posted
This is an entry I am preparing to make on my website, and due to the serious nature of the matter, I would like your input as writers I respect. I want to know if you think any word choice or sentence cohesion could be made better. Am I vague or unlear anywhere? How can I make this deliver my point better?
quote: Last Saturday, thingstobesaid asked me this question: If there is a God, is He perfect? Will a perfect being be completely just? What are the implications of that?
I did not answer at the time, because, honestly, I didn’t see it. When he/she reminded me of it on Wednesday, I promised that I would answer soon. I delayed it until now because this question should not be idly answered.
In the meantime, thingstobesaid entered this on his/her Xanga, in what I believe is a direct response to my site:
My main reason for making this site was to make a comment on Lot49's Xanga. He said that he's an "agnostic deist", and that seems like a not smart idea to me. If there's a God out there, why aren't you doing anything about it? It DOES affect you. You're throwing away your eternity.
I will answer both here. Please take your time to read this – I would very much appreciate it.
When pressured into choosing a religious affiliation, I am most likely to say that I am Agnostic Deist. Forget what you think you know about agnosticism – it does not mean that you do not know whether or not there is a God. Rather, it simply means that you recognize that there is no way to prove the existence of a God either way. Most Christians (even the fundamentalists) are Agnostic, and just do not realize it yet because of the implications that modern society has placed on the term. I believe (much as that word makes me cringe) that there is a God. This is where Deism comes in. Deism entails a belief in a God that created the universe, but makes no further intervention in its affairs – this is akin to the “Blind Watchmaker” metaphor. Deists also do not belief in miracles or revelations, and are concerned with the truths that humans can ascertain through a process of reasoning.
Understand that I did not pick Deism and conform myself to it. Rather, I spent almost three months working out what I believed in, although I would have preferred longer. (I would recommend this for everyone; it can be very enlightening. Do not seek aid from anyone – do it yourself.) Once I had worked that out and announced my departure from Christianity, I was asked what I was, if not Christian.
I am Me.
Unfortunately, this was not enough for many of the sheep in the herd. To appease them a little bit, I went searching for the term that described my beliefs best, and I hit upon Deism. It fit like a shoe, but allowed room for growth and variation.
Now you know who I am. We’ll save why for another time, at your choosing.
As to the first set of questions, I would like thingstobesaid to expand on them, being a bit more specific. If someone else would like to do so, I would respond to him or her as well.
Please, if you have any questions at all, IM me at Thermitepyr or e-mail me at raptor2605@msn.com. I am more than happy to talk about what I believe (as you have already seen); it is not a hidden subject for me at all.
posted
That sounded cool. Like me. I can't really explain what I am religiously because... It's just impossible too... Maybe I'm a mystic... Rumi's poem Only Breath comes to mind.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Rather, it simply means that you recognize that there is no way to prove the existence of a God either way.
I don't think this is an accepted definition of "agnostic." Most rational theists concede this point and take God's existence on faith; most rational materialists concede this point and write off the issue.
Posts: 1839 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, agnostic literally means not knowing. It normally is used in the context of not knowing whether or not God exists. A weak agnostic would say that he doesn't know if God exists. A strong agnostic would say that it is impossible to know whether God exists. This definition of agnosticism is the original and formal definition.
But recently a new definition has come up that is pretty much exactly what your definition of agnosticism is. To differentiate between the two definitions, the first is called "strict agnosticism" the second is called "empirical agnosticism".
So in order that you guys don't talk passed each other, it might be helpful to acknowledge the strict definition that your friend has in mind, but state that you are using the empirical definition. Hope this helps.
Posts: 43 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I always thought was cool about Judaism was this one thing: Why should someone adopt a religion that god didnt advertise to them. If god wanted us to follow, why didnt he just tell us? So you could answer that he wants to test our faith. And for the initial revelation, it should be to the masses (rather than 1 person) which is what happened and sinai. Regardless, Judaism doesnt try to convert others. Judaism has seperate commandments for non-jews. 7 basic commandments, like establish government, dont kill, dont steal, dont have illicit/immoral relations. Simple human stuff. So most ppl can fulfill those 7 commandments without ever being entirely sure as to god's existance, or whatever religion is the right one. It also enables them to be good people.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Unfortunately, this was not enough for many of the sheep in the herd. To appease them a little bit...
This part came across as quite condescending to me. Just because they wanted to get a better idea of what you believe, they're now "sheep?" Yeah, as philosophically powerful as the statement "I am Me" may be to you, it's really not very descriptive to anyone who doesn't already know a lot about you (and in this case, I'm guessing they didn't know at least this one thing about you, or else they wouldn't have been asking).
Or maybe they're "sheep" just because their belief system is shared by a large number of people? If it's popular, it can't possibly be good, after all.
I realize that this might not be what you intended to communicate, but it can very easily be taken that way, and since you asked for feedback, that's my two cents.
Posts: 134 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
