Agnostic Theist

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

Agnostic Theist

They do exist.          

 

 

[RevBogovac]

What about an apatheistic agnostic theist?

 

Someone who "believes" there is possibly some supernatural being (or beings) but know he can never know (prove) it for sure and therefore doesn't care...? 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

3 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

What about an apatheistic agnostic theist?

 

Someone who "believes" there is possibly some supernatural being (or beings) but know he can never know (prove) it for sure and therefore doesn't care...? 

 

For what little it's worth, I was ordained as a minister of the Apathetic Agnostic Church.  The Universal Church Triumphant of the Apathetic Agnostic.  The church motto was -- "We don't know and we don't care."

 

The church died.  The founder got tired of running it.  The church was never incorporated.  It was too much trouble.

 

Apathetic Agnostic is enough.  Again, the motto.  "We don't know and we don't care."  Words of wisdom to live by.  To paraphrase -- Of course there could be a god or gods -- but so what?  It doesn't matter.

 

 

[RevBogovac]

17 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

For what little it's worth, I was ordained as a minister of the Apathetic Agnostic Church.  [...] "We don't know and we don't care."  Words of wisdom to live by.  To paraphrase -- Of course there could be a god or gods -- but so what?  It doesn't matter.

 

 

 

Why am I not surprised...? Cheers! 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

11 minutes ago, RevBogovac said:

 

Why am I not surprised...? Cheers! 

 

 

The important thing about being Agnostic, or Apatheist, is not getting caught up in silly arguments.  Arguments about First Cause, Unmoved Mover, evolution, cosmology, etc.  Believers love to argue this stuff with Atheists.

 

Agnostics end it with -- I don't know.

 

Apatheists  end it with -- I don't care.

 

Atheists are frequently willing to argue.

 

This is strictly my unscientific observation.  The important distinctions are behavioral rather than philosophic.

 

[RevBogovac]

1 hour ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

The important thing about being Agnostic, or Apatheist, is not getting caught up in silly arguments.  Arguments about First Cause, Unmoved Mover, evolution, cosmology, etc.  Believers love to argue this stuff with Atheists.

 

Agnostics end it with -- I don't know.

 

Apatheists  end it with -- I don't care.

 

Atheists are frequently willing to argue.

 

This is strictly my unscientific observation.  The important distinctions are behavioral rather than philosophic.

 

 

 

I like the tips! I also tend to get into these kind of arguments and as I have seen you comment very often; they lead to nothing good. Getting too old for that... life is too short. Thanks!

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

24 minutes ago, RevBogovac said:

 

 

I like the tips! I also tend to get into these kind of arguments and as I have seen you comment very often; they lead to nothing good. Getting too old for that... life is too short. Thanks!

 

 

 

Without getting stuck on the labels; it all boils down to something simple.

 

1.  We have no objective, verifiable, facts about God.  Or gods.

 

2.  A god which can not be demonstrated to exist, doesn't matter.  Even if that god actually exists.

 

3.  Arguments are not evidence.  Arguments are arguments.  If they offer an argument, it's because they have no evidence.

 

4.  Faith is not facts.  When we have facts, we don't need faith.

 

There we are.  Stay out of other people's rabbit holes.  Nothing you find down there, will improve your life.

 

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

5 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

 

I like the tips! I also tend to get into these kind of arguments and as I have seen you comment very often; they lead to nothing good. Getting too old for that... life is too short. Thanks!

 

 

Perhaps a change of profession?  You could be the man who circumcises Jewish boys.       

 

[RevBogovac]

1 hour ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

Perhaps a change of profession?  You could be the man who circumcises Jewish boys.       

 

 

🤣

 

[Pete]

I go with I don't know if a deity exists and no one can prove it. So unless you have empirical, indisputable, and demonstrable  proof, then don't bother me with fairy stories.

Edited January 7, 2021 by Pete

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

33 minutes ago, Pete said:

I go with I don't know if a deity exists and no one can prove it. So unless you have empirical, indisputable, and demonstrable  proof, then don't bother me with fairy stories.

 

 

Alright.                     

[RevBogovac]

3 hours ago, Pete said:

I go with I don't know if a deity exists and no one can prove it. So unless you have empirical, indisputable, and demonstrable  proof, then don't bother me with fairy stories.

 

 

Sounds like a healthy attitude to me...

 

 

[damnthing]

On 1/6/2021 at 4:43 PM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

Perhaps a change of profession?  You could be the man who circumcises Jewish boys.       

 

Be a Mohel, the job sucks but the tips a good

Edited January 7, 2021 by damnthing

[Dan56]

On 1/6/2021 at 8:35 AM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

Agnostics end it with -- I don't know.

 

Apatheists  end it with -- I don't care.

 

Atheists are frequently willing to argue.

 

When you don't know anything and don't care, you really have no argument? With no position coming out of the gate, your void of content.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

4 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

When you don't know anything and don't care, you really have no argument? With no position coming out of the gate, your void of content.

 

 

You are mistaken.  I know a lot about things that interest me.  Things that matter a lot.  Supernatural things for which we have no reliable information -- trivial things like God -- not so much.  I have plenty of content.  Content that matters.  Simply, not your content.  

 

About God?  I don't know, I don't care, and I'm bored with silly arguments.  In particular, I'm bored with arguing with your faith statements.  So very bored with your faith.

 

It wouldn't be so bad, if you were capable of learning.  You continue to insist that "Atheists believe in nothing."   That Agnostics "know nothing".   I have tried to explain why this is not so.  It is futile.  You have your own point of view -- and you have no understanding of any other perspective.  Neither do you care.

 

 

 

[Dan56]

7 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

I have plenty of content.  Content that matters.  Simply, not your content.  

 

That was my point... You have your theories and I have my faith, neither of which are substantiated with objective verifiable facts.

 

So as I mentioned many moons aloft; When push comes to shove, no one knows nothing.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

7 minutes ago, Dan56 said:

 

That was my point... You have your theories and I have my faith, neither of which are substantiated with objective verifiable facts.

 

So as I mentioned many moons aloft; When push comes to shove, no one knows nothing.

 

 

Are you asking me to support -- I don't know -- with objective, verifiable evidence?  What do you want?  What part of -- I don't know -- are you contesting?

 

 

 

[Dan56]

6 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

Are you asking me to support -- I don't know -- with objective, verifiable evidence?  What do you want?  What part of -- I don't know -- are you contesting?

 

 

No, there is no support for "I don't know", nor is there a viable argument for it, which was all I was pointing out.. When you know nothing and believe nothing, there's nothing to argue about.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

6 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

No, there is no support for "I don't know", nor is there a viable argument for it, which was all I was pointing out.. When you know nothing and believe nothing, there's nothing to argue about.

 

🙄

 

[Pete]

Agnostics and Atheists identify with what we can see and prove in our environment. We do not project myth into our perception or understanding. We have the reality we van identify. Everything else is unprovable and baseless. To us it is you that has nothing but superstition and myth. If you base your sum on nothing , it does not matter how many times you multiply it your sum total argument is still nothing. You have not one thing you can bring to the discussion that we can agree proves anything, and therefore your defending a position with nothing. I give you that you are persistent, but like the multiplying of nothing it does mean anything except to you.