Why believe the Bible?

[Adrift]

George Locus

[robertb]

Again, words have meaning Robert so if we can call ourselves whatever we please, why call yourself an atheist? Perhaps you are a 'Buddhist-Methodist' like George Locus claims to be.

Words do have meaning.

I am an atheist because I do not believe in a God. I am agnostic with regards to the actual existence of any possible gods.

So, again I question whether you understand the difference between belief and knowledge.

[lilpixieofterror]

Words do have meaning.

So why can one be a theist and an agnostic, at the same time?

I am an atheist because I do not believe in a God. I am agnostic with regards to the actual existence of any possible gods.

Most would say you would be an agnostic, not an atheist (including your fellow atheist).

So, again I question whether you understand the difference between belief and knowledge.

Sure, but how could one be a theist and say God does exist, but not sure if God exist? Do you not see the contradiction here? Hey, if we can call ourselves whatever we want, I guess you can be a Christian-atheist, a Buddhist-Methodist etc?

[lilpixieofterror]

Blame spell check for auto fixing it. I just find it odd that a person can call themselves two different belief systems, that disagree with one another about the questions of life.

[Adrift]

Blame spell check for auto fixing it. I just find it odd that a person can call themselves two different belief systems, that disagree with one another about the questions of life.

No, its better that way actually. Just needs a "t" on the end of "Locus".

[robertb]

So why can one be a theist and an agnostic, at the same time?



Most would say you would be an agnostic, not an atheist (including your fellow atheist).



Sure, but how could one be a theist and say God does exist, but not sure if God exist? Do you not see the contradiction here? Hey, if we can call ourselves whatever we want, I guess you can be a Christian-atheist, a Buddhist-Methodist etc?

Okay. If I do not believe in a God then I am by definition a - theistic. This says nothing about what I do or do not actually know regarding the actual existence of god. Similarly, you may believe in a God, a theist by definition while not actually knowing if in fact a God exists or not. Perhaps you simply have faith that one does.

[magellan004]

Okay. If I do not believe in a God then I am by definition a - theistic. This says nothing about what I do or do not actually know regarding the actual existence of god. Similarly, you may believe in a God, a theist by definition while not actually knowing if in fact a God exists or not. Perhaps you simply have faith that one does.

This sounds similar to a recent discussion of knowledge in another thread with you and Zack (which I enjoyed very much.)
As an atheist/agnostic, do you know that Christians do not know?
Can I use the same reasoning to say - 'Robertb does not know what Christians know.'?
Can I use the same reasoning to say - 'Robertb does know that God exists.'?



Magellan

[shunyadragon]

Shuny, you can do a Google search on it and you'll find the term is common among many people. Christian-atheism has a wiki article and even its own web site, so following your logic, it is a valid belief (in truth, it really isn't, it is more of butchering up the Bible and removing all references to God, miracles, etc and seeing Jesus as a wise teacher that was hijacked by Christianity). Anyway, we definite people by terms, if finding a wiki article and an article online is enough to establish that two contradictory beliefs can be made into one, then there is no reason why people cannot be Christian-atheist anymore then they can be agnostic-theist or whatever you want to call yourself. When do we stop redefinining terms to mean whatever we want them to mean?

I have not been redefining terms at all, and responded with a clear concise reference that used standard definitions in the description of Christian agnostics. You have failed to respond to the reference!!!!

Christian atheism is not a common term used by many.

Still ignoring the post, and googling is a very valid way to find good articles and and references. Are you saying the reference I cited was not valid? If you refer to it it refers to other articles and references. You have not responded to the post. I acknowledged that there could be people who call themselves Christian atheists, and in the next post acknowledged there are those that consider Christ in a humanist light, but that is not the issue you challenged me on. I do not consider Christ in a humanist way. You challenged me that I support atheists and atheism. Failing to document that you move the goal post and take another shot.

Would it help if I referred to three or four Christian theist theologians who describe Christian agnosticism? You can find these references in academic publication, books at the library, and references to them on the internet.

[shunyadragon]

This sounds similar to a recent discussion of knowledge in another thread with you and Zack (which I enjoyed very much.)
As an atheist/agnostic, do you know that Christians do not know?
Can I use the same reasoning to say - 'Robertb does not know what Christians know.'?
Can I use the same reasoning to say - 'Robertb does know that God exists.'?



Magellan

No, and you do not know what all Christians claim yo know. I responded with a reference that clearly describes Christian agnosticism. I rely on the believers to say what they believe they know and not know, and there is great variety. Not all claim to know that God exists, many believe, but acknowledge they do not know.

[Doug Shaver]

So what specific evidence is there against the tradition that Thomas did not visit India?

You're repeating yourself, and it isn't the first time. I have answered that question.