Someone commented recently about how agnosticism was supposedly "playing it safe". Here is the context:
"Religious fanaticism is just as bad as the dogma of atheism. Better to be agnostic, to play it safe, and just use our God-given animal instincts to enjoy our temporary earthly animal life."
In what sense can one claim that " to be agnostic [is] to play it safe"?
Is there any Christian teaching that suggests agnostics could be "saved"?
@FMF
I don’t think being agnostic is a safe space, nor is it unsafe space. Part of the problem with statements like this is language used. “Safe space” implies that there might become danger. So it is likely that this phrase was used by a theist?
It has been said by some observers that “we are all agnostic” as we cannot know for a fact, as in a scientific fact, that God exists. By the same line of reasoning we also cannot know that God doesn’t exist. Therefore we are all “agnostic”.
A thought exercise:
For whatever reason, person A prefers to to believe that based on their own experiences it is more likely that God does exist. Person B prefers to believe that due to the current lack of evidence of God, the chances of their being a God are so close to zero that they prefer to believe that there is no God. And yet by earlier definition they are both agnostic. In the case of God existing and looking at both of these people; Is person A more righteous, more worthy than person B? Elsewhere no God looks down.
Person A subsequently decides, or comes to believe that God is manifested through some writings by other people who also came to believe that God exists and decided to write about their beliefs. Person B looks at these writings and sees only some imaginings. God looks down on both. Both are agnostic. Neither can know for absolute fact. Elsewhere no God looks down.
Person B reads some of writings by people of belief in God and enjoys some moral code in the writings and adopts many of the core values into their life, but still doesn’t believe in God. Person A spends their time developing the texts into guidelines and rules for others to follow to help them see the way to experiencing a shared belief in God. God looks down on the two “agnostics” who have each carved out a mind map. Elsewhere no God looks down.
Years later person A has spent years developed an encyclopaedic back catalogue of beliefs, contexts, rules for the beliefs, exclusions and literature to support this construct. Person B has allowed some of the values of the historical writings to permeate their thinking and therefore direct their life. They have spent years setting up a charity which provides food for underprivileged people. God looks down on both agnostics. Elsewhere no God looks down.
Despite both being agnostic, which person sought and found God; A or B? Neither?
”The generous will themselves be blessed, for they share their food with the poor.”
Proverbs
”This is the covenant I will make with them
after that time, says the Lord.
I will put my laws in their hearts,
and I will write them on their minds.”
Jeremiah and Hebrews.
”You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.”
Also Jeremiah
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29602
“I am agnostic. I don’t know if there is a God or not.” Okay. Welcome to being human. What else ya got? - And in this way, the Christian and the atheist are more alike than different. We are all agnostic. But it is only the Christian and the atheist who are willing to take a risk. They both courageously make an existential stand when no conclusions are available."
Jared Byas
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
I once knew an Anglican priest who claimed he did not know whether God exists. I guess that’s fairly typical of Anglicanism, they’re sort of fence sitters on all kinds of dogmatic issues.
@moonbus saidSome are, that is true. I'm Episcopalian, which is sort of the American version of Anglican. While some in my church are fence sitters, I find that somewhat regretful. Sitting on the fence, being a crowd-pleaser, was never my style. My personal dogma may have bits of unsureness to it, after all, I do not have ALL the answers, but I would call it fully-formed. Not a lot of room for wishy-washy here.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
I once knew an Anglican priest who claimed he did not know whether God exists. I guess that’s fairly typical of Anglicanism, they’re sort of fence sitters on all kinds of dogmatic issues.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI disagree.
“I am agnostic. I don’t know if there is a God or not.” Okay. Welcome to being human. What else ya got? - And in this way, the Christian and the atheist are more alike than different. We are all agnostic. But it is only the Christian and the atheist who are willing to take a risk. They both courageously make an existential stand when no conclusions are available."
Jared Byas
I would say that the Most High, the very Son of God, has shed his blood for us. Surely, we know.
@suzianne saidSitting on the fence, being a crowd-pleaser, was never my style. ... Not a lot of room for wishy-washy here.
Some are, that is true. I'm Episcopalian, which is sort of the American version of Anglican. While some in my church are fence sitters, I find that somewhat regretful. Sitting on the fence, being a crowd-pleaser, was never my style. My personal dogma may have bits of unsureness to it, after all, I do not have ALL the answers, but I would call it fully-formed. Not a lot of room for wishy-washy here.
I'd be interested to hear why you think agnosticism is a "ctowd pleaser" stance or why you think it's "wishy-washy". You seem to be assigning some value or virtue to the absence of doubt.
@fmf saidIt depends on who you ask.
Someone commented recently about how agnosticism was supposedly "playing it safe". Here is the context:
"Religious fanaticism is just as bad as the dogma of atheism. Better to be agnostic, to play it safe, and just use our God-given animal instincts to enjoy our temporary earthly animal life."
In what sense can one claim that " to be agnostic [is] to play it safe"?
Is there any Christian teaching that suggests agnostics could be "saved"?
Safe from fear of the unknown and the general feeling of not knowing how we got here or where we're going? Then, no.
Safe from advocating a belief based on arguably flimsy evidence? Then, yes.
@fmf saidDo you have a reading problem? Or do you just prefer to spin what people say?
Sitting on the fence, being a crowd-pleaser, was never my style. ... Not a lot of room for wishy-washy here.
I'd be interested to hear why you think agnosticism is a "ctowd pleaser" stance or why you think it's "wishy-washy". You seem to be assigning some value or virtue to the absence of doubt.
I was speaking of Anglicanism, which moonbus brought up, not agnosticism, which you brought up. You act as though you never read his post that I responded to.
And the absence of doubt, especially among Christians, IS a virtue. Jesus himself speaks of "the faith of the mustard seed". Doubt hangs people up, preventing action, preventing conviction and yes, sometimes, preventing courage.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4279
@fmf saidYou failed to ask permission for the copy and write for the use of it. You can only f it up, by taking it out of context. Do you have any idea as to what I was implying by playing it safe?
Someone commented recently about how agnosticism was supposedly "playing it safe". Here is the context:
"Religious fanaticism is just as bad as the dogma of atheism. Better to be agnostic, to play it safe, and just use our God-given animal instincts to enjoy our temporary earthly animal life."
In what sense can one claim that " to be agnostic [is] to play it safe"?
Is there any Christian teaching that suggests agnostics could be "saved"?
I did not specify a specific religion, as far as fanaticism. Therefore, why are you isolating the safety to Christianity? Or, are you implying, as a declared atheist, that you are only atheistic towards the existence of the Christian god?
With that said, I suppose that I can overlook your plagiarism, since you did not disclose and give credit the author, me. But I'm honored for you to consider my petty talk worthy of a thread creation, and opened for discussion. Not that I think you mean any good for its use. Still, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and see where you go with this. Stick to the ball to play it even safer!
@suzianne saidAnd the absence of doubt, especially among Christians, IS a virtue.
And the absence of doubt, especially among Christians, IS a virtue. Jesus himself speaks of "the faith of the mustard seed". Doubt hangs people up, preventing action, preventing conviction and yes, sometimes, preventing courage.
A "virtue" of what kind?
Doubt hangs people up, preventing action, preventing conviction and yes, sometimes, preventing courage.
Doubt about God etc. "prevents action" in what way?
@pettytalk saidThat's what the thread OP asks. Feel free to say what you were implying.
Do you have any idea as to what I was implying by playing it safe?
@pettytalk saidBecause I am interested in what Christians have to say, as well as non-Christians here who spend time talking to Christians.
I did not specify a specific religion, as far as fanaticism. Therefore, why are you isolating the safety to Christianity?