# Epistemologically agnostic



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 25, 2012)

I'll bet that several of you thinkers here are familiar with this. I was asking a friend from another site, what his beliefs were. This was part of his response. I had to google it.


----------



## Four (Jul 26, 2012)

Yea, some people use agnostic vs gnostic

So in the past, we've found that JB0704 is classified as an agnostic theist.

Were as i would be classified as a Gnostic atheist.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Jul 26, 2012)

Maybe we need a list of definitions.


----------



## Four (Jul 26, 2012)

TripleXBullies said:


> Maybe we need a list of definitions.



We do... here is a small step on this particular front


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jul 26, 2012)

Four said:


> We do... here is a small step on this particular front


Thanks, this was interesting


----------



## ted_BSR (Aug 11, 2012)

Four said:


> We do... here is a small step on this particular front



I think this is a large step.

I think it deserves a poll thread. These definitions are very telling.

Please include the diagram in a poll thread Thor.


----------



## Asath (Aug 13, 2012)

I . . . um . . . well . . . er . . . wow . . . gotta keep funding that education budget . . . yup, yup . . . 

(Epistemology, for those who may want to pay attention, is that part of inquiry that deals with the origins, methods, nature, and limits of human intelligence.  It is a definition of an intellectual discipline, philosophically, rather than a descriptive adjective.  One CANNOT be ‘Epistemologically’ anything at all – that is just silly.  Being an ‘Epistemological Agnostic’ would be a bit like being a ‘Phenomenological Democrat.’  The term itself has no meaning.)      

No  other comment.


----------



## fish hawk (Aug 14, 2012)

Asath said:


> I . . . um . . . well . . . er . . . wow . . . gotta keep funding that education budget . . . yup, yup . . .
> 
> (Epistemology, for those who may want to pay attention, is that part of inquiry that deals with the origins, methods, nature, and limits of human intelligence.  It is a definition of an intellectual discipline, philosophically, rather than a descriptive adjective.  One CANNOT be ‘Epistemologically’ anything at all – that is just silly.  Being an ‘Epistemological Agnostic’ would be a bit like being a ‘Phenomenological Democrat.’  The term itself has no meaning.)
> 
> No  other comment.



Enough,enough,enough.I cant take it anymore.Off to the christian torture chamber for you......Where well rip your eyelids off,rip out your tongue and make you listen to Gospel music and watch Billy  Graham reruns all day and all night.Then we'll brainwash you to believe in unicorns and flying elephants.After that we'll release you to become a viable part of society.


----------



## Asath (Aug 15, 2012)

Hopefully that won’t be the Christian society, where logic is abandoned and rational thought goes to die a gruesome death while the animated smilies live on as a testament to smug, ancient dogmas that would even make Aphrodite smile.


----------



## ted_BSR (Aug 16, 2012)

Asath said:


> Hopefully that won’t be the Christian society, where logic is abandoned and rational thought goes to die a gruesome death while the animated smilies live on as a testament to smug, ancient dogmas that would even make Aphrodite smile.



I think he was describing the opposite.


----------



## Huntinfool (Aug 22, 2012)

Four said:


> Yea, some people use agnostic vs gnostic
> 
> So in the past, we've found that JB0704 is classified as an agnostic theist.
> 
> Were as i would be classified as a Gnostic atheist.




Does he know that?  That ain't what he says everywhere else!


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 22, 2012)

Huntinfool said:


> Does he know that?  That ain't what he says everywhere else!



It is because I recognize that I _could_ be wrong about my faith.

And I could be.

I'm just pretty secure in what I believe, and "believe" I am correct.  So admitting the possibility that I am not correct is not that big a deal.  Like I said to Ambush a few days back, I could be wrong, and become dust, and be no worse for believing.


----------



## Huntinfool (Aug 22, 2012)

For me, it would be very tough to believe if I wasn't 100% absolutey certain that I'm not wrong about this.  

But I understand what you're saying.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 22, 2012)

Huntinfool said:


> For me, it would be very tough to believe if I wasn't 100% absolutey certain that I'm not wrong about this.



I understand.  

If you have ever seen the movie "Contact," there is a scene at the end where Jodie Foster is testifying before a congressional committee.  She "knows" what she saw, but she "recognizes" the possibility that it was all an illusion.  In heart, though, she "believes" she is right. That's the best illustration I can think of when describing my position.


----------



## ross the deer slayer (Aug 22, 2012)

So JB, you're Christian with doubts or a not 100% faithful Christian..more like 99 or something?


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 22, 2012)

ross the deer slayer said:


> So JB, you're Christian with doubts or a not 100% faithful Christian..more like 99 or something?



I knew when 4 put that up there I was in trouble.  I did not respond hoping it would go unnoticed.

Guys (Christians), it is ok to say that you might not be correct in your beliefs. What is required is that we can defend _WHY_ we believe, and that we have faith in what we believe to be true.  When I say I believe something, that means I don't doubt it....I "believe" it.  It's got nothing to do with faith either.  

But, I / you / we could be wrong.  Look around your local community and see all the different denominations.  Check out the spiritual forum and see all the different ideas on faith.  We can't all be right.  Somebody's going to be wrong.  It might be me......I just don't "believe" it is.  Words mean things.  

That isn't doubt.   It isn't a lack of faith.  It is an honest personal assessment.   And, honestly, I think it shows that I am not afraid of discussing alternative possibilities because I am confident in my conclusions.  I am not concerned that somebody will come along and knock me out of the faith.  

So, let's consider whether or not God exists.  Let's explore these thoughts genuinely.  I have many times, and have reached a very comfortable place with my faith because I have reached my conclusion through these questions.  My faith is much stronger now that I have considered that God doesn't exist than it ever was when I thought acknowledging the chance I am wrong was evidence of a lack of faith.  I have enough faith to be secure in the questioning process.  That's just the way I see it.

Hope that clears it all up.


----------



## Havana Dude (Aug 22, 2012)

Clear as mud.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 22, 2012)

Havana Dude said:


> Clear as mud.



Just gonna take shots, or would you like to give me specifics?


----------



## Havana Dude (Aug 23, 2012)

Not meant as a shot, just an observation of what I would consider useless babble about something so simple. But to each his own. I should have just moved on. Carry on.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 23, 2012)

Havana Dude said:


> Not meant as a shot, just an observation of what I would consider useless babble about something so simple. But to each his own. I should have just moved on. Carry on.



Why do you consider his post "useless babble"? JB was asked a question and he answered it.


----------



## Huntinfool (Aug 23, 2012)

> But, I / you / we could be wrong. Look around your local community and see all the different denominations. Check out the spiritual forum and see all the different ideas on faith. We can't all be right. Somebody's going to be wrong. It might be me......I just don't "believe" it is. Words mean things.



I think the distinction, JB, is that agnostic theist does not mean you acknowledge that you could be wrong about sprinkling versus dunking.....it means that you that you believe God (or a god for that matter) exists, sent Jesus to die for your sins and you are saved....but you acknowledge that you could be wrong.

I'm 100% certain that I'm wrong about something theologically.  I am also 100% certain that God (the God) exists, he's the creator and redeemer and he is the ONLY God.  I will not, in any way, acknowledge that there is another possibility.

That, to me, is the distinction.  Of course we could be wrong on theological things.  Foundational doctrine is different IMO.

If you acknowledge that you could be wrong about the very existence of God...well...let's just say I see some very strong biblical and foundational issues.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> Why do you consider his post "useless babble"? JB was asked a question and he answered it.



Thanks string.

I should have just avoided all of this, and answered everything through pm's.  I don't know why people have to be rude about this stuff.


----------



## JABBO (Aug 23, 2012)

FINALLY!!!!   Everybody stop what you're doing. Huntinfool is finally going to show the proof that the whole world has been looking for for quite some time. Because I know there is no way he could make that statement and not be 100% certain of it....   We are all ears.....



Huntinfool said:


> I am also 100% certain that God (the God) exists, he's the creator and redeemer and he is the ONLY God.  I will not, in any way, acknowledge that there is another possibility.


----------



## Huntinfool (Aug 23, 2012)

Ok....are ya ready?   REALLY ready?  Really REALLY ready? Huh?







_For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. _


_And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him._


_The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork._


_To the King of ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen. _




This and those pesky personal experiences that you dismiss.  That's what I've got.  Pretty weak in your opinion huh?


Not to your satisfaction?  No?  What?  I can't believe it.  Oh well....it's a good thing I didn't write anything even close to the statement "I have the hard physical proof that JABBO requires.".  BOY....would I have egg on my face then!





You stay classy JABBO....You're a FINE representation of your ilk.



.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

Huntinfool said:


> If you acknowledge that you could be wrong about the very existence of God...well...let's just say I see some very strong biblical and foundational issues.



*DISCLAIMER:  USELESS BABBLE WILL FOLLOW.  HAVANA DUDE MAY WANT TO AVOID WASTING HIS TIME READING THIS.*

I understand what you are saying.  I try very hard to be clear on this topic, and I think that basically we get caught up in the difference between acknowleding possibilities and doubt.  I guess I just don't see the flags it raises for the rest of you.

I keep thinking about the mustard seed analogy in the Bible:



> 20 He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.



Nobody on here can move a mountain.  I'm just admitting it.

But, I "believe" I am right.  That word means something.  When I was a kid, there was always talk about "doubt" being satan trying to change our minds.  And, if there were any "doubt" that we were clearly going to he11.

Then, I faced my "doubt" head on.  I had conversations with many people from all spectrums of religious belief.  The basis of these coversations was typically "what if I'm wrong, what ig there is no God."  

I came through that time period even stronger in my beliefs because I had considered the alternatives, and my conclusions made the most sense to me.  I no longer have "doubt."  I have faith in what I believe, and that is where I place my hope.

I believe my actions on this board will testify to the fact that I believe in God and Jesus.  I say it with regularity, and argue my case constantly.  I don't know what more a person can do. 

So, I don't know what the big deal is here.  This always causes great concern amongst the Christians, and I am left scratching my head over what I am saying or doing that is incorrect.  I guess I am supposed to say "I know I am right and you are wrong."  But, then, we all turn around and say believing in Jesus requires "faith" because we can't prove a man rose from the dead.

I have "faith" that a man rose from the dead.  I believe it to be true.  But, I can't prove it to anybody.  So, to say there is no chance I am wrong would require conclusive proof that I can show another person.....which I can't do.  All I have is my beliefs, and the logic behind them, and my "heart."  I can't show that to these guys, or anybody.

What more am I supposed to say or do?


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

Also, people can call me what ever they want.  Agnostic theist, theist, deist whatever.  I don't really care because I know that I am a Christian.  I know what I believe.  And I know it is good enough.


----------



## Huntinfool (Aug 23, 2012)

Obviously we see it differently, but I do understand where you're coming from.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

Huntinfool said:


> Obviously we see it differently, but I do understand where you're coming from.



Would you like to continue this via PM's.  I really don't want any misunderstanding on the subject, and would be happy to discuss further.

For the record....I absolutely HATE this subject.  I always seem to tick everybody off, without intending to.


----------



## JABBO (Aug 23, 2012)

Well, all I've got to say is I'm not too surprised!!!!  I guess you should have made that 70-80% sure since you do not have ANY proof what so ever except that which is made up in your head...  Thanks for trying. And you stay classy also.



Huntinfool said:


> Ok....are ya ready?   REALLY ready?  Really REALLY ready? Huh?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

JABBO said:


> I guess you should have made that 70-80% sure since you do not have ANY proof what so ever except that which is made up in your head...



It is a belief based on evidence, and faith.

Either you accept it or not.  But, it ain't made up in our head.


----------



## Havana Dude (Aug 23, 2012)

Havana Dude said:


> Clear as mud.





Havana Dude said:


> Not meant as a shot, just an observation of what I would consider useless babble about something so simple. But to each his own. I should have just moved on. Carry on.





stringmusic said:


> Why do you consider his post "useless babble"? JB was asked a question and he answered it.





JB0704 said:


> Thanks string.
> 
> I should have just avoided all of this, and answered everything through pm's.  I don't know why people have to be rude about this stuff.





JB0704 said:


> *DISCLAIMER:  USELESS BABBLE WILL FOLLOW.  HAVANA DUDE MAY WANT TO AVOID WASTING HIS TIME READING THIS.*
> 
> I understand what you are saying.  I try very hard to be clear on this topic, and I think that basically we get caught up in the difference between acknowleding possibilities and doubt.  I guess I just don't see the flags it raises for the rest of you.
> 
> ...



I will take this opportunity to apologize in public for my comment. I was exhausted after a day of dealing with my Dad and his medical issues. No excuse, and I don't need sympathy. I will state my position and move on faster than you can click your mouse.

It is all about faith, period, bottom line. What I didn't say was I don't see the need to box everybody in a certain category. Seems divisive to me. I think everyone has questions, but make no mistake. I have zero questions about a man dying on the cross for my sins. I would have to say that I don't fit into any of the boxes in the diagram. I believe in THE God of the universe, Jesus Christ, not just "a god", and I know he exists. So I don't really fit in anywhere on the diagram. 

Again, I should have stayed out of this, and I'm sorry I stepped in. And I can appreciate the smart comments aimed at me, nice shots.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 23, 2012)

Those who knowingly wear a clown costume aren't surprised when people laugh.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

Havana Dude said:


> I will take this opportunity to apologize in public for my comment.



Thanks.  And I am sorry about your father....I hope all is / goes well.



Havana Dude said:


> It is all about faith, period, bottom line. What I didn't say was I don't see the need to box everybody in a certain category. I think everyone has questions, but make no mistake. I have zero questions about a man dying on the cross for my sins.



And I agree with all of this. Particularly the parts in red. I think we are discussing symantecs.

This is why I never responded to the intitial post about me.  There seems to be a protocol that I have missed.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 23, 2012)

JABBO said:


> Well, all I've got to say is I'm not too surprised!!!!  I guess you should have made that 70-80% sure since you do not have ANY proof what so ever except that which is made up in your head...  Thanks for trying. And you stay classy also.


Did you read this?....



Huntinfool said:


> Not to your satisfaction?  No?  What?  I can't believe it.  Oh well....*it's a good thing I didn't write anything even close to the statement "I have the hard physical proof that JABBO requires.".*  BOY....would I have egg on my face then!


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 23, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> And I agree with all of this. Particularly the parts in red. I think we are discussing symantecs.
> 
> This is why I never responded to the intitial post about me.  There seems to be a protocol that I have missed.



I'm in agreement with you JB. Is there a chance we, as Christians, could be wrong, yes. Do we believe that we are wrong, absolutely 100% NO. There are two distinct quetions there with two different answers, most folks mix the two questions and the two answers together, and come to a misconstrued assessment of your/our thoughts.

 And I think thats the point you're trying to get across. Do most Christians think that by admitting this that the devil has "got a hold'on ya".... yes.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 23, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Those who knowingly wear a clown costume aren't surprised when people laugh.



You think it's a clown costume, millions of others think it's a batman costume.(the new one of course)


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> I'm in agreement with you JB. Is there a chance we, as Christians, could be wrong, yes. Do we believe that we are wrong, absolutely 100% NO. There are two distinct quetions there with two different answers, most folks mix the two questions and the two answers together, and come to a misconstrued assessment of your/our thoughts.
> 
> And I think thats the point you're trying to get across. Do most Christians think that by admitting this that the devil has "got a hold'on ya".... yes.



Thanks String.  And, you nailed it.  But, I have a feeling you may have gotten yourself in trouble with me.......

For the record, if I classified myself, it would be Christian....Theist.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 23, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> I'm in agreement with you JB. Is there a chance we, as Christians, could be wrong, yes. Do we believe that we are wrong, absolutely 100% NO. There are two distinct quetions there with two different answers, most folks mix the two questions and the two answers together, and come to a misconstrued assessment of your/our thoughts.



An honest man of any other faith could say the exact same thing. So in that sense you're in the same boat with every other person of faith. Given the conflicting views most if not all of you are wrong. Odds are you're all wrong but if we assume that there is one true faith out of the bunch the odds are still very much against you happening to be the one whose beliefs are true. So how do you separate out the truth from the fiction? Can't do it with faith or personal experience because you've all got that.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Can't do it with faith or personal experience because you've all got that.



Faith is the point.  Many (not all) other religions are action based.  Ours is a simple faith in Jesus.  And I believe in Jesus.  I have faith in that.

There are multiple seperating factors, which you will disregard, compare to Zeus, and move on.

This is also my point.....there is nothing I can do to convince you of what I believe.  It requires faith on your part.


----------



## Huntinfool (Aug 23, 2012)

> Well, all I've got to say is I'm not too surprised!!!!



Didn't figure you would be...



> I guess you should have made that 70-80% sure since you do not have ANY proof what so ever except that which is made up in your head...



Man!!!

Check AND Mate!  JABBO...you certainly surpass my meager skills.  You really got me on that one my friend.  I take everything back now.  I had no idea I just made this up.  I'm with you guys now.  JABBO beat me.




> Thanks for trying. And you stay classy also.



Always my man.  As I said...I hope you stick around.  Every time you post, you make Christianity look better and better.


----------



## Huntinfool (Aug 23, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Thanks String.  And, you nailed it.  But, I have a feeling you may have gotten yourself in trouble with me.......
> 
> For the record, if I classified myself, it would be Christian....Theist.



That's IT!

Now String is off the Christmas card list along with JB.  Boy are you guys gonna miss out on one hum-dinger of a picture of my family!  You'll be sorry!


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

Huntinfool said:


> Now String is off the Christmas card list along with JB.  Boy are you guys gonna miss out on one hum-dinger of a picture of my family!  You'll be sorry!



Oh, come on.....I was already off your Christmas list


----------



## Huntinfool (Aug 23, 2012)

Yeh, well now you're off double secret probation and on to TRIPLE secret probation.  One more offense and I'll have to open a big ol' can of Matthew 18 on ya....and you don't want that sir.  It's ugly.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

Huntinfool said:


> One more offense and I'll have to open a big ol' can of Matthew 18 on ya....and you don't want that sir.  It's ugly.





We need a thread on that chapter over in the SD&S.  I don't think I see what y'all see.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 23, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Faith is the point.  Many (not all) other religions are action based.  Ours is a simple faith in Jesus.  And I believe in Jesus.  I have faith in that.
> 
> There are multiple seperating factors, which you will disregard, compare to Zeus, and move on.
> 
> This is also my point.....there is nothing I can do to convince you of what I believe.  It requires faith on your part.



The actions themselves are based on faith. And christians have them to. So that's a moot point.

I think you missed my point. Keep your faith if you feel the need. Just understand that faith isn't a means of determining that your beliefs are any more valid than the guy next to you who has faith in a completely different set of beliefs. So if you care about whether or not what you believe is actually true or false you need some other mechanism for making that determination. It needs to be a mechanism that will yield the same results no matter what faith someone happened to be born into.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 23, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> An honest man of any other faith could say the exact same thing. So in that sense you're in the same boat with every other person of faith.


Yep, except I believe Christianity has more evidence to back it up.



> Given the conflicting views most if not all of you are wrong.


So the more the conflicting views, the more chance I have of being wrong? Christianity stands on it's on, as do all other religious views, the conflicting views have nothing to do with whether I am right or not.



> Odds are you're all wrong but if we assume that there is one true faith out of the bunch the odds are still very much against you happening to be the one whose beliefs are true.


In your opinion.



> So how do you separate out the truth from the fiction? Can't do it with faith or personal experience because you've all got that.



I can, and do seperate the truth from the fiction by faith and personal experience, coupled with evidence that I choose to put my faith in because of the persuasiveness of that evidence.


----------



## Huntinfool (Aug 23, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> We need a thread on that chapter over in the SD&S.  I don't think I see what y'all see.



OH, I'm 100% certain of that man.  Start it.  I'll chime in for ya.


----------



## dawg2 (Aug 23, 2012)

How many angels can dance on a head of a pin?


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

Huntinfool said:


> OH, I'm 100% certain of that man.  Start it.  I'll chime in for ya.



Will do....at some point today.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 23, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> Yep, except I believe Christianity has more evidence to back it up.



You should start a thread on that evidence sometime. I know you've cited the historicity of the bible. I had a thread that spoke to that point concerning the census of Quirinius. Perhaps you can take part in addressing that since you consider the bible historically reliable.




stringmusic said:


> I can, and do seperate the truth from the fiction by faith and personal experience, coupled with evidence that I choose to put my faith in because of the persuasiveness of that evidence.



Every person of faith can do the same to confirm their own preconceptions. It clearly is not a reliable means of separating truth from fiction.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> I can, and do seperate the truth from the fiction by faith and personal experience, coupled with evidence that I choose to put my faith in because of the persuasiveness of that evidence.



Hey man....you are saying this a lot better than me.  I'll be the "amen choir" today!


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

Huntinfool said:


> OH, I'm 100% certain of that man.  Start it.  I'll chime in for ya.



I'll start it in the "Christian" forum.....to keep it "in house."


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 23, 2012)

Huntinfool said:


> That's IT!
> 
> Now String is off the Christmas card list along with JB.  Boy are you guys gonna miss out on one hum-dinger of a picture of my family!  You'll be sorry!



dagummit, and I had a spot on my refrigerator picked out and everything.


----------



## Four (Aug 23, 2012)

Holy Crap, Sorry JB0704! I didn't think you'd be attacked like that.... I assumed it might start a conversation about certainty and people would re-evaluate there position of Gnosticism vs agnosticism. 

Didn't think i would be throwing you out of the proverbial closet... I also thought that it wasn't a secret given how many big conversations you've been apart of on this forum that resulted in something like this...

Its odd, as an atheist you might get a similar reaction from other atheists if you said you were gnostic.

In atheist circles its cool to be agnostic, in theist circles its cool to be gnostic..


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Keep your faith if you feel the need. Just understand that faith isn't a means of determining that your beliefs are any more valid than the guy next to you who has faith in a completely different set of beliefs.



Then we are back to what string is saying.....I have a willingness to accept evidence that you do not.



			
				atlashunter said:
			
		

> So if you care about whether or not what you believe is actually true or false you need some other mechanism for making that determination. It needs to be a mechanism that will yield the same results no matter what faith someone happened to be born into.



I do care.....which is why I went through my personal "searching" several years back.  I just landed in a very different place than you did when you started asking questions.  Your qualifiers, or mechanisms, and mine are apparently very different.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

Four said:


> Holy Crap, Sorry JB0704! I didn't think you'd be attacked like that.... I assumed it might start a conversation about certainty and people would re-evaluate there position of Gnosticism vs agnosticism.
> 
> Didn't think i would be throwing you out of the proverbial closet... I also thought that it wasn't a secret given how many big conversations you've been apart of on this forum that resulted in something like this...
> 
> ...



It's all symantecs.  

I believe in God.  And Jesus.

I enjoy conversation.....I just hate having to defend my faith over my particular approach to it.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 23, 2012)

Would it be odd to say, based on the chart, that I consider myself a gnostic theist?

I know God is real, and I know that Jesus died on the cross, but, at one point in time, people of the world "knew" the earth was flat. I'm not saying that I think I am going to be proved wrong, because I don't think that.

I am just giving in to the reality that what I know, could be wrong. Do I believe it is wrong, obviously not, or I would believe it.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 23, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> You should start a thread on that evidence sometime. I know you've cited the historicity of the bible. I had a thread that spoke to that point concerning the census of Quirinius. Perhaps you can take part in addressing that since you consider the bible historically reliable.


I like the three stage argument for God thread I started as well. An the thread about how consciousness arose from inanimate matter. I can't think of everything I've talked about on this forum right off hand, but all this together is the evidence that I'm talking about.




> Every person of faith can do the same to confirm their own preconceptions.




But, _I_ don't think every person of faith can do this, unless they put their faith in something that has less evidence than Christianity.



> It clearly is not a reliable means of separating truth from fiction.



...... for you, it has clearly worked for me and 9,123,583,394,384,394 other people.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 23, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Then we are back to what string is saying.....I have a willingness to accept evidence that you do not.



If the evidence is there then faith isn't necessary. So let's leave faith out of it and concentrate on the evidence. Those are discussions I'm happy to take part in.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 23, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> ...... for you, it has clearly worked for me and 9,123,583,394,384,394 other people.



If it worked then we wouldn't have such a wide diversity of conflicting religious beliefs.


----------



## JABBO (Aug 23, 2012)

I do? I didn't think it could get any better... Boy was I wrong!!!   



Huntinfool said:


> Every time you post, you make Christianity look better and better.


----------



## Four (Aug 23, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> Would it be odd to say, based on the chart, that I consider myself a gnostic theist?
> 
> I know God is real, and I know that Jesus died on the cross, but, at one point in time, people of the world "knew" the earth was flat. I'm not saying that I think I am going to be proved wrong, because I don't think that.
> 
> I am just giving in to the reality that what I know, could be wrong. Do I believe it is wrong, obviously not, or I would believe it.



It wouldn't be odd at all... i think gnosticism is a default position for most theists were as agnosticism is the default position for most atheists. This is likely because religion is generally about knowing the answers were as science is about finding them... 

 Many people say that agnostism is the only rational position for anything

They say this because of last Thursday-ism  (our whole world was created last Thursday and all your memories are fake and implanted by a god/demon/devil etc) matrix style!

This is why some people rather use the Dawkins Scale as it can often times be more useful than the gnostic vs. agnostic position... 

Even if i would to say i am a gnostic atheist, that would only be for certain versions of God, there are certain definitions that i couldn't rationally say i was gnostic about, as they are outside the realm of knowable information.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> If the evidence is there then faith isn't necessary.



Unless you have faith in the evidence.....

You guys have beat the NT to death over here.  And, it typically gets reverted back to the OT claims.  There is much discussion over who wrote what when.

Either you accept it, and live it.  Or you reject it, and move on. Either way, I am sure we are both content with our current status.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 23, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> If it worked then we wouldn't have such a wide diversity of conflicting religious beliefs.



If libertarianism worked, we wouldn't have socialism?


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 23, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Unless you have faith in the evidence.....
> 
> You guys have beat the NT to death over here.  And, it typically gets reverted back to the OT claims.  There is much discussion over who wrote what when.
> 
> Either you accept it, and live it.  Or you reject it, and move on. Either way, I am sure we are both content with our current status.





Fantastico!


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 23, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> Unless you have faith in the evidence.....
> 
> You guys have beat the NT to death over here.  And, it typically gets reverted back to the OT claims.  There is much discussion over who wrote what when.
> 
> Either you accept it, and live it.  Or you reject it, and move on. Either way, I am sure we are both content with our current status.



Is an understanding of how chemistry and physics operate based on faith? This is like saying if you toss an iron bar in a bucket of water 10,000 times and it sinks every time the next time you do it and predict it will sink your prediction is based on faith.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 23, 2012)

stringmusic said:


> If libertarianism worked, we wouldn't have socialism?



You can have truth swimming in a sea of lies. But if everybody follows the same methodology and comes to widely differing conclusions then that is a failed methodology for sorting out the truth. People of other faiths share your methodology to confirm their preconceptions just as you do. So what is it exactly that you think you've accomplished if you've set up a test that you rig to give you the desired outcome? That isn't a pathway to identifying falsehoods and actually when people do that it shows a distinct lack of confidence in the truth of the claims they make.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> Is an understanding of how chemistry and physics operate based on faith? This is like saying if you toss an iron bar in a bucket of water 10,000 times and it sinks every time the next time you do it and predict it will sink your prediction is based on faith.



This is why I have been saying all along that a little "faith" is required.

I believe it happened.  You don't.  I can't prove it to you, so I have to have faith.


----------



## stringmusic (Aug 23, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> You can have truth swimming in a sea of lies.



Yep.


----------



## atlashunter (Aug 23, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> This is why I have been saying all along that a little "faith" is required.
> 
> I believe it happened.  You don't.  I can't prove it to you, so I have to have faith.



Which gets us no where. So let's talk about whether prayer really works and what evidence we should see if it does. Let's talk about the historical problems with the gospel accounts. There has to be some accounting for those even for a believer. Let's talk about what the evidence of human origins indicates and what that means for the bible. The evidence is what it is regardless of what you believe.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

atlashunter said:


> So let's talk about whether prayer really works and what evidence we should see if it does. Let's talk about the historical problems with the gospel accounts. There has to be some accounting for those even for a believer. Let's talk about what the evidence of human origins indicates and what that means for the bible. The evidence is what it is regardless of what you believe.



I agree.

Let's discuss those things.......again......


----------



## WaltL1 (Aug 23, 2012)

JB0704 said:


> For the record....I absolutely HATE this subject.  I always seem to tick everybody off, without intending to.


For what its worth, there are those of us that are intelligent enough to understand that acknowledging the fact that you could be wrong has absolutely NOTHING to do with your level of faith, belief, christianity etc. and no explenation or defence of your position is required or necessary.


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 23, 2012)

WaltL1 said:


> For what its worth, there are those of us that are intelligent enough to understand that acknowledging the fact that you could be wrong has absolutely NOTHING to do with your level of faith, belief, christianity etc. and no explenation or defence of your position is required or necessary.




...Unless you're in an apologetic forum.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

WaltL1 said:


> For what its worth, there are those of us that are intelligent enough to understand that acknowledging the fact that you could be wrong has absolutely NOTHING to do with your level of faith, belief, christianity etc. and no explenation or defence of your position is required or necessary.


----------



## WaltL1 (Aug 23, 2012)

ambush80 said:


> ...Unless you're in an apologetic forum.


Ok sure I'll change it to based on all the posts JB has ever made I personlly dont require it or find it necessary for JB to explain himself on this voluntary, no participation required, explain if you want, dont if you dont want to, forum. We good now?


----------



## ambush80 (Aug 23, 2012)

WaltL1 said:


> Ok sure I'll change it to based on all the posts JB has ever made I personlly dont require it or find it necessary for JB to explain himself on this voluntary, no participation required, explain if you want, dont if you dont want to, forum. We good now?



That's fine.

Having the 'faith of a child' doesn't carry much weight around here.


----------



## WaltL1 (Aug 23, 2012)

Faith of a child?
Fact - JB 100% believes in God and Jesus and all that stuff
Fact - Aknowleding he could be wrong doesnt change that in any way
Fact - he doesnt have to explain that to you or anybody else if he chooses not to. On this forum or any other.
Fact - Im dealing with facts not 'faith of a child' or any other kind of faith.


----------



## ross the deer slayer (Aug 23, 2012)

I'm sorry JB I kinda kicked off all that with my question..NOT my intentions I understand now..not sure how havana didn't get it? ?? Anyway sorry about that


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

ross the deer slayer said:


> I'm sorry JB I kinda kicked off all that with my question..NOT my intentions I understand now..not sure how havana didn't get it? ?? Anyway sorry about that



It's all good man.  I appreciate it.  I think the discussion turned up some positive things eventually.


----------



## JB0704 (Aug 23, 2012)

WaltL1 said:


> Faith of a child?
> Fact - JB 100% believes in God and Jesus and all that stuff
> Fact - Aknowleding he could be wrong doesnt change that in any way
> Fact - he doesnt have to explain that to you or anybody else if he chooses not to. On this forum or any other.Fact - Im dealing with facts not 'faith of a child' or any other kind of faith.



I appreciate it Walt.  

I try to "defend" my faith where needed.....but would much prefer discussing it.  I think everybody in here believes a little bit differently than everybody else.  That's what makes it fun.  I like communicating with you guys, and comparing thoughts and beliefs.  It gives me perspective on my own faith that I wouldn't get if everybody agreed with me.

I am constantly learning things.  Whether or not I agree with the atheists or agnostics I am constantly gleaning facts from them about science, history, and much of the time y'all know more about the Bible than I do.

I'm glad you saw fact one and two as you did.  I wish I could have communicated it as well as some of the other folks did.....I might have been able to avoid some of the mess that got stirred up.  But I do appreciate your posts.


----------

