Anonymous
01/24/2020 12:26
Subject: Re:Online Bible Study for Agnostic
Another vote for BSF. I do it online but they have weekly in person groups. There is an audio/video lecture and then written materials and questions to help relate it to the life of the reader. A friend who is in seminary took a look and said the materials are of high quality. I was curious and also felt like I was missing a lot of cultural references, etc, OP. I like the mix of modalities watching/listening/reading and even engaging in online discussion if you want (I have skipped that part since I cannot commit to a time). It is free and you can stop whenever, skip or make up when busy, etc. A colleague mentioned it to me - she goes to in person lectures/meetings and keeps up even when she travels, there are groups that meet all over the world. That also appealed to me on some level, a collective search for meaning sort of thing.
Anonymous
01/24/2020 12:18
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
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.
Anonymous
01/24/2020 12:10
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
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".
Anonymous
01/24/2020 12:00
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
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.
"vast majority of people" - you mean a few people in this forum despite link after link showing otherwise? That's your claim? The people active in this thread - which may be single digits - constitute the "vast majority" against the multiple links of evidence (that I can continue if you need it)?
"aren’t aware of the semantic hair-splitting" - but it is not "semantic hair-splitting"; it's a critically important distinction because to say "There are absolutely no gods" is a claim which must be supported by evidence. You know this, which is why you don't like the Agnostic Atheist position. You'd like to share that impossible burden of proof that you shoulder. Sorry. Not happening.
Anonymous
01/24/2020 11:54
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
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.
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.
Anonymous
01/24/2020 11:42
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are either atheist or agnostic, not both. If you waiver you are an agnostic, not atheist.
Sigh.
Again, nope. It has nothing to do with "wavering". It has to do with what you claim to know. "Gnostic" refers to knowledge, not belief.
Go back and read the thread, with particular attention to the cartoons, if you wish to understand what the vast majority of atheists believe.
You cannot be both. You are either atheist or agnostic. I am an atheist. Gnositc has nothing to do with anything.
Thank you. The whole gnostic thing just muddies the waters. But underneath the cartoons, the distinction between 100% knowledge/certainty and 99% knowledge/certainty is still the fundamental point. And even the cartoon makes it clear you can’t be both.
And you base your understanding on the contents of a CARTOON?? To me, it seems like you are an atheist who does not know the meaning of "agnostic" which is "not knowing" while "atheist" is "not believing" and you can certainly be both.
Maybe it's time to realize that you were misinformed and that now you're learning something new.
You seem really threatened. It was an "atheist" who first posted the cartoon saying you can't be both atheist and agnostic.
I posted the first cartoon, and it makes it clear you can be both and explains how. I am both atheist and agnostic.
The cartoon has already been disected and ridiculed above, by other atheists. Why don't you let OP go back to trying to get input.
Why don't you stop ignoring facts?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism
https://books.google.com/books?ei=0Xt_T5mMH8KUiQLrlq3HAw&id=FI7ZAAAAMAAJ&dq=atheism+the+case+against+god&q=agnostic+theist#search_anchor
https://www.atheistrepublic.com/blog/arminnavabi/atheism-vs-agnosticism-what-difference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRmX9RVeNkU
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/theory-knowledge/201410/why-i-am-agnostic-atheist
https://danielmiessler.com/blog/if-youre-agnostic-youre-probably-an-atheist/
The most common misconception about atheism is that all atheists are 100% convinced that no godlike entity exists anywhere in the universe. This is false.
https://atheism.wikia.org/wiki/Atheist_vs_Agnostic
People sometimes say stuff like, “I’m an agnostic” when the other person thinks they’re closer to a weak atheist. Alternatively people call themselves atheists while others think they’re agnostics. Then people can get accused of lying when they didn’t intend to deceive anyone. Below are examples of different use of atheist and agnostic:- Richard Dawkins argues that there almost certainly is no god and is considered an atheist. Bertrand Russell also believed that god is very unlikely but called himself an agnostic at least part of the time, [1] .
People generally hate it if they get called liars despite trying to be honest. So at the very least we should take care to remember that other people may use these two words with a different meaning from the meaning we assume.
I could go on all day with links.
You can say what the word means to YOU, but you can't say what someone else believes, just the way you can't tell a Mormon he isn't Christian or a Buddhist that he isn't religious. It's not your choice. I am Atheist and Agnostic both. I am not making the claim "no gods exist" because I know I cannot prove a negative so I do not make that claim.
Anonymous
01/24/2020 11:24
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are either atheist or agnostic, not both. If you waiver you are an agnostic, not atheist.
Sigh.
Again, nope. It has nothing to do with "wavering". It has to do with what you claim to know. "Gnostic" refers to knowledge, not belief.
Go back and read the thread, with particular attention to the cartoons, if you wish to understand what the vast majority of atheists believe.
You cannot be both. You are either atheist or agnostic. I am an atheist. Gnositc has nothing to do with anything.
Thank you. The whole gnostic thing just muddies the waters. But underneath the cartoons, the distinction between 100% knowledge/certainty and 99% knowledge/certainty is still the fundamental point. And even the cartoon makes it clear you can’t be both.
And you base your understanding on the contents of a CARTOON?? To me, it seems like you are an atheist who does not know the meaning of "agnostic" which is "not knowing" while "atheist" is "not believing" and you can certainly be both.
Maybe it's time to realize that you were misinformed and that now you're learning something new.
You seem really threatened. It was an "atheist" who first posted the cartoon saying you can't be both atheist and agnostic.
I posted the first cartoon, and it makes it clear you can be both and explains how. I am both atheist and agnostic.
The cartoon has already been disected and ridiculed above, by other atheists. Why don't you let OP go back to trying to get input.
Anonymous
01/24/2020 10:35
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are either atheist or agnostic, not both. If you waiver you are an agnostic, not atheist.
Sigh.
Again, nope. It has nothing to do with "wavering". It has to do with what you claim to know. "Gnostic" refers to knowledge, not belief.
Go back and read the thread, with particular attention to the cartoons, if you wish to understand what the vast majority of atheists believe.
You cannot be both. You are either atheist or agnostic. I am an atheist. Gnositc has nothing to do with anything.
Thank you. The whole gnostic thing just muddies the waters. But underneath the cartoons, the distinction between 100% knowledge/certainty and 99% knowledge/certainty is still the fundamental point. And even the cartoon makes it clear you can’t be both.
And you base your understanding on the contents of a CARTOON?? To me, it seems like you are an atheist who does not know the meaning of "agnostic" which is "not knowing" while "atheist" is "not believing" and you can certainly be both.
Maybe it's time to realize that you were misinformed and that now you're learning something new.
You seem really threatened. It was an "atheist" who first posted the cartoon saying you can't be both atheist and agnostic.
I posted the first cartoon, and it makes it clear you can be both and explains how. I am both atheist and agnostic.
Anonymous
01/24/2020 09:34
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are either atheist or agnostic, not both. If you waiver you are an agnostic, not atheist.
Sigh.
Again, nope. It has nothing to do with "wavering". It has to do with what you claim to know. "Gnostic" refers to knowledge, not belief.
Go back and read the thread, with particular attention to the cartoons, if you wish to understand what the vast majority of atheists believe.
You cannot be both. You are either atheist or agnostic. I am an atheist. Gnositc has nothing to do with anything.
Thank you. The whole gnostic thing just muddies the waters. But underneath the cartoons, the distinction between 100% knowledge/certainty and 99% knowledge/certainty is still the fundamental point. And even the cartoon makes it clear you can’t be both.
And you base your understanding on the contents of a CARTOON?? To me, it seems like you are an atheist who does not know the meaning of "agnostic" which is "not knowing" while "atheist" is "not believing" and you can certainly be both.
Maybe it's time to realize that you were misinformed and that now you're learning something new.
You seem really threatened. It was an "atheist" who first posted the cartoon saying you can't be both atheist and agnostic.
Anonymous
01/24/2020 09:22
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are either atheist or agnostic, not both. If you waiver you are an agnostic, not atheist.
Sigh.
Again, nope. It has nothing to do with "wavering". It has to do with what you claim to know. "Gnostic" refers to knowledge, not belief.
Go back and read the thread, with particular attention to the cartoons, if you wish to understand what the vast majority of atheists believe.
You cannot be both. You are either atheist or agnostic. I am an atheist. Gnositc has nothing to do with anything.
Thank you. The whole gnostic thing just muddies the waters. But underneath the cartoons, the distinction between 100% knowledge/certainty and 99% knowledge/certainty is still the fundamental point. And even the cartoon makes it clear you can’t be both.
And you base your understanding on the contents of a CARTOON?? To me, it seems like you are an atheist who does not know the meaning of "agnostic" which is "not knowing" while "atheist" is "not believing" and you can certainly be both.
Maybe it's time to realize that you were misinformed and that now you're learning something new.
Anonymous
01/24/2020 09:13
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are either atheist or agnostic, not both. If you waiver you are an agnostic, not atheist.
Sigh.
Again, nope. It has nothing to do with "wavering". It has to do with what you claim to know. "Gnostic" refers to knowledge, not belief.
Go back and read the thread, with particular attention to the cartoons, if you wish to understand what the vast majority of atheists believe.
Citation that the vast majority of atheists "believe" in these definitions?
My use of the word belief was WRT atheism and what it is.
I posted a video from the leading internet/TV show on atheism - the Atheist Experience -- to explain it. The video is from 2002, so any indication it is "new jargon" is fallacious.
Here's another citation from a group you've probably heard of, American Atheists:
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/about-atheism/
Atheism is one thing: A lack of belief in gods.
Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.
Older dictionaries define atheism as “a belief that there is no God.” Clearly, theistic influence taints these definitions. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as “there is no God” betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read “there are no gods.”
Enough for you?
I'm sorry - the "vast majority of atheists" haven't watched that video or heard of American Atheists.
From my experience, I'd say most atheists would use these definitions:
atheist = doesn't believe in any god
agnostic = not sure if there are gods or not
OK so give me a few minutes and I will call the vast majority of atheists up and ask them, since references from 2 leading sources are not enough apparently.
As for your assertion:
atheist = doesn't believe in any god
agnostic = not sure if there are gods or not
Sure. But both of those can be true at the same time. They are to me. The second "but with the same level of belief in god that I have in faries or unicorns" as with Dawkins.
OK. But not to the "vast majority of atheists".
And not to Dawkins—pp is misconstruing him. Please re-read Dawkins quote above.
And how is it that you can speak for the "vast majority" of atheists? If you were an atheist, you'd know that it's impossible to prove there are no gods, just as it is impossible to prove there are no fairies or gremlins. Yet people generally give up belief in fairies while they are children. Atheists have given up, i.e., stopped believing in God - they have not proved his (or her!) non-existence because it's just as impossible as proving the non-existence of fairies or anything else that's invisible. Many atheists would describe themselves and agnostic atheist - I don't know and I don't believe.
It's true that in our society, agnostic is considered to be a nicer designation -- presuming a desire to believe, but an inability to believe -- but it really doesn't mean that.
Think of other uses of the word: when people say "I'm agnostic about that" they mean they don't know, not that they wished they knew or that they are struggling to know. It's the same in the context of religion.
Anonymous
01/22/2020 09:25
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
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!
Anonymous
01/08/2020 17:39
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
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
Anonymous
01/08/2020 17:25
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are either atheist or agnostic, not both. If you waiver you are an agnostic, not atheist.
Sigh.
Again, nope. It has nothing to do with "wavering". It has to do with what you claim to know. "Gnostic" refers to knowledge, not belief.
Go back and read the thread, with particular attention to the cartoons, if you wish to understand what the vast majority of atheists believe.
Citation that the vast majority of atheists "believe" in these definitions?
My use of the word belief was WRT atheism and what it is.
I posted a video from the leading internet/TV show on atheism - the Atheist Experience -- to explain it. The video is from 2002, so any indication it is "new jargon" is fallacious.
Here's another citation from a group you've probably heard of, American Atheists:
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/about-atheism/
Atheism is one thing: A lack of belief in gods.
Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.
Older dictionaries define atheism as “a belief that there is no God.” Clearly, theistic influence taints these definitions. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as “there is no God” betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read “there are no gods.”
Enough for you?
I'm sorry - the "vast majority of atheists" haven't watched that video or heard of American Atheists.
From my experience, I'd say most atheists would use these definitions:
atheist = doesn't believe in any god
agnostic = not sure if there are gods or not
OK so give me a few minutes and I will call the vast majority of atheists up and ask them, since references from 2 leading sources are not enough apparently.
As for your assertion:
atheist = doesn't believe in any god
agnostic = not sure if there are gods or not
Sure. But both of those can be true at the same time. They are to me. The second "but with the same level of belief in god that I have in faries or unicorns" as with Dawkins.
OK. But not to the "vast majority of atheists".
And not to Dawkins—pp is misconstruing him. Please re-read Dawkins quote above.
Anonymous
01/08/2020 17:21
Subject: Online Bible Study for Agnostic
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are either atheist or agnostic, not both. If you waiver you are an agnostic, not atheist.
Sigh.
Again, nope. It has nothing to do with "wavering". It has to do with what you claim to know. "Gnostic" refers to knowledge, not belief.
Go back and read the thread, with particular attention to the cartoons, if you wish to understand what the vast majority of atheists believe.
Citation that the vast majority of atheists "believe" in these definitions?
My use of the word belief was WRT atheism and what it is.
I posted a video from the leading internet/TV show on atheism - the Atheist Experience -- to explain it. The video is from 2002, so any indication it is "new jargon" is fallacious.
Here's another citation from a group you've probably heard of, American Atheists:
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/about-atheism/
Atheism is one thing: A lack of belief in gods.
Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.
Older dictionaries define atheism as “a belief that there is no God.” Clearly, theistic influence taints these definitions. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as “there is no God” betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read “there are no gods.”
Enough for you?
I'm sorry - the "vast majority of atheists" haven't watched that video or heard of American Atheists.
From my experience, I'd say most atheists would use these definitions:
atheist = doesn't believe in any god
agnostic = not sure if there are gods or not
OK so give me a few minutes and I will call the vast majority of atheists up and ask them, since references from 2 leading sources are not enough apparently.
As for your assertion:
atheist = doesn't believe in any god
agnostic = not sure if there are gods or not
Sure. But both of those can be true at the same time. They are to me. The second "but with the same level of belief in god that I have in faries or unicorns" as with Dawkins.
DP. How can “doesn’t believe” be the same thing as “not sure”? These are two different things to English speakers. Not even your cartoon tries to claim they’re the same—even if the cartoon distinguishes between agnostic atheists and gnostic atheists, it’s saying it depends on full knowledge vs. partial knowledge and the cartoon says these two things are NOT the same.
Dawkins’ whole point about calling himself agnostic is that he still has 0.1/7% uncertainty, presumably the same uncertainty he has about fairies. He’s not at 7/7 certainty there are no gods. And THAT’s the whole reason Dawkins calls himself agnostic, not atheist or agnostic atheist or however else you’ve tried to label him. Please re-read the quote from Dawkins himself above.