Bad faith of the agnostic

No. We are taught the Christian religion. "God" is only that teaching. Agnostics accept the Christian teaching. No one is forcing them.
I accept the Abrahamic teaching, Buddhist teachings and any other religious teachings I've learned over the years. That doesn't mean I believe them.

Do you accept Critical Thinking?
 
I don't have a god. Just "God", whichever religion has selected the right one.
FWIW, I strongly doubt any religion or any person has a full understanding of a power that created the entire Universe.

IMO, those that claim only they understand God are not to be trusted.
 
Standard Christian belief.
The standard Christian belief is that their God is a person (Jesus) and a being that is human-like in that it has emotions, and understanding (to some degree) of right and wrong, a working understanding of what it means to be human. It's not just a celestial power.
 
The standard Christian belief is that their God is a person (Jesus) and a being that is human-like in that it has emotions, and understanding (to some degree) of right and wrong, a working understanding of what it means to be human. It's not just a celestial power.
God created the universe. Standard Christianity.
 
No. We are taught the Christian religion. "God" is only that teaching. Agnostics accept the Christian teaching. No one is forcing them.
If they accepted Christian teachings, wouldn't they be Christians and not agnostic?
 
The standard Christian belief is that their God is a person (Jesus) and a being that is human-like in that it has emotions, and understanding (to some degree) of right and wrong, a working understanding of what it means to be human. It's not just a celestial power.
Jesus is a form of god. Not the only aspect of god.
 
Christians aren't agnostic. They believe in the Christian God. They don't question god's existence.
I mean, Christians pose the question that you have to believe in god or you are an atheist. CHRISTIANS made that up.
Christians manufactured the religion. Then used it as a weapon (literally and figuratively) against anyone who disagreed.
 
God created the universe. Standard Christianity.
Agreed. Don't all religions and spiritual cultures have a creation story?


 
I mean, Christians pose the question that you have to believe in god or you are an atheist. CHRISTIANS made that up.
Christians manufactured the religion. Then used it as a weapon (literally and figuratively) against anyone who disagreed.
Some do, but not all. There are, literally, thousands of Christian dominations around the world. Disagreed all are violent enough to weaponize it.
 
It is possible to find value in Christ's teachings without believing him to be God. Ergo one can be an atheist and value Christ's teachings. One can be an agnostic and value Christ's teachings.
You can value some of the ideas from Jesus or any of the many philosophers from, or before, Jesus time. I can find valuable ideas in the Book of Mormon despite the fact that it was a nonsensical fictional story written by a con man. I find value in teachings/concepts from people alive today.

"Ideally, no one should touch my property or tamper with it, unless I have given him some sort of permission, and, if I am sensible I shall treat the property of others with the same respect." – Plato ( c. 420 – c. 347 BCE)

"Do not do to others that which angers you when they do it to you." – Isocrates (436–338 BCE)
 
This is a reasonable position. As I noted earlier even if one assumes there was an all-powerful being who created the universe and everything it doesn't then follow that that being would have specific requirements of one tiny little group on one tiny little planet circling one tiny little star on the edge of one of a zillion galaxies.

For me the "contentious part" about religion is the extrapolation of some "requirements" by that being. But, by the same token, it would make sense for someone who needs a "personal God". If there IS such an all-powerful being it makes sense to the believer to want to "please" that being because then that being could "take care of the believer" and protect them.
Think of the 'requirements' as the accumulated moral wisdom of humanity but taught to younger people by making up an authoritarian figure, because young people are stupid .
 
It is possible to find value in Christ's teachings without believing him to be God. Ergo one can be an atheist and value Christ's teachings. One can be an agnostic and value Christ's teachings.
This is called the aryan heresy. It's a dumb catholic dismissive label of a perfectly good reason to be a Christian.
 
This called the aryan heresy

Not exactly. The Arian Heresy was one of dualism with Christ being separable from God in terms of divinity and essence. This is why we have the Nicene Creed.

Granted, I am questioning the divinity of Christ but it is not in relation to another divine being (God) but rather questioning the whole existence of any sort of god or godhead.
 
Not exactly. The Arian Heresy was one of dualism with Christ being separable from God in terms of divinity and essence. This is why we have the Nicene Creed.

Granted, I am questioning the divinity of Christ but it is not in relation to another divine being (God) but rather questioning the whole existence of any sort of god or godhead.
Basically yes exactly
 
"Ideally, no one should touch my property or tamper with it, unless I have given him some sort of permission, and, if I am sensible I shall treat the property of others with the same respect." – Plato ( c. 420 – c. 347 BCE)
Does not sound like Plato. Please cite the source.

From the "Laws." Most scholars question Plato as the author.
 
Last edited:
Does not sound like Plato. Please cite the source.

From the "Laws." Most scholars question Plato as the author.
You're right. It was written by Aristotle or one of his students, not Plato. Still other people had concepts of right and wrong, and treating others as you want to be treated, before Jesus came along.
 
Back
Top