I would like to have an intellectual, thought provoking talk about religion and god on this forum. If you are religious or believe in a god, can you tell me why? What makes your religion and God right? I am not religious, nor do I believe in a god, I am agnostic. I cannot prove a god does not exist, but it is impossible to prove a God does exist, since theirs no evidence at all. Logical responses only please. I would like your opinions.

 

This makes you an atheist. Belief in god is a binary question, you either believe in god or you do not, since belief is active, if you are unsure, or don't believe, you are without belief, thus making you a textbook atheist.

Your position of agnosticism is also valid, but agnosticism answers a different question. Agnosticism is a position about knowing if a deity exists , it's precisely the position of not knowing, or making the claim that it is impossible to know if a deity exists. Agnostics can be both atheists and theists, but never exclusively agnostic.

In essence.

Do you believe in god, or believe deities exist ? (Question about belief)
Atheist - doesn't believe in deities, or doesn't know.
Theist - believes in deities
Agnostic- not applicable

Do you know if god exists? (Question about knowledge)
Atheist - Yes I know, and the answer is no.
Theist - Yes I know, and the answer is yes.
Agnostic- I don't know, and it's impossible to know.

I'm an agnostic-atheist. I don't know if god exists, but I don't believe in god because there is no evidence to suggest that any such supernatural beings have ever existed.

It's equally possible to be agnostic-theist too, that is the default position for Christianity, in Christianity you're not supposed to know that god exists, as that would devalue faith. Instead are supposed to believe, and the more improbable and unlikely you find god, the better, as that shows your faith is extra strong.

But it isn't possible to just be agnostic on its own.

 

Sorry, I meant to say agnostic atheist. Thanks for your response, do you have an opinion of Theist? How is it logical to put blind faith into something with no evidence? Do you find Religion dangerous? I just would like to make have a rational and logical discussion here.

 

It's logical in the sense that the human mind is a deeply flawed tool if the goal is to behave in a rational way, thus makes irrational responses a logical outcome.
Religion is brainwashing, it works on the young and the stupid. You won't find an intelligent person that finds religion in adulthood unless the seeds have already been sowed in childhood. Not all religions are dangerous, some are much worse that others. People's lack of scepticism and their willingness to take things on faith is much more dangerous.

 

Although you are mostly right, I am afraid you haven't quite got your second lot of definitions right.

When talking about knowing if a god exists or not, rather than believing a god exists you can not be purely an "Atheist - Yes I know, and the answer is no." The word "theist" comes from the Greek "thos" meaning "god". So the word "theism" (or theist) makes no claim about knowledge what so ever. It is always a term for belief. Putting an 'A' before a word (in this case "theist") simply shows a lack of something (in the case a belief in god). So as a literal translation; "Theist" = belief in god, and "Atheist" = lack of belief in god.
The same applies with "agnostic" the root word for that is "gnostic" which comes from the Greek for knowledge. So just as adding the 'A' to theist denoted a lack of belief in god, adding 'A' to gnostic shows a lack of knowledge.

So, the terms that should be used are:

Agnostic-theist = doesn't know, but believes there is a god.
Agnostic-atheist = doesn't know, but does not believe there is a god.
Agnostic = not applicable. (but commonly used for someone who is fence sitting on the subject.)
Gnostic-theist = knows there is a god.
Gnostic-atheist = knows there is not a god.

In common everyday usage though very few people bother to call themselves "agnostic-atheist" because most people who take the atheist viewpoint will be happy to change their minds if/when the right evidence is produced for them. So saying "agnostic" becomes redundant, as it covers every atheist other than the gnostic-atheists. Although gnostic-atheists are incredibly rare because anyone who is honest would have to say they can never know for sure and so by default means they are "agnostic" (without knowledge). The best you will normally find is someone who will make a gnostic claim regarding certain deities. So you could claim to be a gnostic-atheist in regards to Christianity, if you feel you have the knowledge that particular god does not exist even if you are still an agnostic-atheist in regards to the concept of a deity in general.

 

I understand. I would not only say it works on the young and stupid though. I believe religion preys on the most desperate, and hopeless, like the poor, sick, and elderly.

 

Wow very deep discussion. Bored Guy states that is not logical to put blind faith into a God that, paraphrasedcan neither be proven he exists or he doesn't exist. Yet, he probably has one time or another has placed a blind faith in love. Love can not be seen tasted heard felt or smelled. So does it exist? According to both Dave and the Bored Guy based on evidence, love cannot be proven without any of the senses because it cannot be perceived by our senses. But love can be felt. Whether it be misguided feelings due to a chemical imbalance. We feel love. So if someone feels god is he wrong? When my daughter was 14 she said she loved this boy and he loved her. I said no you dont yes I do. I said no you dont and I can prove it. If you truly love someone you would die for them. I love you and yes I would die for you. Your bf will not die for you, in fact the first time there's a problem he will run. My belief is that god is love and love is god. Therefore god exists. Ahhh but religion thats the problem. I am 100% against religion as was Jesus Christ if you believe what written in the 4 gospels. Not preaching here. But all the religions on this planet only one mentions the sacrifice of life. According to the Bible Jesus died to save our souls. That is love and love is God. So that is why I believe. I do not believe he will perform some divine intervention because that would interupt the the time continuum. We have to change our own lives. No one will do it for you.

 

I have never put blind faith into anything. Love is an emotion, I do not understand what your trying to get across. Anger and Happiness cannot be felt or smelled either, so whats your point?

 

The point is god is love and love is god. Do you have children? I do and they are the only people I have truly honestly loved. I know this be cause I would sacrifice my life for them. I am anti religion. It will be the death of us.

 

My children did not have to do anything other than be children.

 

No, I'm 20.

 

One day you will. You will have emotions that are completely illogical. You may not br a violent person, but if your childrens lives are in danger not only would you die to save the, you would kill toprotevt them. All illogicsl emotions

 

Sorry about typos. Did not have my glasses on I was striking blindly.

 

Im going to steal devious daves explanation because i suck at explaining things. This is how i feel as well :

"I'm an agnostic-atheist. I don't know if god exists, but I don't believe in god because there is no evidence to suggest that any such supernatural beings have ever existed."

 

I am not a religious person, but I do believe there is a God.
What is God/ a God?
If you believe God is a supreme being or spirit that creates everything, wouldn't it be safe to say a God does exist, base on that the evidence is all around us.

 

I couldn't disagree more. There are plenty of intelligent adult Christians who found God as an adult. I've known several, my dad being one of them. Your view that they don't exist is a bit naive, although it's a view a lot of people share.

 

To put it simply: No.

Just because we have X does not automatically mean Y. The very best you can hope for by going down that road is to end up saying "Well I don't see how else this could happen...so god!" but that is a logical fallacy. Just because you don't know of another option doesn't mean there is one, and it doesn't mean your preferred guess is right.

Nature does not constitute evidence of a supernatural being because nature is...well...natural. The only way it could be used at all as evidence for god is if it could be shown that the natural world could not have come into existence by any other means. But even then you would not know what god is responsible, just that there is one.

 

Study quantum physics in depth or even casually. What do you find natural about nature? I myself find it to be profoundly strange and UNnatural.

 

Gunner, no offence but your definition of god (god is love/love is god) has to be the weakest definition I have ever seen. All you are basically doing is using the word "god" as a synonym for "love". By that definition it is not a separate entity and is not worthy or any kid of worship as 'love' is not responsible for the creation of the universe/the origin of life. That effectively makes the term "god" meaningless as it becomes the same as "love", and since the word "god" has other meanings for people (creator of the universe...etc...) it would be better not to use "god" to mean love, if for no other reason than to avoid confusion.

I reject the notion that you said in your first comment as well that love can not be seen and so does that exist? Love, although a name we give to a complex emotion is still an emotion that can be seen/experienced by others and so we can show it does exist. To use your own example here: If your children were in danger and you risked your own life in order to save them, would they not recognise this as an act of love? You said your self you would not risk your life for someone unless you really loved them, so by really risking your life you prove that love exists.

Although the fact that evolution would explain that love for your children as you have an interest in your offspring surviving also invalidates any claim you are trying to make.

 

Strange? Maybe. Unnatural? No. You, and everything that makes you is found in nature. By definition you are natural.