0
   

Passage ...... Where do you go after you die

 
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 10:49 am
Frankly, anyone who does not acknowledge their agnosticism (it seems none of us KNOWS for sure if a God exists or if gods do not exist) is playing loose with the truth. I have no idea of why you find that insulting, but instead of ranting on about how insulted you are, why not just debate the concept with me?

Frank, this certainly sounds like you're saying that if anyone doesn't admit agnosticism, they're being dishonest. And as far as "not ranting, but debating the concept", if you already regard everyone who doesn't see things like you do as being intellectually dishonest, or "playing loose with the truth" as you put it, how can anyone expect to have a discussion with you in which their views will be genuinely respected?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 11:03 am
snood wrote:
Frankly, anyone who does not acknowledge their agnosticism (it seems none of us KNOWS for sure if a God exists or if gods do not exist) is playing loose with the truth. I have no idea of why you find that insulting, but instead of ranting on about how insulted you are, why not just debate the concept with me?

Frank, this certainly sounds like you're saying that if anyone doesn't admit agnosticism, they're being dishonest. And as far as "not ranting, but debating the concept", if you already regard everyone who doesn't see things like you do as being intellectually dishonest, or "playing loose with the truth" as you put it, how can anyone expect to have a discussion with you in which their views will be genuinely respected?



What it should sound like is me saying what I think.

Nothing wrong with that, is there?

You have, in effect, said the same thing, Snood.

You have acknowledge that you consider it near to impossible to KNOW if God or gods exist. You mention "faith" and "belief" as substitutes.

No problem.

Anyone is allowed to guess about reality.

But unless you actually KNOW there is a GOD -- or KNOW that there are no gods -- you are an agnostic. Someone who does not KNOW.

As far as this continuum is concerned, there appears to be only two kinds of people in this world -- agnostics who acknowledge their agnosticism and agnostics who guess one way or the other and pretend it is something other than guessing.

I don't know why that causes so much anger in somepeople -- but truly, that is their problem, not mine. I most assuredly do not mean my comments to be insulting -- just truthful.
0 Replies
 
Eva
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 12:23 pm
Thank you, Snood! You DA MAN!!! (wish I'd said that!)

...there appears to be only two kinds of people in this world -- agnostics who acknowledge their agnosticism and agnostics who guess one way or the other and pretend it is something other than guessing. wrote:


Since Frank has now decided that everyone is an agnostic, I guess there is no point in presenting divergent views. Thanks SO much for settling it all for us, Frank. Rolling Eyes

What it should sound like is me saying what I think. wrote:


Agreed. It SHOULD sound like that. Instead, it sounds arrogant and passively aggressive. Which always makes people angry. But as you said, that's my problem, not yours. So I BELIEVE I shall go play on another thread. No, scratch that. It's not a belief. It's a fact.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 12:36 pm
Visitor


You quoted me saying: "...there appears to be only two kinds of people in this world -- agnostics who acknowledge their agnosticism and agnostics who guess one way or the other and pretend it is something other than guessing"...and then you wrote:


Quote:
Since Frank has now decided that everyone is an agnostic, I guess there is no point in presenting divergent views. Thanks SO much for settling it all for us, Frank. Rolling Eyes


Only too happy to be of service.


Quote:
So I BELIEVE I shall go play on another thread. No, scratch that. It's not a belief. It's a fact.


Well you can do that if you choose, but it seems to me you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Look -- you seem to think I am wrong when I say everyone is an agnostic.

Well -- an agnostic is someone who does not know if there is a God -- and who does not know if there are no gods.

Since you disagree with me about everyone falling into that category -- perhaps you will tell us who you know who KNOWS there is a God -- or who KNOWS there are no gods.

Seems to me that is a more adult way of dealing with this than just running away.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 01:22 pm
"...perhaps you will tell us who you know who KNOWS there is a God -- or who KNOWS there are no gods."

That's the rub. If I tell you I "know" in my heart - just like someone "knows" they love someone, your reply would probably press for something more concrete. Nothing wrong with your saying we can't know - and I can understand why you're so adamant eveyone is really a member of the agnostic camp whether they admit it or not.

Just two things I'll leave you with -

In any disagreement between reasonable, mature adults, I think one common trait is that at some point, when their 'facts' simply won't reconcile, they can agree to disagree. What I find particularly hard to swallow about your whole line and attitude is that you're saying everyone agrees with you, and its just up to them whether they admit it or not. I find that especially snide.

Secondly,
If I told you that the way some soldiers or clergy or physicians or police or firemen or parents get through their daily routine is by relying on a power greater than themselves, I think it would be perfectly fine if you thought that was quaint, but ignorant. What I wouldn't find easy to take would be if you found you had the need to tell those people that they were just deceiving themselves. Because if you found you had that need, then my friend your desire to enlighten the world to your self-labeled 'only real right way of looking at things' becomes something far less than attractive, to put it kindly.
0 Replies
 
stanlen
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 01:34 pm
"Life is a brief interlude between periods of non-existance"
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 01:48 pm
snood- I like your "take" on this-

Quote:
In any disagreement between reasonable, mature adults, I think one common trait is that at some point, when their 'facts' simply won't reconcile, they can agree to disagree.


I think that there reaches a point, when all arguments are presented, that sometimes there is still no meeting of the minds. I have a friend who is extremely intellectual and very bright. She is interested in EVERYTHING. The problem was, that we come from completely different political perspectives.

When we first met, we were hell bent on arguing our particular political thoughts. We both were sincere individuals, who really believe in what we were saying. After awhile, we looked at each other, and she said to me, exactly what you said, "Let's agree to disagree".

Now we enjoy each other's company as human beings, and have had many pleasant times together. We simply no longer discuss those issues that are futile for us to discuss.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 02:31 pm
Snood, I have tried to be responsive to your questions but have evidently failed.
I still would like the courtesy of an attempt on your part to answer mine ... If for some reason you feel they are not worthy of an answer please inform me of the reason.


Is it possible to confuse religious bigotry with a constructive exchange of ideology?

How is growth possibl without an exchange of ideas.

If each person's God is identical in every aspect, to the degree that any discussion of religion is superflous, what would be the point of religion?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 03:14 pm
snood wrote:
"...perhaps you will tell us who you know who KNOWS there is a God -- or who KNOWS there are no gods."

That's the rub. If I tell you I "know" in my heart - just like someone "knows" they love someone, your reply would probably press for something more concrete. Nothing wrong with your saying we can't know - and I can understand why you're so adamant eveyone is really a member of the agnostic camp whether they admit it or not.


If you told me you "know in your heart" -- I would treat it the same way I would if you told me you "know it in your kidney."

We know things in our brain -- and when someone says they "know" something in their heart -- they are acknowledging in a round about way that they do not know it -- but suspect it, estimate it, guess it, or something else like that.




Quote:
In any disagreement between reasonable, mature adults, I think one common trait is that at some point, when their 'facts' simply won't reconcile, they can agree to disagree. What I find particularly hard to swallow about your whole line and attitude is that you're saying everyone agrees with you, and its just up to them whether they admit it or not. I find that especially snide.


I have ended dozens -- perhaps hundreds of conversations here and in Abuzz with the words "we will simply have to agree to disagree."

But if someone is pressing the point with me -- I have no problem continuing to present my opinion.

Your rewording of what I had to say about agnosticism is jaded -- and I reject it. If you go back to my words, I will stand by them completely. And if I read you here and elsewhere correctly, you agree with my position.

You do seem to be bothered by the fact that I present my arguments without the sugar coating. I feel my way of doing things is the more ethical way of dealing with these kinds of things. I'm sorry my honesty bothers you so much. I like what you have to say -- but I think you are off base on your assessment of me.


Quote:
If I told you that the way some soldiers or clergy or physicians or police or firemen or parents get through their daily routine is by relying on a power greater than themselves, I think it would be perfectly fine if you thought that was quaint, but ignorant. What I wouldn't find easy to take would be if you found you had the need to tell those people that they were just deceiving themselves. Because if you found you had that need, then my friend your desire to enlighten the world to your self-labeled 'only real right way of looking at things' becomes something far less than attractive, to put it kindly.


I don't go looking to push my agenda on anyone -- unless it is in a forum like this or Abuzz -- where opinions are expected.

My mother, now dead, was a devote Christian -- who attended church every day!!! I have no problem with people who are religious -- and have many MANY religious friends. But when someone talks about what they KNOW here in a forum designed for debate, I think the proper thing to do is to debate the issue.

That is what I am doing.

Sorry I'm not doing it the way you -- or some of the others -- want me to do it, but I am doing it out-front. And without all the smiley stuff.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 04:59 pm
Well Frank, in my estimation, if you and I can agree that common courtesy and "all the smily stuff" ain't exactly the same thing, then I don't think we have a problem.

Gel, I'm afraid I have to admit that I haven't tried to answer your question for two reasons which are related to each other...
One, the way you worded your question is confusing to me, and two -
seeing as how you've already pretty much dismissed he idea of God as the supreme spirit out of hand, I sorta have my doubts that you're not trying to set someone up with the seemingly innocuous "question".
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 05:03 pm
Also, it is interesting to me what Frank said about me "knowing it in my kidney" Laughing .

- Does that mean, Frank, that you regard the things of the heart (and so as not to be too nebulous, by that I mean falling in love, joy, grief, etc.) as purely functions of biology and imagination?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 05:39 pm
Snood

Sorry to have to explain this to you, but there is no such thing as "knowing something in one's heart." That expression was invented to deal with the situation where someone truly does not know something -- but which the person does not want to acknowledge as a lack of knowledge.

Love, joy, grief, imagination -- and all that stuff, I'm sorry to inform you, are products of the brain -- not the heart.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 05:48 pm
Frank Apisa- I hear where you are coming from, and factually, IMO, you are correct. But what about poetic license? Can you imagine a man saying to his beloved, "I love you with all my brain, hormones, and pheromones?"
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 05:52 pm
Laughing

Yeah, really.. "Darling, I love you with all my synapses!"
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 05:54 pm
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Frank Apisa- I hear where you are coming from, and factually, IMO, you are correct. But what about poetic license? Can you imagine a man saying to his beloved, "I love you with all my brain, hormones, and pheromones?"


Phoenix

I think you know me better than that.

I have no problem with poetic license -- and I am sure I have used those expressions myself under other circumstances.

But understand that we are having a serious discussion here about what we KNOW and do not know.

The stuff that comes under "knowing in the heart" have no place in the part of this discussion that is not being considered. And honestly, neither do expressions like "it is transcendental knowledge."

My guess is that nobody here KNOWS the answers to the questions being discussed. Anyone can make a guess, estimate, or anything else -- but it is not knowledge.

I hope I am not being petty by being this rigid on this -- but the thing being discussed is KNOWLEDGE -- and if I just concede "know in my heart" I might just as well concede everything.

Snood knows I am correct in this thing -- but he is pushing it for some reason rather than simply acknowledge the obvious. Some people are not as lucky as Snood. They truly cannot see the truth in this thing.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 06:04 pm
Aw heck - and here I thought I had stopped pushing.

Lighten up there Frank - life's too short. That is something we know.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 06:19 pm
Frank Apisa- I just recently jumped into this thread, and I DO get the feeling that you are pushing. I think that people have knowledge in certain narrow areas. I think that it is impossible in the time that we live to learn a great deal about everything.

Unless we have made major committments in time for studies in an area of knowledge, most of what we know are things that we have picked up through peers, the media, other people's research, and popular books.
How much we know about an area of learning is correlated with how much time and effort we have put into that particular area.

So I think that we can all safely say, that most of the time we are making educated guesses. I am satisfied that my educated guesses work for me, and that I am open to new knowledge that will further "fine tune" those guesses. I respect that each person is coming from a different place based on their background, learning and experiences.

If a person is open to discussion, fine. If not, that's OK too. I think though that if a person insists on pushing an idea on someone where they don't want to be pushed, it is not only an exercise in folly, but extremely overbearing and arrogant.

I went through a time in my life, when I was very young, and I thought I knew all the answers. I pushed like crazy. And I quickly learned that people backed off from me, and after awhile did not even hear my words, but reacted to my aggressiveness.

What I found was that this desire to have people agree with me was borne out of an insecurity. I needed a claque, who would nod in agreement. As I matured, I realized that it was not necessary for ANYBODY to agree with me. I had my belief system, and would discuss it with willing persons. But I would never push it on people to gain "converts" to my way of thinking.

I have said this before, and I will say it again. I may not agree with or even respect a person's views, but I respect the RIGHT of that person to hold those views.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 06:23 pm
Snood & Frank Apisa- Wanna go out for a beer? I think that we all could use one now! Very Happy
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Apr, 2003 06:25 pm
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Snood & Frank Apisa- Wanna go out for a beer? I think that we all could use one now! Very Happy


Smile
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 May, 2003 05:49 am
Snood, thank you. Did you ever hear 'when the student is ready, the teacher will appear'?

Years ago a friend told me, (paraphrasing) most people see the ocean, some see the waves, you see the foam on the waves.

When you mentioned the way I structure my questions ..... you are not the first .... the cogs started to slowly turn. I woke up this morning thinking about seafoam. Finally what my friend had said made some sense. Now, is that good or bad ......
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 09:27:19