Agnostic.com

34 8

I’d like to get members opinions and thoughts and feelings about agnostic theists; of which I am one. I don’t KNOW if an entity was the first cause or if there even was a first cause but the Kalam really makes one think. I have all kinds of doubts due to the problem of evil and the suffering in the world.

tactic8 4 Oct 15
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

34 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

12

Meh.
I'm an atheist. Unless and until there is credible and verifiable evidence to prove the existence of any god, I'm going to continue to live my life without believing in any of them.
Saying, "I don't know", is absurd.

For me, it's no different than saying, "I don't know if unicorns and leprechauns exist, so I'm going to leave the door open for that."
All gods are myths, just like unicorns and leprechauns.
All "holy" books are fiction as well.
All. Of. Them.

Best answer by far.

I love how reasonable you are!!!😘

@LovinLarge Thank you!

@Redheadedgammy You call me "reasonable", all my exes called me "crazy".
LOL

@KKGator many think I'm crazy. I would say you are in good company. I repeat. I always agree with your posts as if I wrote them.

@Healthydoc70 Thank you!

0

Could you elaborate? What does the Kalam really makes you think?

The Kalam makes me question why there is anything at all; though I've heard the thermodynamic thing a bit and that energy may have always existed.

@tactic8 Yes, β€œwhy is there anything at all” is an excellent question. But what I was wondering is: what in the Kalam makes you think that there was or there is an entity that was the first cause?

@Rodatheist I don't know if there is a conscious entity that is the first cause, or not. Does anybody know one way or the other?

@tactic8 I’m sorry but you were the one who started by saying that β€œI don’t KNOW if an entity was the first cause or if there even was a first cause but the Kalam really makes one think.” as if you are saying that the Kalam really makes you think that there is an entity that was the first cause. I know by the way of reason that there is no such entity; but you are the theist and that is why I was asking what in the Kalam made you think that there is such an entity?

4

No, no, no, no and no.

If you don't care, why bother saying anything?

@Storm1752 No there isn't any beginning, no the cause of existence isn't a deity, no infinity is not an impossiblity, no there isn't a cause of a beginning that's isn't there, no there isn't a creator and no there is no God especially a Muslim God. I chose to express a negative. I'm a nonbeliever. I look for no answers. I wasn't here, now I'm here and soon I won't be here again. The universe will be here for a length of time that might as well be forever. It won't matter to any of us.

0

Agnostic theist? Might work? You do not know if gods exist, but you would consider it true that they do exist but agnosticly it could never be known?

I have no ideal what Kalam is.

I know "There is good and there is evil."

Word Level 8 Oct 15, 2020

You say you "have no idea" what Kalam is. Neither did I, but it took me about three minutes to find out, since I have the most powerful computer ever created at my fingertips at a moment's notice.
You remind me of people who profess not to know of crop circles, or reincarnation, or any number of things, but apparently certain of their nonexistence, when a few taps of the keyboard would enlighten them...are you REALLY that lazy, or willfully ignorant, or both?
I thought so.

@Storm1752 it isn't about lazy, it was about giving an answer based on the circumstances then existing, then after answering I look it up.

Was your typing to make all that worth it to do some unnecessary ?

@Storm1752 I like when people type "SP?" Just look it up...

0

Finally admitting that there is no 'Supreme Being' you can understand why there are good and evil people in the world.

It seems me that by your statement that you conclude that people who "admit" that there is no Supreme Being somehow have better understanding of why there are good and evil people in the world. How does admitting that there is no Supreme Being lead better understanding of why there are good and evil people in the world?

@tactic8 It is my opinion that people who want to believe that we were all created by some all seeing, all benevolent, all powerful being can't logically explain how such a being could create evil. Yes, it would have to be the creation of that being since, according to them, nothing existed before it. Without that problematic belief, you can understand that some people a. are out to get whatever they want regardless of who it hurts, b. Have power over others, and/or c. take pleasure in others' misery. You don't have to reconcile with that foolish remark about 'free will' that so many theists use.

0

Evil is caused either by nature or mankind. Kalam, or any religious tenant, doesn't mean anything. Man is inherently evil. We want or need so we take. If it is not given, we take by force. This is not to say that evil can't be overcome by good. It can... But rarely.

You are mistaken. Man is a social creature and meant to live in groups. Evil is not inherent, empathy and care for others like us is.

@sterlingdean He spoke of evil and suffering... Put 5 people in a room for 1 week with no food. Then, put in 1 plate with food and see what happens. Sharing won't happen most likely. Man has always conquered and taken what he wants. History is filled with the stories.

5

The beginning of wisdom is not knowing . . . . it is understanding just how little you really know. And as Spock once said, logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end.

Spock was so biblical. John 1:1 In the beginning was the logos, the logos was with God and was God.

I sincerely doubt that.
"For most people, religion is nothing more than a substitute for a malfunctioning brain. If people need religion, ignore them and maybe they will ignore you, and you can go on with your life. It wasn't until I was beginning to do Star Trek that the subject of religion arose. What brought it up was that people were saying that I would have a chaplain on board the Enterprise. I replied, "No, we don't.” Gene Roddenberry

"We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing, all-powerful god, who creates faulty humans and then blames them for his own mistakes." Gene Roddenberry

0

Darn! Who wants to try to talk to that bald asshole! He talks over both the lady and the caller. His style turns one off completely.

I could care less about STYLE
I care about TRUTH

@AgnoBill...You have a problem with bald people?

2

The Epicurean dilemma was a prime motivating factor in my eventual dismissal of a personal, albeit capricious god, who, it is said, occasionally interferes with the natural chain of cause and effect. Having abandoned the notion of a personal, interactive deity, I retreated to the god of my avatar.

Deism advances the idea that an all-powerful being created the universe and its laws, then moved on to other more pressing matters, never to be heard from or seen. To the Deist, by the time human beings evolved, this supreme being had been completely absent for the better part of 13.7 billion years!

But even this idea is unsatisfying. Prior to the creation of the universe, what was this deity doing? How long had it existed in the nothingness of a non-existent universe? And what possible benefit do we gain by believing in something that can in no way be proven to exist and has zero impact on our own existence?

@p-nullifidian....I've heard the argument that we don't know that time even existed before the big expansion, and a theist could argue that too...and that therefore the question " long had it existed in the nothingness of a non-existent universe?" may be...um...moot perhaps.

@tactic8 Indeed! I have heard this too. String theory branes aside, there seem to be at least three major camps: that time had a finite beginning, that time is infinitely linear, and that time is cyclical. Which, if any of these models, do you subscribe to?

5

Why is this important to you? Maybe try thinking about real things you could do that would improve the actual world we inhabit?

For one would involve actually working where the other is daydreaming.

Yes, refocusing on doing real things that would improve the world is good advice. It seems that people at Agnostic. are embedded in the larger system of the world with it's beliefs and the non-believers are still defining themselves by a lack of belief in god(s)...enough Agnostic., anyway. Just trying find some like minded people. Here's some food for thought: Do you know what his major at university was?: "Bible"

2

Regarding Kalam, you might be interested in this:

Mvtt Level 7 Oct 15, 2020

His first point was good enough to convince the hypothesis doesn’t support a creator god. Thanks for sharing πŸ™‚

1

I refer to Occam's Razor: * "the principle (attributed to William of Occam) that in explaining a thing no more assumptions should be made than are necessary." Or, in other words, the simplest explanation is more likely to be correct.

The simplest explanation is that potential energy/energy has always existed. We know that energy becomes matter and that matter returns to an energy state. Sometimes that matter becomes life; sometimes life becomes sentient and sometimes it becomes self-aware. But, in the end, everything is energy in some form or another.

Science shows us that no creator being is necessary for the universe to behave as it does. So, if no god/universal consciousness, holding everything in its place, is necessary-- why insert one?

Adding a consciousness to this energy, or making it a god, adds an unnecessary layer of complexity; and especially so if one gives human attributes to this being and makes claims that it is involved in human affairs etc.

[google.com]

A good way to put it. Also if there was a god, it would have to exist outside our Universe, for if it did not then we could not know what each individual is responsible for, or whether god did it. Therefore there is no free will, which we all know exists, otherwise, why have a consciousness, it would just make one aware of some bad thing coming without being able to do anything about it. A Universe is not needed unless there is a god who needs to spend his time playing with himself.

2

"Not knowing" and "having doubts" makes you wiser than all the televangelists combined. If you question your beliefs sincerely, examine the evidence rigorously, and then at the end of it, you still hold those beliefs and find they're consistent with the evidence, more power to you. It's those who hold a blind faith in the face of all evidence to the contrary that drive me batshit.

Thank you for the affirmation Paul4747. I think the thing is that social conservatives have painted themselves into a corner and are now in a position where they feel the need to try to prove 70 years of accusations against gays correct. Some say the ship has already sailed on the LGBTQ+/GRSM thing but I think they still want to tell the world not to touch themselves based on a 2000 year old book with contradictions and a baby-killing god. It's enough to make me batshit at times; and that's a fact...or a psychologically constructed label; or both. Thanks again, and I guess I should be happy to consider myself wiser (at times) than the televangelists, as if that says much o_0.

3

The whole "first cause" argument is based out of the "argument from incredulity" logical fallacy. You can't imagine the universe existing without a creator (first cause).

So the idea then is to "make up" a first cause. The problem and fallacy of that, is if everything must have a first cause, what caused the first cause, then what caused that, then what caused that .... ad nauseum. It really falls apart when the claim is made "The first cause was without cause." .... well if the first cause could be without cause, then so could the second cause .... and maybe there was never a need for a first cause at all!!!

It just unravels all by itself. It can't stand on it's own merit.

As for "evil" .... good and evil are subjective judgments ...... For example .... Most would consider it "good" if a successful hunter were to share his killed deer with his starving neighbor ..... But few stop to consider how the deer would feel about that.

I agree.
So that means either the universe just spontaneously (poof) came into being out of nothing, OR it's always been here.
I'd bet on the latter

2

I think it’s great that you’re considering possibilities. Having given god away with Santa and the Tooth Fairy as mythical, it worries me that people still think that a reasonable/ good all powerful being could allow this level of inhumanity in the world. At best such a being would be a bit sadistic, from my point of view.
All the best with making sense of it, from your view point.

5

The Kalam Cosmological Argument is magnificent in its absurdity: it makes unwarranted assumptions about the nature of time and the nature of causality.

0

OK I'm stupid, what is an "agnostic theist"?

0

Well, on this, if you ask me if I believe in God, I say no. If you ask me if there is a God, I say I don't know. With all the shit around the world I don't think the chances of the existence of a deity like described in the so called holy books are that big.

1

If you don't know something to be true, then the default position is to assume it isn't.
You do not KNOW there is not a nun's habit wearing purple invisible intangible giant hedgehog shitting invisible, intangible big macs all over your front room carpet, but I am pretty damn sure you are not agnostic about that.
You do not know that Leonard Nimoy was not the second coming of Christ who instead of saving the world decided to make sci fi movies instead and just never told anyone and refrained from performing miracles becaus they gave him chronic IBS, but I am pretty damn sure you are not agnostic about that either.
What makes the ridiculous claims of Christianity any less bull shit, than any other bull shit claim?
Nothing, so why make a special pleading claim for ir?

3

For me the problem does not lie on the characteristics of the deity. It could be the best deity the mind can conjure; that is not the problem. I can come up with the best god in the universe. The problem or flaw is in the believer. The problem is to have a mind that relies in magical thinking and on unproven beings to solve everyday problems. Magical thinking is the problem. It takes us away from reality, it supports flawed reasoning, it arrives to erroneous conclusions, and reduces the logical and moral standing of the bearer.

4

Fuck that shit!

1

Maybe this helps.

1

Does it not strike you as somewhat odd that all of those who believe in a heaven and hell have managed to create one for themselves and nearly everybody around them. If someone believes that there is a heaven or hell which one enters after death then I wonder why they are waiting, surely they should be making all haste to get there. However, they may find as Nietzsche said: "In heaven all the interesting people are missing."

1

Most of us are free thinkers who dispassionately look at evidence

bobwjr Level 10 Oct 16, 2020
5

Examine the evidence...that is how we evaluate anything prior to concluding whether or not we believe it to be true. In these present times of so called alternative facts, it still holds as true as ever...there is no alternative to facts, alternative facts are fiction at best and downright lies at worst. This has always been true, and after 13.8 billion years of known existence of our universe, there is not one shred of evidence of the existence of a creator. Logic tells me that on laws of probability therefore, that the likelihood of one existing is nil. Evil and suffering are sadly part of the human condition, along with a propensity to believe in a non-existent and wholly manmade god.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:543818
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.