Hi

[VanessaUSA]

Excellent post Vanessa and welcome to the forums. I never could understand the agnostics position, as you say belief is binary, you either believe in god or you don't. There is no third option.

That is what is meant by agnostic atheist or agnostic theist. Modern terminology sometimes substitutes ''weak'' for agnostic, (and ''strong'' for it's polar opposite) which obscures the issues and leads to mistaken assumptions that agnostics/weak people on either side of the atheism/theism line can be easily swayed to the opposite side of the belief line. So called strong atheism / strong theism, are often used to refer to atheists and theists who make claims of existence well beyond their actual powers of human knowledge and language. It might be said then that ''strong'' atheists (much like strong theists), are rather religious, subjective, faulty in their logic, and somewhat less intellectually honest, albeit perhaps not intentionally. For my purposes here, the word religious applied to an atheist is in reference to rigid thought characterized by highly subjective and passionate mental operations, rather than more objective and dispassionate consideration of what knowledge is and how far a human being can go in making claims about knowledge and facts from a  particular point in time and space of human development.

[wheatpenny]

My position is kind of difficult to explain. I have always believed in a spark of the Divine inherent in everyone (a leftover belief from when I was a Quaker), what George Fox - the founder of Quakerism - called "That of God in every man". This divine spark may well be the closest thing to an actual god you're ever going to find.

What I'm "agnostic" about is the existence of a personal God, i.e., a "guy-in-the-sky" named God (or Jehovah, Allah, or whatever).
As to tyhe afterlife, I lean in favour of reincarnation, but I've adopted a wait-and-see attitude. If there is an afterlife, so much the better, but if there isn't, well it won't matter because by the time I get that far I will have ceased to exist and will therefore never know I was wrong.

[vulcanlogician]

My position is kind of difficult to explain.  I have always believed in a spark of the Divine inherent in everyone (a leftover belief from when I was a Quaker), what George Fox - the founder of Quakerism - called "That of God in every man". This divine spark may well be the closest thing to an actual god you're ever going to find.

What I'm "agnostic" about is the existence of a personal God, i.e., a "guy-in-the-sky" named God (or Jehovah, Allah, or whatever).
As to tyhe afterlife, I lean in favour of reincarnation, but I've adopted a wait-and-see attitude. If there is an afterlife, so much the better, but if there isn't, well it won't matter because by the time I get that far I will have ceased to exist and will therefore never know I was wrong.

I have actually been going to Quaker meetings the last few months. I kind of like them actually, though I'm still learning about it. If you don't mind my asking, what caused you to renounce Quakerism? You can be an atheist or agnostic Quaker, right? So how come you left the movement?

[wheatpenny]

I didn't really "renounce" Quakerism, I just drifted away from it, as I felt drawn more towards the Zen and classical Christian mystical traditions.

[GrandizerII]

Excellent post Vanessa and welcome to the forums. I never could understand the agnostics position, as you say belief is binary, you either believe in god or you don't. There is no third option.

That is what is meant by agnostic atheist or agnostic theist. Modern terminology sometimes substitutes ''weak'' for agnostic, (and ''strong'' for it's polar opposite) which obscures the issues and leads to mistaken assumptions that agnostics/weak people on either side of the atheism/theism line can be easily swayed to the opposite side of the belief line. So called strong atheism / strong theism, are often used to refer to atheists and theists who make claims of existence well beyond their actual powers of human knowledge and language. It might be said then that ''strong'' atheists (much like strong theists), are rather religious, subjective, faulty in their logic, and somewhat less intellectually honest, albeit perhaps not intentionally. For my purposes here, the word religious applied to an atheist is in reference to rigid thought characterized by highly subjective and passionate mental operations, rather than more objective and dispassionate consideration of what knowledge is and how far a human being can go in making claims about knowledge and facts from a  particular point in time and space of human development.

Well, there's a difference between knowledge and belief. Strong atheists don't always make claims of knowledge regarding God's existence, so they too can be agnostic atheists as well, as opposed to gnostic atheists.

The strong atheist says they believe God does not exist, which is a fairly reasonable claim to make, considering the utter lack of evidence for such a grand being. It's the gnostic atheists who say they know God does not exist.

And of course, we need to keep in mind that when we're discussing "God", we're usually referring to a certain type of God believed in by many deists and/or adherents to any of the Abrahamic religions. So atheistic positions can vary per individual based on which god is being debated.

[Succubus]

Agnostic: it can't be known if god exists. Oh yes it fucking can! He can show up and do some god shit, so why doesn’t he?

[VanessaUSA]

Well, there's a difference between knowledge and belief. Strong atheists don't always make claims of knowledge regarding God's existence, so they too can be agnostic atheists as well, as opposed to gnostic atheists.

The strong atheist says they believe God does not exist, which is a fairly reasonable claim to make, considering the utter lack of evidence for such a grand being. It's the gnostic atheists who say they know God does not exist.

And of course, we need to keep in mind that when we're discussing "God", we're usually referring to a certain type of God believed in by many deists and/or adherents to any of the Abrahamic religions. So atheistic positions can vary per individual based on which god is being debated.

Now that you mention it, I did hastily lump the terms together in over-simplified equations and I don't particularly like it when I read pieces that confound such terms. That being said, I don't like using the terms strong/weak to refer to atheism/theism because they are easily misunderstood and miscommunicated far more easily than the term agnostic which exists in a state of global misuse.

And still, I am not sure what the OP meant by the phrase. At least the nature of these confusing linguistic contortions serves to keep me open to asking for clarification and trying to comprehend the thoughts of a being who isn't me.

[Sal]

hello

[Joods]

Welcome Jeff. PA is a pretty state.

They'll also tax you for anything they can.

---

Welcome Jeff. I'm in the Susquehanna valley. 😀

[wheatpenny]

Welcome Jeff. I'm in the Susquehanna valley.  😀

I'm in York.