🔒 Closed Why don't atheists just start believing in God so they can go to heaven?

[jayendecastro]

This is not specifically about "you".
I'm am just clarifying the common misconception about "agnosticsm", that it is a "middle ground" of some sort, between atheism and theism, which it is not. You can only be a theist or an atheist. People just tend to add "agnostic" on top of that, to avoid the negative connotation that comes with the "theist" or "atheist" label, but in reality they are either of the two. And people who say they are "agnostic" dont usually involve themself in pro or anti religion debates.

Better label for your stance? See post #5.

Agnosticsm is actually the weakest stance because of lack of assertiveness. They hide in the percieved ambiguity of the word "agnostic", to be exempted from scrutiny of beliefs. And that does not include you. Because you are way too assertive as an atheist to claim "undecided". There no sincerity everytime you say "agnostic ako".

Agree… some people dont want the baggage that comes with the label that they wanna associate with… and thats fine..

Iba lang talaga style ni TS…hehehe

i would just be very happy to discard this tag as well hehe they are just tags anyway, i still stick to my stand of unknowns without any tags or group hehe

Good then.. u present ur topics and ideas kasi like “atheist are this” or “theist are like that” based on what you know about them… but when you are presented with what others know about “agnostics” you reject it..

Labels are not necessary nman tlaga.. but at the end of the day you either believe or not believe in a god/s..(repeat ko lang…not believing in god is not the same as saying there is no god)

Your definition, i can get on board with that. Syempre sa stance ng atheism typically, wala kasi sakanila (or satin) ang burden of proof, so proof is not even in any cosideration.

Yah.. coz typically and for most cases nman evem outside religion the absence or lack of belief does not require any proof…

 

[plhbg1]

Good then.. u present ur topics and ideas kasi like “atheist are this” or “theist are like that” based on what you know about them… but when you are presented with what others know about “agnostics” you reject it..

Labels are not necessary nman tlaga.. but at the end of the day you either believe or not believe in a god/s..(repeat ko lang…not believing in god is not the same as saying there is no god)

i am a thread poster, i can actually post anything as long as the forum accepts it, it really doesn't follow that my threads represent me, i only look for debatable topics and i enjoin my self as a commenter to the openning post of my own thread, like i've said mas maigting ang bakbakan between theist and atheist so dun talaga ako focus kesa magpost ako ng agnostic and no one wants to debate

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

i don't follow agnosticism especially the meaning you showed so you cannot accuse me of disobeying the doctrine of agnosticism

Agnosticism is not a doctrine. It is simply a word that has a certain meaning. How can you say that it is the "closest" when you already disagree with the most defining meaning of the word.

It is very obvious naman na gusto mo lng yung label dahil mga matatalino na scientist ang gumagamit ng label na yan. And you want to think yourself as "like them".
Pero dahil nabuking ka na hindi ka nagmamatch sa label na gusto mo sana, you make it seem like you are above the definition of things. Dahil takot ka tawagin ang sarili mong atheist kasi you have convinced yourself for too long na much better position ang agnosticsm kaysa sa atheism. So you want to settle that your position simply does not have a proper word for it..

 

[Arlertz]

kasi mas maigting ang labanan between atheist and theist, sa agnostics kasi (which is my actual stand) ala masyadong maipaglalaban dun hehe

akalain mo yun agnostic ka pala?

 

[jayendecastro]

i am a thread poster, i can actually post anything as long as the forum accepts it, it really doesn't follow that my threads represent me, i only look for debatable topics and i enjoin my self as a commenter to the openning post of my own thread, like i've said mas maigting ang bakbakan between theist and atheist so dun talaga ako focus kesa magpost ako ng agnostic and no one wants to debate

Ur right.. u can post and comment anything u please nman… pero kung yan ang reasoning mo na u wanna pit theists againts atheists then parang pointless nman ata… let the theist or atheist present their own argument when they want it and how they want it…

Baka mas maganda na yang about sa “agnosticism” mo yang ipost mo and maybe u will learn a thing or two about what u believe in…

Theist sometimes do post ung views ng atheist with the purpose of debunking it or atleast offer their perspective about it…atheist does the same thing about theist as well…

Agnosticism is not a doctrine. It is simply a word that has a certain meaning. How can you say that it is the "closest" when you already disagree with the most defining meaning of the word.

It is very obvious naman na gusto mo lng yung label dahil mga matatalino na scientist ang gumagamit ng label na yan. And you want to think yourself as "like them".
Pero dahil nabuking ka na hindi ka nagmamatch sa label na gusto mo sana, you make it seem like you are above the definition of things. Dahil takot ka tawagin ang sarili mong atheist kasi you have convinced yourself for too long na much better position ang agnosticsm kaysa sa atheism. So you want to settle that your position simply does not have a proper word for it..

And i think he has a misguided idea of a/theism and a/gnosticism is… rather that listen to people who are actual atheists or accept ung actual definitions eh he just keeps on rambling about what he think those terms mean.

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

kesa magpost ako ng agnostic and no one wants to debate

Naka 2 page na tayo definition palang ng agnostic..

 

[plhbg1]

Agnosticism is not a doctrine. It is simply a word that has a certain meaning. How can you say that it is the "closest" when you already disagree with the most defining meaning of the word.

It is very obvious naman na gusto mo lng yung label dahil mga matatalino na scientist ang gumagamit ng label na yan. And you want to think yourself as "like them".
Pero dahil nabuking ka na hindi ka nagmamatch sa label na gusto mo sana, you make it seem like you are above the definition of things. Dahil takot ka tawagin ang sarili mong atheist kasi you have convinced yourself for too long na much better position ang agnosticsm kaysa sa atheism. So you want to settle that your position simply does not have a proper word for it..

ahaha di ko inakala ganoon pala ka big deal sa iyo ang tagging, you tend to know everything pati yung iniisip kong i'm like a scientist haha actually that's good to hear that i sounded like scientist to you haha of all people who tag themselves as agnostic only me ang inakusahan mo of thinking myself as scientist whew haha

Ur right.. u can post and comment anything u please nman… pero kung yan ang reasoning mo na u wanna pit theists againts atheists then parang pointless nman ata… let the theist or atheist present their own argument when they want it and how they want it…

Baka mas maganda na yang about sa “agnosticism” mo yang ipost mo and maybe u will learn a thing or two about what u believe in…

Theist sometimes do post ung views ng atheist with the purpose of debunking it or atleast offer their perspective about it…atheist does the same thing about theist as well…


And i think he has a misguided idea of a/theism and a/gnosticism is… rather that listen to people who are actual atheists or accept ung actual definitions eh he just keeps on rambling about what he think those terms mean.

yeah so anung gusto ninyong tagging ko ngayun since di pala ako fit sa agnostic hehe

di rin ako nagpopost ng thread to make points, mas intention ko pa na yung commenters ang mag make ng points, if i want to make a point i will include myself as commenter to my own thread like i've said before

 

[jayendecastro]

ahaha di ko inakala ganoon pala ka big deal sa iyo ang tagging, you tend to know everything pati yung iniisip kong i'm like a scientist haha actually that's good to hear that i sounded like scientist to you haha of all people who tag themselves as agnostic only me ang inakusahan mo of thinking myself as scientist whew haha

I think namisunderstood mo ung sinabi ni EroKaiLogo

yeah so anung gusto ninyong tagging ko ngayun since di pala ako fit sa agnostic hehe

di rin ako nagpopost ng thread to make points, mas intention ko pa na yung commenters ang mag make ng points, if i want to make a point i will include myself as commenter to my own thread like i've said before

Actually di nman big deal ung labels eh… kung gusto mag associate sa isang label thats fine.. pero dont make ur own definition at iattach mo un sa label mo like ung line mo na “unknown stays unknown”

Also dont tell other people how to define what they believe in or what they know based on ur own idea..ibat iba ang theist just as ibat iba ang atheist…

 

[plhbg1]

I think namisunderstood mo ung sinabi ni EroKaiLogo

akala niya siguro ide-defend ko yung agnostic nang todo todo para wag akong ma-de-throne sa pagka wanna be scientist haha i've already said agnostic is a very much disposable word to me

Actually di nman big deal ung labels eh… kung gusto mag associate sa isang label thats fine.. pero dont make ur own definition at iattach mo un sa label mo like ung line mo na “unknown stays unknown”

so anong label na nga ang gagamitin ko to fit my stand on unknown stays unknown?

Also dont tell other people how to define what they believe in or what they know based on ur own idea.

when did i instruct someone? can you quote?

.ibat iba ang theist just as ibat iba ang atheist…

nope, you cannot take away from me the capability to make my own judgement

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

akala niya siguro ide-defend ko yung agnostic nang todo todo para wag akong ma-de-throne sa pagka wanna be scientist haha i've already said agnostic is a very much disposable word to me

No that is not the point. Ang nilinaw ko lng nmn dito ay yung fact na na-mimisundertand mo ung labels in relation sa opinion ng mga taong gumagamit nito para sa sarili nila. To the point na kahit ung sariling label mo namisundertand mo.

nope, you cannot take away from me the capability to make my own judgement

how can you say your own judgement is an accurate judgement when you misjudged yourself?

 

[plhbg1]

No that is not the point. Ang nilinaw ko lng nmn dito ay yung fact na na-mimisundertand mo ung labels in relation sa opinion ng mga taong gumagamit nito para sa sarili nila. To the point na kahit ung sariling label mo namisundertand mo.

nope, i've said that disposable lang iyan sila, di ko kailangan i-learn yung kabuo-an ng word agnostic since even if di ako match doon ay it can be discard lang siya, the words will be the one to adjust not me, i've said already di ako ang susunod sa definition ni agnostic, the words should adjust to match my stand (by continuously replacing until a matching word is found) instead of me that's going to match with them

how can you say your own judgement is an accurate judgement when you misjudged yourself?

nope, if found out my judgement is inaccurate i would be very happy to change it, but it doesn't erase my capability to make a judgement

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

the words should adjust to match my stand

There is a word to match you nmn in the first place. "Atheist"
The word has nothing to do with god being knowable or unknowable. It simply is a state of not believing in the existence.
Why do all this mental gymnastics "adjusting the words"? Pag ginawa mo yan it is just a recipe for dysfunctional conversation.

Mas madali mag admit ng nagkamali k sa intindi kesa yung route na dinadala mo ang conversation na ito.

 

[plhbg1]

There is a word to match you nmn in the first place. "Atheist"
The word has nothing to do with god being knowable or unknowable. It simply is a state of not believing in the existence.

i don't believe in god's inexistence, it is just unknown whether there is an existence

Why do all this mental gymnastics "adjusting the words"? Pag ginawa mo yan it is just a recipe for dysfunctional conversation.

Mas madali mag admit ng nagkamali k sa intindi kesa yung route na dinadala mo ang conversation na ito.

i've already said that i would be very happy to change my judgement, but it is not you that's going to find my judgement inaccurate, it should be me that's going to find it out and not you

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

i don't believe in god's inexistence, it is just unknown whether there is an existence

But that statement came from the misinterpratation of agnosticsm - which really said it cannot be proven.

But is there any logic in saying you do not believe and do not disbelieve in something?

Unless you are actually experimenting right now for the answer. Jan tlga you have to let go of your bias from belief. But are you doing that? Is anybody even doing that?

You know what you are saying is nonsense. Unless naconvince mo tlga sarili mo sa nonsense na yan, which just makes it worst.

i've already said that i would be very happy to change my judgement, but it is not you that's going to find my judgement inaccurate, it should be me that's going to find it out and not you

I dont see how you have not found out yet. Perhaps you already did but refuse to admit it.. haha

Btw ilang beses ko na nilagay dito ang label na bagay sayo - anti-theist.

 

[plhbg1]

But that statement came from the misinterpratation of agnosticsm - which really said it cannot be proven.

yes it is against agnosticism and i am not changing my stand just to fit to any word

But is there any logic in saying you do not believe and do not disbelieve in something?

yes because belief is only applied to things outside science

Unless you are actually experimenting right now for the answer. Jan tlga you have to let go of your bias from belief. But are you doing that? Is anybody even doing that?

how can i have a belief bias if i don't have belief?

You know what you are saying is nonsense. Unless naconvince mo tlga sarili mo sa nonsense na yan, which just makes it worst.

thanks for the remarks, hopefully i can be able to find it out as well

I dont see how you have not found out yet. Perhaps you already did but refuse to admit it.. haha

it could be hehe but i choose to stay until i find the rejection myself

Btw ilang beses ko na nilagay dito ang label na bagay sayo - anti-theist.

how can i be anti-theist if i'm anti-atheist and anti-agnostic na nga? but i can accept that as you wish as long as the meaning of it is that it is unknown whether god exist as of the moment

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

yes because belief is only applied to things outside science

Wrong view. Science is simply a process of proving or disproving a belief. Belief exist in the realm of unknown unknowable. There is no logical way to say you neither believe nor disbelieve in something unknown.

Besides, you also use the phrase "god of gaps", which means you do not believe in God. Because the phrase means theist only believe in gods because of things they do not know. And the idea of that is once everything is fully understood, there is no more god.

I am not asking you to "change" your belief. Just be more honest about it and stop the nonsense.

Of course like the post before this you will still not understand due to your lack of reading comprehension, so open ka nlng ibang topic.

 

[plhbg1]

Wrong view. Science is simply a process of proving or disproving a belief. Belief exist in the realm of unknown unknowable. There is no logical way to say you neither believe nor disbelieve in something unknown.

if science say it is unknown then i say unknown as well hehe i don't have to be a believer or unbeliever to describe it as unknown, science is proving what is being believed and not the belief itself, it is the object of belief that needs proving and not the belief itself that is why the arts and literature that christians consider as evidence will only prove the belief (christianity) but not the object of belief/worship which is god

Besides, you also use the phrase "god of gaps", which means you do not believe in God. Because the phrase means theist only believe in gods because of things they do not know. And the idea of that is once everything is fully understood, there is no more god.

it is unknown if god is included in the gaps that will be discovered eventually, but as of now all things beyond science are being thrown to the "god did it" basket kaya "god of gaps"

I am not asking you to "change" your belief. Just be more honest about it and stop the nonsense.

thanks for the remarks but i choose to stay until i found the nonsense and dishonesty myself hehe

Of course like the post before this you will still not understand due to your lack of reading comprehension, so open ka nlng ibang topic.

i would be very happy to learn reading comprehension if i find the lack of it myself hehe

 

[Arlertz]

i would be very happy to learn reading comprehension if i find the lack of it myself hehe

Talaga baaaaa???

May tanong ako sayo hindi ka makasagot ng diretso e kahit ikaw naman mismo yung nagsimula, ako pa sasabihin mong nag a accuse non e ikaw naman yung sabi haha

Oh napadaan lang ako, sige usap na kayo uli hehehe

 

[plhbg1]

Talaga baaaaa???

May tanong ako sayo hindi ka makasagot ng diretso e kahit ikaw naman mismo yung nagsimula, ako pa sasabihin mong nag a accuse non e ikaw naman yung sabi haha

Oh napadaan lang ako, sige usap na kayo uli hehehe

hehe ayan kana naman sa tanong mo na iyan, sinabihan na kita it doesn't apply to me, just ask the right persons (6000 fans)

 

[Arlertz]

hehe ayan kana naman sa tanong mo na iyan, sinabihan na kita it doesn't apply to me, just ask the right persons (6000 fans)

It applies to you because you used their beliefs in your argument e hehe. Tapos inulit mo pa at idiniin. Kaya nga kita tinatanong jan di mo masagot ng diretso.

Sige okay na. Natawa lang ako sa comment mong

i would be very happy to learn reading comprehension if i find the lack of it myself hehe

Usap na kayo uli