Agnostic Atheism: the only logical position.

I know personally that the Lord exists for a fact. The Lord has spoken to me before. I didn't require that event though, to know he exists.
The Lord who created all life is a Lord of love and light. Anyone who wishes to escape judgement must be willing to believe and to love others and know that the Lord loves all human kind. Not getting scientific proof of God's existence is not a valid excuse.

People who refuse to do that will have no valid excuse after death of the body, to be excused from that. To get close to being able to do all of that requires a loss of bloated self pride, and humility of soul.

In others words, all of the things that Satan refused to do which caused his expulsion and transformation. He and his followers were turned into ugly and hideous representations which mirrored their foul spiritual pursuits.

Everyone has freedom of choice and free will to believe or not, and that is what it is.

a reply to: Randyvine
At the moment, I have no conclusive evidence for the existence of sasquatch/bigfoot. I cannot say he doesn't exist, neither can I say he does, so I have no belief in such a creature, neither do the atheists I know, but just as with "god" or aliens, I am open to solid evidence.

Why would you take offense to the word heathen in reference to atheists considering you don't seem to be one? I take no offense to it and I am one according to the church. Besides, the word was used in jest.

And BTW although i could survive a night alone in the mountains up there in Canada ALONE. I wouldn't. especially not to prove anything to anybody. The whole point is this. You and I are being lied to. Everybody in every society on this planet is being lied to.

On this we can agree.

a reply to: Klassified

I'm sure we would agree on many things. Fair enough for me.

originally posted by: Annee


"virtual reality requires a creator."

Not necessarily. You’re thinking only what you know currently.

I know a mathematically predictable virtual reality requires intelligent input. Just like our physical laws are precise in order to perpetuate life.

Energy, thought consciousness — evolving simultaneously. Kind of an energy consciousness metamorphosis.

That primordial Consciousness must have been intelligent though right?

Basically, everyone is their own creator.

I agree, we are children of the original Conscious Being, and therefore inherit the ability to create. We did not create our selves though. The only way you get away from the "who created the creator?" Paradox, is if there is a Creator who always existed, and never needed to be made because this Creator never did not exist. Or in other words, "Unbegotten".

originally posted by: ooder57
The title says it all.

Not a bad summation, but the title is in fact very bad...

A more proper term would be 'Rational Agnostic'.

The inclusion of the term atheist makes it the dominant term.

Also, your commentary only discussed religion with respect to belief in an all powerful god, when in fact there is another big one, currently growing in power as we speak - humanism is a religion that simply replaces god with government.

There are apparently many of those here, blindly trusting in and voluntarily subjugating themselves to their government god.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: ooder57
The title says it all.

Not a bad summation, but the title is in fact very bad...

A more proper term would be 'Rational Agnostic'.

The inclusion of the term atheist gives it much more weight.

Also, your commentary only discussed religion with respect to belief in an all powerful god, when in fact there is another big one, currently growing in power as we speak - humanism is a religion that simply replaces god with government.

There are apparently many of those here, blindly trusting in and voluntarily subjugating themselves to their government god.

Good analysis. We are essentially replicating another tower of Babel scenario where transhumanism (not to be confused with transgender) attempts to artificially induce a heavenly state of existence. Look at where virtual reality is heading, soon we will be able to do anything we would like through human made technology. I would bet this is the most popular religion in the world at this moment, although it doesn't technically have the official tally to prove it.

moses was just drinking the tea. his experiences were used and bastardized. the more insane thing to me is how people are so easily led.

too bad we can't talk about that more in depth here, drinking the tea that is.

i think reality is way more out there than we could ever imagine.

people who act like they know it all are full of themselves, imo.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Annee


"virtual reality requires a creator."

Not necessarily. You’re thinking only what you know currently.

I know a mathematically predictable virtual reality requires intelligent input. Just like our physical laws are precise in order to perpetuate life.

Energy, thought consciousness — evolving simultaneously. Kind of an energy consciousness metamorphosis.

That primordial Consciousness must have been intelligent though right?

Basically, everyone is their own creator.

I agree, we are children of the original Conscious Being, and therefore inherit the ability to create. We did not create our selves though. The only way you get away from the "who created the creator?" Paradox, is if there is a Creator who always existed, and never needed to be made because this Creator never did not exist. Or in other words, "Unbegotten".

How do you know we didn’t create ourselves?

And again back to a “metamorphosis”.

Billions of years ago — we weren’t modern human.

Obviously, there was an evolution from original consciousness. I just don’t think it was a singularity.

originally posted by: knoxie

people who act like you know it all are full of yourselves, imo.

But just before you claim you know that part of the foundation of Judeo-Christianity is insane to believe:

moses was just drinking the tea. his experiences were used and bastardized. the more insane thing to me is how people are so easily led.

So do you, acting like you know, immediately fall under your presupposition that you must be full of yourself?

too bad we can't talk about that more in depth here, drinking the tea that is.

i think reality is way more out there than we could ever imagine.

I agree. It seems like we are in a tutorial material interface of some sort where we develop to the point where eventually our training wheels are taken off. Although from what I see many get off the bike and stop trying altogether... perhaps because theyre afraid of continuing to fall. I certainly don't know it all, but the search for understanding should not be quit. With that being said I don't think it is the full duty of our intellectual brain to understand it all, instead it requires the entirety of our body and mind to become in tune with the reality of what it actually is.

originally posted by: Annee

How do you know we didn’t create ourselves?

because none of us can explain how we did it.

Billions of years ago — we weren’t modern human.

Eternally, the source Consciousness existed. I have never heard a better way to explain it. Something cannot come from nothing, therefore since Something exists then that Something must have always existed. This Something that never needed to be created is the intelligible source of all. I know that since I am intelligent, I must have been created by Something intelligent. Again, I'm open to a better explanation if you have one but this really resonates with me.

Obviously, there was an evolution from original consciousness. I just don’t think it was a singularity.

Well if this Primordial Consciousness is the source of all things, then the creation would not be better than the Creator. This is why evolution is bunk. Akasha as it's called (or Sophia in Gnostic tradition), is the Hindu way of describing the model from which things come. It is the first-created. Think of it like an intelligent blueprint. This is why humans were originally made in the image of God... microbes do not randomly mutate and eventually become an intelligent human being. Evolution has become so popular, but I think it is because it is remniscient of our conscious evolution. This conscious development is not so much a development as it is a remembrance of our birthright that always existed. Plato does a wonderful proof of how this must be the case if you are interested. Surely, this is a reference to the Christ - A Passover or Crossing into your multi-dimensional home and origin. The Homecoming of Homer's Odyssey, The coming of the ship described by Khalil Gibran, the 1000 years in a day described by the apostle Peter, etc, etc, etc.

a reply to: cooperton

you're right, my bad, in my opinion moses was hallucinating when he came upon a burning bush.

if i were to have a similar vision i wonder what christians would make of it..

i went down the rabbit hole 10 years ago when my son died. i became interested in psychedelics and in turn ancient religion and ancient stuff. it's how i found ats. my first post was one about puma puncha.

my interest has been recently rekindled. i'm currently reading The Immortality Key but only a few pages in.

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: cooperton

you're right, my bad, in my opinion moses was hallucinating when he came upon a burning bush.

But what is called a hallucination by the blind world, could actually be a revelation of the light, or at least a hint of the deeper underlying reality. Would you agree? Most people tend to think, for example, when they're on mushrooms that they are undoubtedly seeing a more true world than the one they were familiar with their whole life.

if i were to have a similar vision i wonder what christians would make of it..

i went down the rabbit hole 10 years ago when my son died. i became interested in psychedelics and in turn ancient religion and ancient stuff. it's how i found ats. my first post was one about puma puncha.

my interest has been recently rekindled. i'm currently reading The Immortality Key but only a few pages in.

Sorry to hear about your son, I can't imagine. Yeah I also have dabbled in many things and treated it as objective as possible. I read the intro to the immortality key and have a lot to say on the topic. I do believe the 'Manna' that Moses and company were eating was some sort of entheogen that enhanced their ability to see Heavenly influences. They even stopped eating the Manna the moment they entered the promised land, which indicates to me that the promised land is like a natural state of elevated consciousness. Jesus then calls himself the true Manna, that people may eat and never die. So although I still believe that entheogens can emulate this conscious elevation, it is most prudent to resemble Christ's words to enable it to naturally occur in your life and blossom into a new creation.

a reply to: cooperton

i agree with what you posted except that the experiences are proof of heaven or Christ.

like i said earlier i think they (moses and jesus) had their experiences that were later used and bastardized.

if i were to have an experience i don't need someone else telling me what they mean. i don't mean that to insult you or anyone else, it's just how i feel. we don't know! i do think they could be used as tools for a greater understanding of ourselves, individually. apparently they've helped addicts and folks with deep depression. they're used as a tool to help folks who are dying not be so scared of death - i like that

proof of christ and heaven.. i just don't buy it. reality is way way more crazy than we can possibly imagine. just my opinion.

a reply to: cooperton

The perfect state of mind for a human is with normal chemical and electrical signals, as they have evolved to do.
Chemical modifications prove that our conscience experience has a large chemical component.
As semi evolved hominid, do we deem ourselves the final arbiters of reality.
I'm afraid this will stall our potential.

Technology has evolved from Biology through intention.
Life crawled out of the slime, by intention.

We can rewind physics to a singularity,
But can we account for the fact that intention arises ?

originally posted by: rom12345
a reply to: cooperton

The perfect state of mind for a human is with normal chemical and electrical signals, as they have evolved to do.
Chemical modifications prove that our conscience experience has a large chemical component.
As semi evolved hominid, do we deem ourselves the final arbiters of reality.
I'm afraid this will stall our potential.

I look at it from the opposite perspective. I view our brain, receptors, chemicals, etc as a material interface for consciousness to have its existence. Destroy the interface and the mind that is in control of it loses its ability to interact with material reality (dies). Jesus being the only exception in history, which showed He was indeed the transcendent Mind that originates the underlying reality of the matter.

Life crawled out of the slime, by intention.

So you suppose life was intended by an intelligent source?

We can rewind physics to a singularity,
But can we account for the fact that intention arises ?

Intention insists upon an intelligent faculty that has the ability to intend. I suppose this intention came from a primordial Consciousness that created the material interface and the conscious children to inhabit it.

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: cooperton

proof of christ and heaven.. i just don't buy it. reality is way way more crazy than we can possibly imagine. just my opinion.

Yeah sadly "Christ" and "Heaven" have become such diluted words that we tend to forget that both of these are supposed to be limitless features in which we can pioneer the depths of our illimitable imagination.

if i were to have an experience i don't need someone else telling me what they mean.

most definitely. Blind belief has hurt many, but to actually experience it is what has brought me to where I am today. I continue to tap into it here and there, and I realize such a transition would take a full devotion to pioneering the limitless spiritual frontier.

a reply to: cooperton

Nothing — Neil deGrasse

youtu.be...

youtu.be...

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Debunkology

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: Debunkology

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: Navieko

originally posted by: Klassified
Agnostics claim that to know whether there is or isn't a god is unknown or unknowable. Therefore, their default stance is a lack of belief in either, because they neither believe nor disbelieve, making them as atheist as I or any other atheist. The only difference between the atheist and the agnostic is a willingness to say so.

Agnostics belief is simply that the existence or nature of God is unknowable. Atheists believe God does not exist.

Very difference. Let's not mix them up.

Your definition of agnostic is correct enough, but your definition of atheism is still incorrect. Atheists do not believe god does not exist. They simply don't believe god exists. There is a difference. One is an affirmation, the other is a lack of belief in something that cannot be proven to exist.
Lets not mix them up.

Oxford Dictionary: Belief
Any proposition (1) that is accepted as true on the basis of inconclusive evidence.


Is there conclusive evidence that god does NOT exist?

What's your point? That atheists have a belief that god does not exist? There is no belief involved, just a lack of belief.

You have two propositions:

God exists = Theist
God does not exist = Atheist

The Theist takes the proposition that god exists, the atheist takes the proposition that god does not exist. The agnostic takes neither.

Oxford Dictionary definition of Belief:
Any proposition (1) that is accepted as true on the basis of inconclusive evidence.

Not exactly.

Atheism is lack of belief — not “I don’t believe in God”.

www.oxfordreference.com...
The theory or belief that God does not exist. The word comes (in the late 16th century, via French) from Greek atheos, from a- ‘without’ + theos ‘god’.

originally posted by: Debunkology

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Debunkology

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: Debunkology

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: Navieko

originally posted by: Klassified
Agnostics claim that to know whether there is or isn't a god is unknown or unknowable. Therefore, their default stance is a lack of belief in either, because they neither believe nor disbelieve, making them as atheist as I or any other atheist. The only difference between the atheist and the agnostic is a willingness to say so.

Agnostics belief is simply that the existence or nature of God is unknowable. Atheists believe God does not exist.

Very difference. Let's not mix them up.

Your definition of agnostic is correct enough, but your definition of atheism is still incorrect. Atheists do not believe god does not exist. They simply don't believe god exists. There is a difference. One is an affirmation, the other is a lack of belief in something that cannot be proven to exist.
Lets not mix them up.

Oxford Dictionary: Belief
Any proposition (1) that is accepted as true on the basis of inconclusive evidence.


Is there conclusive evidence that god does NOT exist?

What's your point? That atheists have a belief that god does not exist? There is no belief involved, just a lack of belief.

You have two propositions:

God exists = Theist
God does not exist = Atheist

The Theist takes the proposition that god exists, the atheist takes the proposition that god does not exist. The agnostic takes neither.

Oxford Dictionary definition of Belief:
Any proposition (1) that is accepted as true on the basis of inconclusive evidence.

Not exactly.

Atheism is lack of belief — not “I don’t believe in God”.

www.oxfordreference.com...
The theory or belief that God does not exist. The word comes (in the late 16th century, via French) from Greek atheos, from a- ‘without’ + theos ‘god’.

From: AMERICAN ATHEISTS


What is 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.”

www.atheists.org...

originally posted by: Annee

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.

That sounds more like agnosticism

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.

Yeah thats agnosticism. Atheism is the belief that God does not exist. If you are uncertain whether or not God exists, that's agnosticism.

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: cooperton

Nothing — Neil deGrasse

youtu.be...

youtu.be...

Yikes. Nothing means to not exist. Nothing literally doesn't exist. I exist, and therefore am not Nothing, so I must have also come from Something since you cannot make something from nothing