Jonathan H. B. Lobl

To put this into terms that you will understand: It would be like you, claiming to be a Republican and an American. They are not the same thing at all. Yet -- you manage to be both. You are also a Conservative. Three labels apply to you. You're also a man. Four labels apply to you. Are you still confused?

Does G.O.P. stand for Party of God?

Yet again, explaining has done no good at all. So, I will make things simple. One term. No distinctions. I am an Apatheist. Because it doesn't matter whether or not God exists -- and I don't care whether or not God exists.

Your words. Not mine. It works for me.

1. Definitive Conclusion? 2. Absolute determination? You are not paying attention to my words. You're making up your own crap. 3 Seriously? Keep guessing. Better yet. Pay attention. Your lottery analogy is beyond stupid. You're trolling me. This has to be outright baiting.

For the last 2,000 years, give or take, every generation has been expecting that they were the last. That they were living in the end times. So, yet again, these are the last days? Alright. You have fun with that. Just to be on the safe side; don't give up your day job. Tomorrow has a way of coming. When the world fails to end, you will discover that you still need an income. And a place to sleep.

https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2019/03/31/in-nebraska-atheists-now-have-their-own-caucus-in-the-democratic-party/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=BRSS&utm_campaign=Nonreligious&utm_content=361

An addendum: In the past, when I attempted to explain Agnosticism to Dan; he had an answer. Revelation 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations Revelation 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations I am afflicted with memory. This exchange was a small part of why I went on to being an Apatheist. I figured that nobody could be confused by not caring whether or not God existed. Seriously. What possible confusion could there be? No more arguing about the distinction between Agnostic and Atheist. No more arguing. No more confusion. No more explaining the difference, between knowledge and belief. Apatheist was the perfect label. Not caring about whether or not God exists is idiot proof. Or so I thought. The idiots found ways. One of our true believers demanded to know -- "What's the difference between an Apathetic Agnostic and a Pathetic Agnostic?" The answer was -- "None." Dan went off on a tangent about being "hopeless". You know. Life on this board.

Thank you. I try to be clear and methodical. I neglected to tie up the loose ends. As an Atheist, I don't believe. There is no claim to knowing. I don't believe. As an Agnostic, I know that I don't know. It's an honest answer and objectively true.

In a religious context, the distinction between belief and knowledge may not be obvious. So, for purposes of this discussion, we will change the context. 1. I believe that I have the winning lottery ticket. I know that I have the winning lottery ticket. Before the lottery is drawn, all I have is belief. My belief might or might not be correct. After the drawing, I know whether or not I have the winning ticket. 2. I believe that I can drink a pint of rum and drive safely. The cop who pulls me over for drunk driving, knows that I am not driving safely. 3. I believe that I have cooked a great meal. The unfortunate friend who tastes that meal, knows that I am an awful cook. 4. I believe that I'm a great plumber. When the pipes all leak, everyone will know that I'm a lousy plumber. When there is objective, verifiable fact -- the distinction between believing and knowing is clear. In the absence of hard fact -- the distinction is not so clear. Belief may be comforting. Knowing is useful.

Dan, since you have had so much to say about Cultural dominance -- a little more information for you. The Wheel turns. The Pendulum swings. https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2019/03/22/nones-are-statistically-tied-for-the-largest-religious-group-in-the-country/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Nonreligious&utm_content=44 Shall we discuss majority rights?

https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2019/03/22/nones-are-statistically-tied-for-the-largest-religious-group-in-the-country/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Nonreligious&utm_content=44

Unless you intend to die, today, I suggest that you cultivate patience.

1. I wear a variety of labels. I'm Human. I'm a man. I'm an American. I'm a senior citizen. None of them conflate. In the same way, I am both Agnostic and an Atheist. They do not conflate. They answer different questions. I am Agnostic. I don't know whether or not God exists. I am an Atheist. I don't believe that God exists. I am an Apatheist. I don't care whether or not God exists. Knowing, believing and caring are all different issues. The questions that we ask, take us to different answers. 2. Have you found yet another way to be irritating? 3. The only reason that we are discussing your God -- is that your God is the favorite flavor of the moment. There have been many gods down through the centuries. Your God is the newest and most popular; but is otherwise not immune to the arch of history. In history, patterns repeat. Never quite the same way, but patterns repeat. Gods have a time of popularity. Over time, their religion becomes mythology. The old gods fade away for lack of attention. True, they never vanish. Thor still has a following. But people don't get worked up over whether or not Thor exists. The old gods simply fade, from the center of their culture, into the background. Religion fades into mythology. You think that your God and religion are unique? That the same fate won't overtake them? It won't happen any time soon; but it will happen. History shows us the future. There is a lot of history.

I'm going to restate my position, in regard to the basic labels. These are only statements of my understanding -- because Dan has muddied the waters yet again. I am not about faith or belief. 1. We have no objective, verifiable facts about God. None at all. Nothing. There is no point in arguing, because in the absence of facts, all anybody has is opinion. That is why I'm Agnostic. 2. God could exist. There is no good reason to assert that God exists -- or to believe that God exists -- but yes. I repeat. God could exist. There is simply no good reason, given the total lack of evidence; to think that this is the case. That is why I'm an Atheist. Presented with compelling evidence, I am willing to reconsider. Arguments are not evidence. Scripture is not evidence. As yet, I am not persuaded. Threats of Damnation are irritating, but not relevant. 3. If God exists at all -- we have a God that neither helps nor hinders. It doesn't matter whether or not God exists. Even the question is meaningless and irrelevant. That is why I'm an Apatheist. I am willing to reconsider, given compelling evidence. As yet, there is nothing. There are things that I care greatly about. I am not apathetic about everything. Only the possible existence of deity. What others choose to believe, is not my concern. Most of the people that I'm fond of, believe in God. I'm under no obligation to persuade them -- and I don't try. It doesn't matter. 4. I am Secular, because I am tired of silly, irrelevant, meaningless, arguments, about deity. There is nothing to argue about. I respect those who respect me. In particular, people who don't prattle on about "Atheists believe nothing.". Now, does anybody want to argue about the possible existence -- or non-existence -- of The Mighty Thor? Or the other ancient gods?

Why? Yes. Why?

Do you seriously mean to say, that you can't tell the difference between -- Atheists don't believe in God --and --Atheists believe in nothing. ??? What's wrong with you? Are you deaf to distinctions? Is all nuance and meaning lost on you?

It's an interesting thought. I considered stupidity. I considered trolling, or being vicious. Maybe it is insanity.

I feel the need to elaborate. Dan, Atheists are not "spinning" your "remark" into an insult. It is an insult. You have been told repeatedly, that Atheists find it insulting. I don't care what you think it means. Atheists take it as insulting. You know that Atheists find it insulting. Yet you continue to make the same remark. So, I repeat the question that Cuchulain put to you. Are you going out of your way to troll us and be as offensive as possible -- while pretending to be misunderstood? Or are you so stupid, you can't tell when you are offending people? Or, an additional possibility. You are simply indifferent to the feelings of others and you don't care that you are offending people. No matter which it is, you are being offensive. Your innocent act, is rubbing salt into the wounds. Please. Cut the crap. Stop it. Or man up and declare yourself openly. I refuse to believe that you're that stupid. Am I mistaken about you?

If you really want to play that game -- the Atheists on this board will start defining Fundamentalists -- in ways that will give you no joy. I suggest that you quit before things escalate.

Talking about souls is a lot like talking about God. We have no hard facts and we don't know. We can speculate. We can reason. We can believe. But we don't know. Even if our "essence" -- how ever you define that -- lives on -- we don't know if individuality persists. We don't know if it is conscious. We can speculate. We can reason. We can believe. But we don't know. The people who wrote the books of the Bible, didn't know any more about souls, than we do. In the meantime, in a total absence of hard facts -- we have to live. If we are not to waste the only lives that we can be sure of -- we can't be afraid of life or death. Well, we can be afraid. It doesn't help. I think the same applies to God. We have no hard facts; and the people who wrote the books of the Bible, didn't know any more about God, than we do. We can pretend that we know. We can apply reason. We can speculate. We can believe. We can disbelieve. We don't know. My contention is that since we know nothing at all about God; debating God's possible existence is a waste. I think it is more relevant to ask; what possible difference it makes. In the end, what is -- is. What is not -- is not. Belief, non-belief and dis-belief are all equally irrelevant and meaningless. This is where I should point out the obvious. People don't waste a lot of time arguing about the old gods. I never hear a lot of arguments, about the existence of the mighty Thor. He must have been a big deal in the past. We still honor him every Thursday. We honor Frey every Friday. Demands that Science answer all questions -- right now -- with finality -- for all time -- betray an ignorance of what science is, and how the scientific process works.

My life is an open book. If you must know such things about me, I'm willing to answer. Not on this thread. If you actually care, start a political thread. In the meantime, kindly stop jumping to conclusions. It's annoying.

It's hard to be sure from that incoherent stream of consciousness. I suspect the poster is looking for cheerful promises, of a happy post death existence. That business about comparing books. Say -- Bible promises against Koran promises. Of course, we can also stack Christian promises of Perdition against what Islam threatens for unbelievers. Or, the poster might have had something else in mind. With that incoherent drivel, it's hard to be sure. Really. English grammar does serve a function.

I find that arguing with you, is like walking in mud. Tiresome and pointless. Even now, you're sticking with the line, about Atheists believe nothing. This alone tells me that you're not prepared to be reasonable. Even cats find value in their lives. Values like loving and being loved; that have nothing to do with God. You're so bound up in doctrine -- so determined to be right about everything -- you can't even concede that Atheists find life meaningful. Your basic arguments shift. In this one thread, you have gone from -- there is no objective evidence to God doesn't want objective evidence. "Far left mindset"? This is something that you keep doing. You keep defining me and my positions -- in ways that have nothing to do with me -- and you refuse to see me. Only your distorted image of me. It's tiresome and irritating. In like manner, you do the same things with my vocabulary. You take basic words, like Agnostic and Atheist -- distort them from a Fundamentalist perspective -- and refuse to understand why I'm offended. Letting people define themselves is basic to mutual respect. Clearly, you have none. My basic position is simple enough. I need a reason to believe. A reason based on evidence and not opinion. You prattle on about faith, and insist on questions that have nothing to do with anything. I'm not mad. I'm tired. And bored. We're going around in circles. Talking with you is like arguing with a wall. It's tedious and I don't want to do this. It's not fun and I'm tired.

I'm going to bow out of this one. Life is too short.