whereby one person is bound to another, or two or more persons are mutually bound; also, that to which one binds oneself, a formal promise.
Oxford English Dictionary
Obligation- 1 : the action of obligating oneself to a course of action (as by a promise or vow ...[text shortened]... tract, a promise, or the demands of
Marriam-Webster
I don't know FMF, sounds strikingly similar.
@sonship saidThere is no "harm": I am an agnostic atheist. Google it. I am what's called an implicit atheist, rather like avalanchethecat is, and not an explicit atheist, like Ghost of a Duke is.
What is the harm to your philosophy to just say "I am agnostic?"
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@FMF
I think the equivalent is me saying something like "I am an agnostic theist."
I have no doubt that lots of stuff can be googled. But I think one can have the courage to make a definite stand.
I am a theist who is aware that some theistic arguments can be perhaps shown to be logically weak or debunked by smart atheists. I live with it. I accept it. I see no need to qualify my stand with "I am a agnostic theist" like you are a "agnostic atheist".
So mythology in the Bible discourages you from believing in God.
But atoms and molecules combining randomly gave rise to dirt aquiring the ability to think and question its own existence and that of the universe is less mythological?
The latter is more plausible than a Creator God of fathomless wisdom and power?
@sonship said"CLOUT" [in capital letters]?
Sounds like you want the CLOUT of being identified as denying God exists but the a backup EXIT stradegy if your truth claim of no God can be shown as weak logically.
What is going on in your mind?
You think I "have clout" because of my lack of belief in the Christian God?
"Clout" with whom?
@sonship saidThe term 'agnostic theist' has already been taken I'm afraid. It refers to one who believes in a god but accepts that they don't know for sure that said god exists.
@FMF
I think the equivalent is me saying something like "I am an agnostic theist."
I have no doubt that lots of stuff can be googled. But I think one can have the courage to make a definite stand.
I am a theist who is aware that some theistic arguments can be perhaps shown to be logically weak or debunked by smart atheists. I live with it. I accept it. I see ...[text shortened]... ythological?
The latter is more plausible than a Creator God of fathomless wisdom and power?
@sonship saidSay it if you so choose. An agnostic theist believes in the existence of a God or Gods, but regards the basis of this proposition as unknown or inherently unknowable. [Wiki]
I think the equivalent is me saying something like "I am an agnostic theist."
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@FMF
Prestiege is a better word maybe than clout.
I think you want the prestiege of one showing that there is no God.
But when unable to show it, you can back into agnosticism - "Well I don't know that there is no God."
What's the harm in just saying "Well, I don't KNOW that there is no God. I am an agnostic?"
Is there a loss of respect in you taking that position with some of your friends?