atheism vs agnosticism

I think people use the term Atheist and Agnostic too loosely. Agnostic is a type of belief, a stance between the difference of belief and knowledge--Atheism isn't this.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Religion
• Atheism
• Agnosticism
• God
• Agnostic
• Atheist
• Debate
• Misconceptions
• Jesus
• Christianity
• Christ
• Faith
• Knowledge
• Logic
• Philosophy
• VS
• Strong
• Weak
• Deism
• Theist
• Disbelief
• Belief
• Gnostic
• Darwin
• Richard
• Dawkins
• Charles Darwin
• Creationism
• Design
• Intelligent
• Truth
• Proof
• Response
• Theory
• Reason
• Evidence
• Morality
• Theism
• Delusion

[AdversusHaereses]

@AdversusHaereses I would also recommend you to look up the tons of Marian apparitions and Catholic miracles that have been given to us as a sign to strengthen our doubts. I'd start by the Marian apparitions of Fatima and Lourdes and the Eucharistic miracles such as of Lanciano. Now the Church is quite strict relative to miracles because it requires the inability of the phenomena to be explained by science unlike most claims that are hugely based on superstition.

[AdversusHaereses]

@gypsyrose713 I think we would also fall into error to merely call God this abstract being of which is the explanation of why there is something rather than nothing. God is far more than that. I would encourage you to read some of the lives of saints to see the extraordinary love that God has handed down to his children despite all our frailties and shortcomings. Saints are men and women who lived holy lives and we can all learn from God through their lives.

[gypsyrose713]

@gypsyrose713 making a judgement based on which side seems more probable. I really need a very very low level of uncertainty in order to be okay calling something my belief or the truth. My point really is my position isn't so much avoiding an answer as it is I don't see a solid clear cut answer based on all evidence and reasoning that has been presented to me. I'm open to it. But never have I seen enough to make me say "that is exactly what I believe to be true", it would be a lie.

[gypsyrose713]

@gypsyrose713 improbable. At the same time, the Atheist argument to me still doesn't have a low enough level of uncertainty for me to take it on as fact. You know there are just some things in this world we may never know... no matter how many tools of ours we try to use. It just may never be enough. And I am more okay with letting that acknowledgement be my truth rather than pushing myself to make a decision based on circumstantial evidence, or based on one being the answer I hope it is, or

[gypsyrose713]

@gypsyrose713 you can't totally leave out practical uncertainty. With many things, even most rules of logic there is always room for practical uncertainty... the rules of the world as we know it could be a total illusion. We could be unaware of so many things that exist. And if the level of uncertainty is low, I can often buy it. But I find either side god or no god filled with a very high level of uncertainty. From my experience with logic on this topic, it's points the existence of god as

[gypsyrose713]

@gypsyrose713 with out it requiring some stretching. Yeah, it's totally possible, is there enough solid logic for it to equate to god existing being fact? I'm open to it, but I haven't seen it. There are some good supporting arguments though, just from what I've seen not enough solid components for me personally. But if logic could prove it? I'd be the first one to sign up as a Theist. And I remain open to that demonstration. Even when looking at this all from a rational perspective...

[gypsyrose713]

@AdversusHaereses Ah, sorry, I get a ton of Atheists on here. I'm from a large Italian family, was raised Roman Catholic. I get the logical explanations of both sides, I know as we know it... everything that exists has a cause. Is it "god" or is this universe just a giant mistake? Is it one almighty power that has a human like persona or did this all come to be by some unintelligible energy? In all of the rational arguments I've encountered it proves a cause, I get that... but does it prove god

[AdversusHaereses]

@gypsyrose713 Oh in no way am I an atheist! I'm a traditional Roman Catholic. But what I mean is that you seem to have an attitude of pragmatism toward this issue rather than following the rational arguments for God's existence. And I think that feelings are followed by a truth. But truth will always precede it and therefore we should only follow what the truth tells us and suspend emotions for later.

[gypsyrose713]

@gypsyrose713 But no, one must not differentiate feelings from truth. It doesn't work that way. Who says one "has" to, in order for it to be legitimate. There are many Christians out there who I am sure will argue this point with you. There is no rule saying your beliefs are not legitimate if you can't differentiate feelings from truth. This is what you have made up. It's not the way belief works though, it's the way Atheism works.

[gypsyrose713]

@AdversusHaereses I think you responded before I finished this, I believe I touched on this in my answer. You can't differentiate feeling from truth when it comes to belief... for "belief" feelings become truth. This is one of my biggest gripes. You can't base it on knowledge alone. If you were to, I guess one would say Atheism is the way to go, right? No evidence of god, ergo... no god. But you see, this is why you are an Atheist. Because this is how you operate.