This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
Do you believe in God?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Skreeran
I'm still pretty sure you're a deist, not an agnostic, based on what you've told me.
Post by
Squishalot
Deism (Listeni/ˈdiː.ɪzəm/ or /ˈdeɪ.ɪzəm/) is the belief that reason and observation of the natural world are sufficient to determine the existence of God
I don't believe that in the slightest. I'm not going to look around at the world and use it as compelling evidence for the existence (or lack thereof) of a God.
In the popular sense, an agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively. In the strict sense, however, agnosticism is the view that humanity does not currently possess the requisite knowledge and/or reason to provide sufficient rational grounds to justify the belief that deities either do or do not exist.
By either definition (and I know we've agreed to disagree on this in the past), my viewpoint aligns with agnosticism, though with a slight leaning more towards non-religious theism rather than atheism. My only deistic leaning is due to my perception that a God does not need to be bound within our physical universe, and so the existence of a physical, constrained universe does not preclude the existence of a God. But I wouldn't put any form of belief in the idea that the argument is conclusive at all.(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##Squishalot##DELIM##
Post by
Gone
Lets not get too hung up on labels
Post by
Skreeran
deism
noun
1.
belief in the existence of a God on the evidence of reason and nature only, with rejection of supernatural revelation ( distinguished from theism ).
2.
belief in a God who created the world but has since remained indifferent to it.
When I talk about deism, I generally refer to the second definition, the type that Thomas Jefferson and Mark Twain are believed by some to have believed in. A sort of religious belief, but in an impersonal creator, rather than someone who cares heavily about who we have sex with. I suppose labels aren't that important, but most "agnostics" (to use the
popular
definition) I know are those who just those who shrug their shoulders and say they don't know. That's actually why I refer to myself as atheist, rather than agnostic, even though both definitions could suit me (in reference to
knowledge
about God, at least, instead of belief).
Post by
Squishalot
Even then - I don't believe in a God - I haven't concluded that one exists or not. I'm indifferent to whether God exists, not believing in a God who is indifferent to us.
Post by
Skreeran
Even then - I don't believe in a God - I haven't concluded that one exists or not. I'm indifferent to whether God exists, not believing in a God who is indifferent to us.See, I was just going off
what you'd
told me in the past
:
My definition of 'true' Agnosticism is that of Agnostic Theism - a belief in an unknowable god. But again, this is a discussion for another thread.
In my opinion, he simply mislabeled his beliefs. The term 'Agnostic' should be reserved for an etymologically correct definition, and his beliefs should be treated as 'weak Atheism' or other such term that questions the existence of the divine in the first place, rather than the characteristics of an accepted divine.
Post by
Squishalot
In there, I'm talking about the definition of 'true' agnosticism, not my own personal views, which even back then you were inferring off something we discussed even further back (which may very well be lost forever, given that we can't really search OT, unfortunately).
I would argue though that my point stands - agnostic by that definition is not synonymous with deism, which stands to infer something about the nature of God (i.e. his indifference).
Finally, I would bring up my other point - this is probably a discussion for another thread, as Ryjacork points out as well. Let's move away from this line of discussion here.
Post by
gamerunknown
It appears your understanding of morals is based on subjectivity, on opinion. That's a bit dangerous, isn't it?
Perhaps. I think all attempts to formulate an objective moral system have been disastrous though. The best heuristic I'm aware of is minimising the pain felt from the worst outcomes of any decision.
Positing God does not resolve Euthyphro's dilemma either.
First of all, murder is defined as one human being killing another. God doesn't murder people.
Actually, murder is the illegal killing of one person by another. In certain countries assisted suicide is not murder, nor is killing an individual in self defence, nor is applying capital punishment.
In the context of an omniscient, all-knowing being, that would be a reasonable interpretation, no?
Which raises the further issue of the incompatibility of free will and certainty of the future, which we've probably been over several times on the board.
Post by
MyTie
Perhaps. I think all attempts to formulate an objective moral system have been disastrous though. The best heuristic I'm aware of is minimising the pain felt from the worst outcomes of any decisionAs far as I am aware, objective measures of good have steered society toward where it has arrived, and it is only truly evil people's subjective takes on those morals, or their own, that has helped them arrive where they have.Positing God does not resolve Euthyphro's dilemma either.
Why would we need it to? Asking about the subjectivity of God's opinions are to ask the nature of God, which seems to be beyond us completely.
On a side note:heuristic.... positing... Euthyphro's dilemma...It was never your style to use rarely used words unnecessarily. In fact, no one here has done that, ever, except HsR. It seems like you've started it recently. I think it's unnecessary, and makes me not really want to read what your posts have to say. It certainly doesn't make your posts look "smarter".
Or, if you prefer...
Characterizing a grandiloquent lexicon dissuades dissemination.
Post by
Gone
Actually, murder is the illegal killing of one person by another. In certain countries assisted suicide is not murder, nor is killing an individual in self defence, nor is applying capital punishment.
Like I said, one
human
killing another
human
. Semantics aside my point is that murder is only something that can be done among relative equals. We don't call a human being killing an animal murder, and I wouldn't call God killing a human being murder either.
Post by
Skreeran
I would.
Post by
1069282
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Gone
Slaughtering is a fair word, or smiting or just plain killing. I'm not saying murder is the wrong word because I want it to have positive connotations. As opposed to Skreeran who is obviously pushing the word just to give it a more negative feel.
If you want to say God slaughtered or massacred the people in Egypt that's fine, but murder is an inappropriate word for the reasons I already mentioned. Again, it's not because I'm saying the killings were justified (although I'm not saying they weren't either, it's just not the issue we're discussing), it's because murder is something that takes place between peers of relatively equal standing. God can't "murder" a human being any more than a human being can "murder" a dog. They can slaughter a dog, but it's not murder.
Post by
gamerunknown
As far as I am aware, objective measures of good have steered society toward where it has arrived, and it is only truly evil people's subjective takes on those morals, or their own, that has helped them arrive where they have.
But we really can't operationalise good. What metric would you propose?
Why would we need it to? Asking about the subjectivity of God's opinions are to ask the nature of God, which seems to be beyond us completely.
Which just restates the issue. If there is an objective good independent of God's fiat, then the existence of good is not dependent on the existence of God. If not, then "good" need not be conducive to human happiness. If God is ineffable, then why are we to assume they are good?
As for the rest of the post: William's syndrome.
Post by
Monday
It seems that gamer suffers from sesquipedalian loquaciousness.
Post by
MyTie
But we really can't
operationalise
define good. What
metric
measure would you propose?
The Bible. It is God's word on what is good. He is a better authority than your opinion on what is good and what is not, since He is totally good.
Which just restates the issue. If there is an objective good independent of God's fiat, then the existence of good is not dependent on the existence of God. If not, then "good" need not be conducive to human happiness. If God is ineffable, then why are we to assume they are good?God doesn't define good, and good isn't defined independently from God. God
is
good. If you could put "good" in a box, you would have a box of God, and if you could put God in a box, you would have a box of "good". If you could put God on the periodic table of elements, it would be in the same square as "good". I'm not sure how better to explain this. Maybe I should use bigger words so you can understand?William's syndrome.I have no idea what you are talking about.
Post by
1069282
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
How about Satanism? Is their god "good" or "evil"?
Why not ask them? If you are trying to trap me into being forced to say something culturally sensitive, but against my religion, it's not going to work. If you want my opinion, it's blunt. Worshiping Satan is evil.
If you are going to try to argue that "all religions are equal, therefore all religions are void" stuff, you are barking up the wrong tree.
Post by
Gone
How about Satanism? Is their god "good" or "evil"?
That's kind of a dumb question.
FYI, most Satanists actually worship the ideals of Satan rather than Satan himself. People who actually worship Satan are referred to as devil worshipers, not satanists.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.