WHY athiests/agnostics "persist."

[Clement]

Your knowledge of my experience is pretty limited, too.

Conflict manifests when arrogant theists work to compel others to believe as they believe by seeking to codify religious dogma in secular law.

Would you like a little cheese to go with that whine? In my universe it's arrogant atheists who are constantly filing lawsuits to see to it that Christian symbols are eradicated from the face of the earth.

Or just from their tax payer funded properties, which makes sense to have beef with.

Don't look now, but I am a taxpayer, too.

 

[Pennywise]

I consider myself agnostic and have no common ground with atheists. The two are exclusive in my book.

I also consider the possibility that God exists, but one must be properly enlightened in order to grasp and accept what to people of faith, is self-evident. Maybe they are just more in tune to the spiritual world than you or me.

^^^
This here.

Though agnostic, radical militant atheists make me want to whop them upside the head with a salmon.

I am neither threatened nor offended about a manger scene during Christmas, "In God We Trust" on the money, or any of the other petty nonsense that the atheist howler monkeys get themselves all in a later about.

That you and others on the right are ignorant of, or hostile to, Establishment Clause jurisprudence comes as no surprise.

A far left SCOTUS made that bullshit decision. Our country was founded by Christian men who utilized biblical principles in every part of life. Secularists and atheists like to pretend otherwise, but there is no separation of God and the USA, there is simply no established religion.

You fall into the arrogant buffoon category.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Life is a journey about finding truth.

I am an agnostic and will question how we got here until the truth is somehow revealed to me.

The truth has not been revealed to me; therefore, I persist.

I question Religion because it is faith based and unprovable. It also seems a bit odd to me that some people are literalists about their bible, while some people feel its half non fiction and half parable.

I also feel much of it is quite frivolous - and that if there were an omnipotent being it would not engage in such frivolity.

Partially - another reason for persistence - is that its annoying. When answer seeking to try to determine why people would believe in the books, they point to scriptures like the ones that say (paraphrasing) "beware, people will question the authenticity."

As though thats some sort of prophesy and proof as opposed to common damn sense that people will question it.

Anyhoo - in case anyone is confused as to why i personally persist -> im a truth seeker. Thats why.

Its dismissable that i will not "accept" evidence.

I once did not believe that a wireless phone signal could exist.
the truth was revealed to me, and i accepted it based on said revelation.
i treat all things in life based on same.

Phrases like "beware, people will question the authenticity" are the religious equivalent of those warning labels you find on mattresses telling you not to remove them even though they don't say what will happen if you do!

Needless to say it was probably some lawyer who insisted that it must be included in the religious texts for one reason or another that has been lost in the mists of time. The missing 13th commandment "Thou shalt not question this text" or something along those lines.

 

[Clement]

Shoukd i be forming my opinions based on someone else's brain?

Ohhhhh got me!

/sigh

It's me having to form MY opinions based on what you think that I object to.

You dont have to do a damn thing to please me short of not infringing on my rights.

Don't tell me: and you think a creche in a fire station infringes on your "rights", but your wasting the taxpayers money (of which I happen to be one) with your frivolous lawsuits every day, week, and month of the year does no violence to mine?

 

[Clement]

Anything purchased with taxpayer money that youre not a fan of you are fully within reasonable bounds to protest itas loud as youd like dude.

Oh and I will.

Thomas Jefferson said "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

This is why atheists are so tiresome, the think everything breaks their leg and picks their pocket. No wonder they are so miserable.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Life is a journey about finding truth.

I am an agnostic and will question how we got here until the truth is somehow revealed to me.

The truth has not been revealed to me; therefore, I persist.

I question Religion because it is faith based and unprovable. It also seems a bit odd to me that some people are literalists about their bible, while some people feel its half non fiction and half parable.

I also feel much of it is quite frivolous - and that if there were an omnipotent being it would not engage in such frivolity.

Partially - another reason for persistence - is that its annoying. When answer seeking to try to determine why people would believe in the books, they point to scriptures like the ones that say (paraphrasing) "beware, people will question the authenticity."

As though thats some sort of prophesy and proof as opposed to common damn sense that people will question it.

Anyhoo - in case anyone is confused as to why i personally persist -> im a truth seeker. Thats why.

Its dismissable that i will not "accept" evidence.

I once did not believe that a wireless phone signal could exist.
the truth was revealed to me, and i accepted it based on said revelation.
i treat all things in life based on same.

Truth isn't going to walk up and slap you in the face, you have to look for it.

I question religion because I have a mind that is constantly testing everything I believe. I don't need truth to slap me before I can know that wireless phone signals are possible, I figured that out when I first heard a radio.

You are a lot like Fred Phelps, another man that never met a fact he couldn't ignore. You like to pretend you are open minded, yet can't ever admit that you don't have all the answers. If you were really an agnostic you would be saying "I don't know," not "I don't believe."

Let me reintroduce you to a fact you have ignored in the past, and will ignore in the future, faith is all about evidence. I have faith in quarks because I understand enough about physics to know how they combine to form larger particles, and how those combine to form atoms, then molecules, then, finally, something I can actually see. I don't need truth to walk up and prove to me that quarks exist simply because I do not have a closed mind.

Funny thing, if someone managed to prove that quarks don't exist, I would enjoy delving into the new knowledge and discovering how the universe works. My faith would adapt to the evidence, I would not require the universe to ***** slap me before I would see the truth. You, on the other hand, would still insist that those wireless phones can't exist unless because your mind is closed to things you cannot see.

Keeping an open mind is the only way to understand faith, or anything else. You will never be able to see truth until you learn that truth is something that you cannot find.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I consider myself agnostic and have no common ground with atheists. The two are exclusive in my book.

I also consider the possibility that God exists, but one must be properly enlightened in order to grasp and accept what to people of faith, is self-evident. Maybe they are just more in tune to the spiritual world than you or me.

I never did get why people can't see the difference between not having the answers and believing you do.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I consider myself agnostic and have no common ground with atheists. The two are exclusive in my book.

I also consider the possibility that God exists, but one must be properly enlightened in order to grasp and accept what to people of faith, is self-evident. Maybe they are just more in tune to the spiritual world than you or me.

And maybe theyre gullible and there isnt one. Seems a worthy task in life to find out, thats all.

Your response to a thoughtful post is to insult people who see things you don't?

Why am I not surprised?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I consider myself agnostic and have no common ground with atheists. The two are exclusive in my book.

I also consider the possibility that God exists, but one must be properly enlightened in order to grasp and accept what to people of faith, is self-evident. Maybe they are just more in tune to the spiritual world than you or me.

How are they exclusive?
One is concerned with what you believe, the other with what you can know. How are they in conflict?
Agnostic atheists and agnostic theists are both agnostic.
It is more a statement of humility.
See my signature for a good, simple explanation.

How can you believe in something you don't know?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

When a person passes off some ill worded fantastical phrase in defense of why they believe, it can be off putting.

In my experience there is nothing that pisses people off more than someone who knows what they believe and why they believe it.

That doesn't piss me, personally, off.

It only pisses me off if the "why" has not merit.

How can you know if the why has merit or not unless you know everything?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I consider myself agnostic and have no common ground with atheists. The two are exclusive in my book.

I also consider the possibility that God exists, but one must be properly enlightened in order to grasp and accept what to people of faith, is self-evident. Maybe they are just more in tune to the spiritual world than you or me.

^^^
This here.

Though agnostic, radical militant atheists make me want to whop them upside the head with a salmon.

I am neither threatened nor offended about a manger scene during Christmas, "In God We Trust" on the money, or any of the other petty nonsense that the atheist howler monkeys get themselves all in a later about.

Why do so many people think you are a fundamentalist Christian? Could it be because they have an agenda, and you won't kowtow to it?