Not exact matches
Whats even more scarier is when
Agnostics use the
word of God for an excuse to be immoral.
Throughout you have twisted and confused the definitions
of words like religion, belief, faith,
Agnostic and Atheist with faulty logic and broken arguments.
According to the work produced by David B. Barrett's religious statistics organisation (FYI, the man was a Christian no less) atheists number more than Jews, Sikh's, Shintos, Baha'is, Jains, combined, and if you want to consider all «non - religious / secular /
agnostic / atheist» together, since the whole «non-religion» movement is kinda riddled with people who find conontations
of words like «atheist» to be bad enough to not want to declare themselves atheist, you'll find the number
of that non-religious group also amounts more than those religions plus buddhism, and taoism or even Confucianism.
I would not characterize the atheist /
agnostic perspective on the whole as angry about the beliefs
of others, I think the
word you're looking for is incredulity.
The
word «
agnostic» was coined by Thomas Huxley (1825 - 95), a strong supporter
of Charles Darwin's theory
of evolution.
Since I believe in the inspired, inerrant, authoritative
Word of God, I must take these texts for what they say, and compare them with other texts which condemn murder and the slaughter
of other people and say, along with the Jewish prisoners in the movie above, and along with atheists and
agnostics of our day, that God is guilty.
And if we add to that, the millions
of living atheists,
agnostics, and former Christians who have had similar experiences to mine and would agree with my conclusions, and add to that the millions
of non believers and former believers in the past, some
of which have left in writing a sampling
of their conclusions, it would seem to me that our personal experience and perspectives cancel each other out, and all you are left with is your belief in the
words written in your bible.
Christians, if they (
agnostics) want to learn the
word of God, we're here to help them with that commitment.
Most honest Atheists are also
Agnostic (defining knowledge)... in other
words - I see no evidence to support the notion
of a god (s) but can't be sure there isn't.
As an
Agnostic he would not claim that he is able to teach the
Word of God as that would also conflict with his choices.
There is a difference between atheist and
agnostic by their very definitions, and no amount
of wiki postings by you is going to change the definitions
of those
words.
I went from
agnostic dabbling with reincarnation and other bits
of Eastern Religions where I was looking for «good» then was caught by the
words in the Bible.
As an
agnostic I disagree with use
of the
word «spiritual» to explain my feelings
of awe at the universe, because «spiritual,» to me, implies the supernatural.
I'll take you at your
word regarding your recommendation to study and suggest you read WHAT GOD DOES TO YOUR BRAIN by two neuroscientists, Andrew Newberg who is a «theist» (believes in some kind
of divine character) and Mark Waldman and
agnostic (a non commit on the question).
I know the authors
of modern versions have been openly gay / lesbians,
agnostics, skeptics, and scoffers
of Gods
word.
There is no room to dilute this fact with
agnostic thinking, or claims for lack
of proof as it is written in God's
word, and a sign for everyone.
In other
words, if believers can't successfully argue that a newborn is born a member
of their cult, they will argue that the newborn should be put in some indeterminate group rather than a non-cult group such as Nones, skeptic or
agnostic.
The reason is most are either
agnostic or atheist who know little or nothing about the revealed
Word of God.
Not only are the
words «belief» and «knowledge» not universally defined, but the very idea
of an
agnostic is silly if you really stick to the distinctions people will give you.
An emphatic 2008 report by economist Ross Garnaut, a former global warming
agnostic who became, in his own
words, «a late - life convert» to the green cause, did much to dispel any lingering questions among most Australians about whether the threat
of climate change was real.
I explain that agnotology is the study
of how and why we don't know things, coming from the
word agnostic.
It also means that Mac users, a group that has been historically excluded from early iterations
of legal software advances, can take advantage
of LEAP's document assembly capabilities, because
Word Online is platform -
agnostic.1
The reverberations
of her
words have re-ignited, for anyone who thought it was a just a trend, the importance
of #metoo, the industry -
agnostic movement.