Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Society & CultureReligion & Spirituality · 1 decade ago

Howcome some agnostics do not accept that atheists do not accept the existence of deities, at all?

When did atheist stop meaning that for them?

What makes them think they have the right to redefine the word and apply it to their own beliefs?

(you might notice that I have put some agnostics to acknowledge that this isn't the case for everyone)

Update:

If you think we use faith, then you give things that so far have been proven correct have the same merit as things that are only mathematically possible, which makes your stance the same as a creationist fundie, if you ask me.

Update 2:

I didn't realise that agnostics found reasons to be homophobic just by looking at my avatar and in a way, you are beginning to show me what it actually means (ie US homophobic fundie type, not really fussed about the truth)

15 Answers

Relevance
  • Favourite answer

    I think that most of us as Atheists and Agnostics are still caught up in the Judeo/Christian/Islamic interpretation and representation of what and who God is, they do not think outside of the box. If somebody asked if you believed in God, the answer would be based on the presupposition that the God you are talking about is Yahweh/Jehovah/Allah. This Anti-theism is due to their dismissal of ancient scripture and their belief in modern science, common sense and logic, but, this perspective is drawn from the common interpretation of the bible as an historical narrative and that is the view of the Theist. So the theists say, 'God is real it says so in the bible' and the Atheists says 'I don't believe the Bible thus God does not exist', therefore it is a belief system founded on dismissal of evidence instead of irrefutable evidence. There are those who conclude God does not exist, through their knowledge of evolution, but this is also based on the assumption that God is Yahweh/Jehovah/Allah and that the only other alternative is the creationists view. This is why we forever see Creation Vs Evolution and endless debates between the findings and conclusions of Dawkins and the belief in Genesis and creation science of Ham.

    Watching a UK soap last week, they touched on this subject using the Easter celebrations as a backdrop. The child’s Mother had not long died and his grandfather wanted to tell him the truth about Easter, but to do this he would have had to explain that his Mother had not gone to heaven but was just rotting in the ground being eaten by worms, the Father cut in quick (though a staunch Atheist) and told him that Mum was in Heaven and all was well. This lie, not different to the lie we tell our children about Father Christmas, is one of shielding the innocent from the realities of the truth to make the process of death easier to handle for the young and desperate. Because we tell our kids these types of little white lies, then they learn about Christianity's version of Easter and other holidays, we are planting the seed that God is Yahweh/Jehovah/Allah and this presupposition stays with us until we are able to define what God is for us, but these early definitions and representations stay with us until we automatically react to the name ‘God’ as representing, Yahweh/Jehovah/Allah.

    The Stories of the Bible are so intertwined within the fabric of society that a true un-bias conclusion is hard to find without looking outside the box. But only the enlightened freethinker will be able to conclude that there is no real evidence for an Eternal being, but there is no evidence that there isn’t an Eternal being.

    So if we take Yahweh/Jehovah/Allah. And any other religious deity that can be refuted through the dismissal of their relevant scriptures, out of the picture altogether! All Atheists would have to recognise that their belief that No Gods exists is built on Faith. Forget the Biblical definition of God or the Greek pantheon or the Roman Gods and Goddesses and the Indian deities and any other man made deity or religious philosophy; could you then say that an Eternal Omnipotent, omniscient all powerful being does not exist?

    Whether Atheists like it or not, our convictions are built on faith.

    Freethinking Atheist

    Source(s): ST All religious beliefs are founded on the human representation of the water cycle which is then played out in the zodiac. Christianity represents, in allegory, the path of the soul within the human condition.first told by the ancient Egyptians and personified by Ra, Osiris and Horus.
    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Jim W
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    How come (actually two words) some atheists do not accept that agnostics do not accept that atheists do not accept the existence of deities at all (comma incorrectly used in question)? Words are redefined all the time. Remember when "gay" meant "happy"? When "bad" was the opposite of "good"?

    In your additional details, you seem to ignore the faith required to reject the existence of deities. That would make "your stance the same as a creationist fundie" (according to your argument).

    Does anyone on R&S really need to have the word "some" pointed out to them? Those who will accept the reduction of the group being attacked will see the word anyway. Those who reject the reduction of the group being attacked will ignore the word anyway.

    Why do people who are losing an argument always try to attack the opposition as fearful? Calling a person a homophobe (apparently one who fears gay people) just because they reject the gay agenda is as disingenuous as calling you a person who fears God.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I do not actually know, I can not speak for other agnostics, I see the Universe as an expression of every possibility of rational organization and chaos. I am more that accepting that there are people at every point on the number line, so to speak. I see myself in a very uncommitted position about what their is no proof for, and open minded to possibilities that proof will appear one day. This has been the basis of theoretical science since its conception. In any case I am sure that whoever has disturbed you does not share my point of view.

    Agnostic

    Source(s): MM
    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I call myself agnostic, only because I know that God's existence can not be proven, or disproven.

    It might not be exactly how the dictionary defines the word, but that is how I use it.

    I also call myself a polytheist. Because I believe that there is a spirit inside of everyone. But, it cannot be proven by me, to you.

    So, I am an agnostic polytheist.

    A stranger combination you might not ever find in someone here in R&S.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    Individuals are different.

    I whole heartedly believe there are currently some atheists that actually do believe in god, they just have no reason to feel this way. I wish there was a better term to use in such case, but it happens.

    I also believe some theists don't believe in God, they just give it lip service, again, words fail to convey the minutiae involved.

    Some agnostics don't know either way, and some agnostics think everyone is in their position. This is partly a failing in English to convey complex concepts, and partly a failing in human beings where they have difficulty understanding all people do not have the same feelings as they do.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Atheism is not believing in a god. If you have no knowledge of a god, than you are not believing in that god, which would make you an atheist, in that respect. Atheism isn't a form of certainty, it's a variation of belief. Agnostics are atheists, in some right.

    I don't know why that is so hard to understand.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Agnosticism is a fair enough viewpoint, but the major drawback is that it places precedence upon deities and Gods, rather than other kinds of similar beliefs.

    Agnostics would willingly say they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God on one hand, but then just as easily deny the existence of unicorns on the other hand.

    Who is to say that God existing is any likelier than a unicorn existing, without some form of bias suggesting that the concept of God is more plausible?

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    You asked:

    "What makes them think they have the right to redefine the word and apply it to their own beliefs?"

    Thats an easy one. Like us gays they realised that the old way of dealing with religious bigots is not to attempt to offer opinions based on facts and truth.

    In place of facts and truth, we now use the same processes that supports of the bible have used.

    As you said. "redefine the word and apply it to their own beliefs"

    Today people are turning the religious bigots own methods back onto them and they dont like the experience of being on the receiving end.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Jim W - what gay agenda? to be treated fairly and not have religions preach hatred is hardly an agenda? homophobia is also about hatred - it's only the bigots who redefine this and other words

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I am agnostic, and I do not believe in heaven or hell, god or devil. All are stories made up by man to just instill fear.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.