Online Bible Study for Agnostic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you call yourself is of course your choice.

Yet, as this thread keeps proving, vast majority of people aren’t aware of the semantic hair-splitting.

TBH I truly don’t care what you call yourself. You’re just such an easy target, you get so angry and defensive.

Exactly - if you go ask them today they would NOT say "I'm an agnostic atheist". They'd either say "agnostic" or "atheist".

That's not the question - what's easy in conversation. Ask them if they are both. I they say "Atheist" ask them if they are 100% certain there are no gods. Very, very few will say yes. That makes them also agnostic.

Really, try it. Or watch a few online videos from The Atheist Experience or similar groups and programs. You'll find it very consistent.

And, for the record, if anyone says "I AM 100% CERTAIN THERE ARE NO GODS IN THE UNIVERSE", by all means, make them show evidence.

No - but I will ask people what is their definition of atheist and agnostic and let them define themselves. I don't force my opinions or definitions on others.

And no one has to provide evidence of their beliefs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you call yourself is of course your choice.

Yet, as this thread keeps proving, vast majority of people aren’t aware of the semantic hair-splitting.

TBH I truly don’t care what you call yourself. You’re just such an easy target, you get so angry and defensive.

Exactly - if you go ask them today they would NOT say "I'm an agnostic atheist". They'd either say "agnostic" or "atheist".

That's not the question - what's easy in conversation. Ask them if they are both. I they say "Atheist" ask them if they are 100% certain there are no gods. Very, very few will say yes. That makes them also agnostic.

Really, try it. Or watch a few online videos from The Atheist Experience or similar groups and programs. You'll find it very consistent.

And, for the record, if anyone says "I AM 100% CERTAIN THERE ARE NO GODS IN THE UNIVERSE", by all means, make them show evidence.

No - but I will ask people what is their definition of atheist and agnostic and let them define themselves. I don't force my opinions or definitions on others.

Exactly the argument I have been making from the beginning. I don't know which poster you are, but I assume you were not one of the ones saying "you are one or the other you can't be both" or ridiculing the cartoon and the other evidence of people who say they are both. So thank you.

And no one has to provide evidence of their beliefs.

Beliefs, never. Claims, always.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you call yourself is of course your choice.

Yet, as this thread keeps proving, vast majority of people aren’t aware of the semantic hair-splitting.

TBH I truly don’t care what you call yourself. You’re just such an easy target, you get so angry and defensive.

Exactly - if you go ask them today they would NOT say "I'm an agnostic atheist". They'd either say "agnostic" or "atheist".

That's not the question - what's easy in conversation. Ask them if they are both. I they say "Atheist" ask them if they are 100% certain there are no gods. Very, very few will say yes. That makes them also agnostic.

Really, try it. Or watch a few online videos from The Atheist Experience or similar groups and programs. You'll find it very consistent.

And, for the record, if anyone says "I AM 100% CERTAIN THERE ARE NO GODS IN THE UNIVERSE", by all means, make them show evidence.

No - but I will ask people what is their definition of atheist and agnostic and let them define themselves. I don't force my opinions or definitions on others.

Exactly the argument I have been making from the beginning. I don't know which poster you are, but I assume you were not one of the ones saying "you are one or the other you can't be both" or ridiculing the cartoon and the other evidence of people who say they are both. So thank you.

And no one has to provide evidence of their beliefs.

Beliefs, never. Claims, always.

Yes, please keep your definitions to yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you call yourself is of course your choice.

Yet, as this thread keeps proving, vast majority of people aren’t aware of the semantic hair-splitting.

TBH I truly don’t care what you call yourself. You’re just such an easy target, you get so angry and defensive.

Exactly - if you go ask them today they would NOT say "I'm an agnostic atheist". They'd either say "agnostic" or "atheist".

That's not the question - what's easy in conversation. Ask them if they are both. I they say "Atheist" ask them if they are 100% certain there are no gods. Very, very few will say yes. That makes them also agnostic.

Really, try it. Or watch a few online videos from The Atheist Experience or similar groups and programs. You'll find it very consistent.

And, for the record, if anyone says "I AM 100% CERTAIN THERE ARE NO GODS IN THE UNIVERSE", by all means, make them show evidence.

No - but I will ask people what is their definition of atheist and agnostic and let them define themselves. I don't force my opinions or definitions on others.

Exactly the argument I have been making from the beginning. I don't know which poster you are, but I assume you were not one of the ones saying "you are one or the other you can't be both" or ridiculing the cartoon and the other evidence of people who say they are both. So thank you.

And no one has to provide evidence of their beliefs.

Beliefs, never. Claims, always.

Yes, please keep your definitions to yourself.

Ahh the old "I don't like what you think so shut up" approach. Always the sign of an open-minded and enlightened person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you call yourself is of course your choice.

Yet, as this thread keeps proving, vast majority of people aren’t aware of the semantic hair-splitting.

TBH I truly don’t care what you call yourself. You’re just such an easy target, you get so angry and defensive.

Exactly - if you go ask them today they would NOT say "I'm an agnostic atheist". They'd either say "agnostic" or "atheist".

That's not the question - what's easy in conversation. Ask them if they are both. I they say "Atheist" ask them if they are 100% certain there are no gods. Very, very few will say yes. That makes them also agnostic.

Really, try it. Or watch a few online videos from The Atheist Experience or similar groups and programs. You'll find it very consistent.

And, for the record, if anyone says "I AM 100% CERTAIN THERE ARE NO GODS IN THE UNIVERSE", by all means, make them show evidence.

Ditto

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you call yourself is of course your choice.

Yet, as this thread keeps proving, vast majority of people aren’t aware of the semantic hair-splitting.

TBH I truly don’t care what you call yourself. You’re just such an easy target, you get so angry and defensive.

Exactly - if you go ask them today they would NOT say "I'm an agnostic atheist". They'd either say "agnostic" or "atheist".

That's not the question - what's easy in conversation. Ask them if they are both. I they say "Atheist" ask them if they are 100% certain there are no gods. Very, very few will say yes. That makes them also agnostic.

Really, try it. Or watch a few online videos from The Atheist Experience or similar groups and programs. You'll find it very consistent.

And, for the record, if anyone says "I AM 100% CERTAIN THERE ARE NO GODS IN THE UNIVERSE", by all means, make them show evidence.

No - but I will ask people what is their definition of atheist and agnostic and let them define themselves. I don't force my opinions or definitions on others.

And no one has to provide evidence of their beliefs.

Would you also ask people what their definition of "Roman Catholic" is or what "Orthodox Jew" means to them?

The definitions of specific religions are well known.

Such has not been the case with "atheist" and "agnostic" but they have specific definitions too, which people are just beginning to understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you call yourself is of course your choice.

Yet, as this thread keeps proving, vast majority of people aren’t aware of the semantic hair-splitting.

TBH I truly don’t care what you call yourself. You’re just such an easy target, you get so angry and defensive.

Exactly - if you go ask them today they would NOT say "I'm an agnostic atheist". They'd either say "agnostic" or "atheist".

That's not the question - what's easy in conversation. Ask them if they are both. I they say "Atheist" ask them if they are 100% certain there are no gods. Very, very few will say yes. That makes them also agnostic.

Really, try it. Or watch a few online videos from The Atheist Experience or similar groups and programs. You'll find it very consistent.

And, for the record, if anyone says "I AM 100% CERTAIN THERE ARE NO GODS IN THE UNIVERSE", by all means, make them show evidence.

No - but I will ask people what is their definition of atheist and agnostic and let them define themselves. I don't force my opinions or definitions on others.

And no one has to provide evidence of their beliefs.

Would you also ask people what their definition of "Roman Catholic" is or what "Orthodox Jew" means to them?

The definitions of specific religions are well known.

Such has not been the case with "atheist" and "agnostic" but they have specific definitions too, which people are just beginning to understand.

I think the whole point is that you decide for yourself. Everyone doesn’t have to fit into neat little buckets that some person arbitrarily defines. Just like they did for religions in the past...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you call yourself is of course your choice.

Yet, as this thread keeps proving, vast majority of people aren’t aware of the semantic hair-splitting.

TBH I truly don’t care what you call yourself. You’re just such an easy target, you get so angry and defensive.

Exactly - if you go ask them today they would NOT say "I'm an agnostic atheist". They'd either say "agnostic" or "atheist".

That's not the question - what's easy in conversation. Ask them if they are both. I they say "Atheist" ask them if they are 100% certain there are no gods. Very, very few will say yes. That makes them also agnostic.

Really, try it. Or watch a few online videos from The Atheist Experience or similar groups and programs. You'll find it very consistent.

And, for the record, if anyone says "I AM 100% CERTAIN THERE ARE NO GODS IN THE UNIVERSE", by all means, make them show evidence.

No - but I will ask people what is their definition of atheist and agnostic and let them define themselves. I don't force my opinions or definitions on others.

Exactly the argument I have been making from the beginning. I don't know which poster you are, but I assume you were not one of the ones saying "you are one or the other you can't be both" or ridiculing the cartoon and the other evidence of people who say they are both. So thank you.

And no one has to provide evidence of their beliefs.

Beliefs, never. Claims, always.

Yes, please keep your definitions to yourself.

Ahh the old "I don't like what you think so shut up" approach. Always the sign of an open-minded and enlightened person.

I don’t want people shoving religion down my throat. And I don’t want people pushing labels down my throat.

It’s not that I don’t “like” what you think it’s just that you shouldn’t be pushing it on others. Proselytizing you might say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you call yourself is of course your choice.

Yet, as this thread keeps proving, vast majority of people aren’t aware of the semantic hair-splitting.

TBH I truly don’t care what you call yourself. You’re just such an easy target, you get so angry and defensive.

Exactly - if you go ask them today they would NOT say "I'm an agnostic atheist". They'd either say "agnostic" or "atheist".

That's not the question - what's easy in conversation. Ask them if they are both. I they say "Atheist" ask them if they are 100% certain there are no gods. Very, very few will say yes. That makes them also agnostic.

Really, try it. Or watch a few online videos from The Atheist Experience or similar groups and programs. You'll find it very consistent.

And, for the record, if anyone says "I AM 100% CERTAIN THERE ARE NO GODS IN THE UNIVERSE", by all means, make them show evidence.

No - but I will ask people what is their definition of atheist and agnostic and let them define themselves. I don't force my opinions or definitions on others.

Exactly the argument I have been making from the beginning. I don't know which poster you are, but I assume you were not one of the ones saying "you are one or the other you can't be both" or ridiculing the cartoon and the other evidence of people who say they are both. So thank you.

And no one has to provide evidence of their beliefs.

Beliefs, never. Claims, always.

Yes, please keep your definitions to yourself.

Ahh the old "I don't like what you think so shut up" approach. Always the sign of an open-minded and enlightened person.

I don’t want people shoving religion down my throat. And I don’t want people pushing labels down my throat.

It’s not that I don’t “like” what you think it’s just that you shouldn’t be pushing it on others. Proselytizing you might say.

I'm not "pushing" anything. I am having a discussion in a discussion forum. Most of this discussion arose from this chestnut at 01/07/2020 20:07:

"These are mutually exclusive — you can’t not believe and yet not know. They are different. A dictionary is your friend, or agnostic writers like Richard Dawkins."

No one is "pushing" anything -- just trying to get people to properly understand them. You'd do the same thing if someone posted "{your belief here} thinks {incorrect BS}." Right?

And sorry, but yes, both your posts indicate you don't like or agree and you would like people to be quiet. That goes against my values. Say what you believe and be ready to defend it! To me that is a wonderful thing.

[Anonymous]

Both of you atheists/agnostics/atheist-agnostics/whatever, start your own thread. Poor OP is looking for answers to very different questions,

[Anonymous]

Did OP ever get an answer to her question?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am agnostic, but would like to try out a Bible study this year - something online, most likely. For background - I'm a woman and was raised protestant and now attend a Unitarian church. Looking generally to explore spirituality and religion, and it's been a very long time since I've read a Bible. Any women's online Bible studies that are any good, and that might be a good fit for someone like me?

OP, I like this devotional for a daily reader:https://www.amazon.com/Mockingbird-Devotional-Good-Today-Every/dp/148402771X/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&linkCode=sl1&tag=themockblog-20&linkId=f476ba72a9f7857f1d6db96fe7325bde&language=en_US. Though I linked to the print version, you can also find some good (not quite daily) writings on this site: https://mbird.com/category/bible/. Mockingbird is a group of mainly Episcopal, younger priests and theologians focused on themes of grace in the Bible and in culture. It's usually fresh, lively, and interesting writing, and always grounded in Scripture. Sarah Condon, in particular, is one of the writers whose voice I particularly appreciate. She's funny and relatable.

This app for your phone includes various devotional plans/readings that you might find helpful to follow along with: https://www.youversion.com/the-bible-app/.

And if you (like me) were raised in a church but feel like you didn't get the full picture in your childhood, you might find a book like this one a good read as an overview back into the Bible: https://www.amazon.com/Story-Stories-Guided-Genesis-Revelation/dp/0830858164. I've just started in, but it's such a helpful, narrative way to tie together the overarching story being told through the Bible.

Finally, it's not a Bible study, and certainly not online, but Alpha courses (mainly offered through Episcopal churches) are a nice way to explore the overall themes of Christianity in a low-key, non-pressure group setting. The format is a dinner, short video, and then discussion group. There are a number of courses kicking off in January and February at churches around the region: https://alphausa.org/try

NP who is also interested in doing the same thing - thank you for actually responding to the topic and making the scroll to the end of the thread worthwhile! I appreciate it!

Glad it was helpful! This thread reminds of something a questioning friend of mine shared when he wasn't sure whether to return to the church or not. A priest told him that you can ask the same questions on the inside of the door as you can from the outside, so come on in.

[Anonymous]

Another thanks to the PP with suggestions for the Mockingbird devotional and the Guided Stories books -- I've ordered them!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you call yourself is of course your choice.

Yet, as this thread keeps proving, vast majority of people aren’t aware of the semantic hair-splitting.

TBH I truly don’t care what you call yourself. You’re just such an easy target, you get so angry and defensive.

Exactly - if you go ask them today they would NOT say "I'm an agnostic atheist". They'd either say "agnostic" or "atheist".

That's not the question - what's easy in conversation. Ask them if they are both. I they say "Atheist" ask them if they are 100% certain there are no gods. Very, very few will say yes. That makes them also agnostic.

Really, try it. Or watch a few online videos from The Atheist Experience or similar groups and programs. You'll find it very consistent.

And, for the record, if anyone says "I AM 100% CERTAIN THERE ARE NO GODS IN THE UNIVERSE", by all means, make them show evidence.

No - but I will ask people what is their definition of atheist and agnostic and let them define themselves. I don't force my opinions or definitions on others.

Exactly the argument I have been making from the beginning. I don't know which poster you are, but I assume you were not one of the ones saying "you are one or the other you can't be both" or ridiculing the cartoon and the other evidence of people who say they are both. So thank you.

And no one has to provide evidence of their beliefs.

Beliefs, never. Claims, always.

Yes, please keep your definitions to yourself.

Ahh the old "I don't like what you think so shut up" approach. Always the sign of an open-minded and enlightened person.

I don’t want people shoving religion down my throat. And I don’t want people pushing labels down my throat.

It’s not that I don’t “like” what you think it’s just that you shouldn’t be pushing it on others. Proselytizing you might say.

I'm not "pushing" anything. I am having a discussion in a discussion forum. Most of this discussion arose from this chestnut at 01/07/2020 20:07:

"These are mutually exclusive — you can’t not believe and yet not know. They are different. A dictionary is your friend, or agnostic writers like Richard Dawkins."

No one is "pushing" anything -- just trying to get people to properly understand them. You'd do the same thing if someone posted "{your belief here} thinks {incorrect BS}." Right?

And sorry, but yes, both your posts indicate you don't like or agree and you would like people to be quiet. That goes against my values. Say what you believe and be ready to defend it! To me that is a wonderful thing.

“Getting people to properly understand them”

Meaning you think your definitions are the only acceptable ones.

You are pushing your beliefs on others, like the PP.

I detest all flavors of proselytizing.

[Anonymous]

I enjoy the Bible for Normal People podcast.

I was raised evangelical but am now an atheist. It’s nice exploring my cultural roots.