Timmy, wanted to check with the dictionary to refresh my memory what agnostic meant. Do any of these definitions define how you are now perceiving God? Just curious.
Definition of agnostic:
ag·nos·tic noun
1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience. Synonyms: disbeliever, nonbeliever, unbeliever; doubter, skeptic, secularist, empiricist; heathen, heretic, infidel, pagan.
2. a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study.
3. a person who holds neither of two opposing positions on a topic: Socrates was an agnostic on the subject of immortality.
adjective
4. of or pertaining to agnostics or agnosticism.
5. asserting the uncertainty of all claims to knowledge.
6. holding neither of two opposing positions: If you take an agnostic view of technology, then it becomes clear that your decisions to implement one solution or another should be driven by need.
Timmy, wanted to check with the dictionary to refresh my memory what agnostic meant. Do any of these definitions define how you are now perceiving God? Just curious.
Definition of agnostic:
ag·nos·tic noun
1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience. Synonyms: disbeliever, nonbeliever, unbeliever; doubter, skeptic, secularist, empiricist; heathen, heretic, infidel, pagan.
2. a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study.
3. a person who holds neither of two opposing positions on a topic: Socrates was an agnostic on the subject of immortality.
adjective
4. of or pertaining to agnostics or agnosticism.
5. asserting the uncertainty of all claims to knowledge.
6. holding neither of two opposing positions: If you take an agnostic view of technology, then it becomes clear that your decisions to implement one solution or another should be driven by need.
Def 1 is pretty close.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
God is holy and God is love. Every judgment He makes is righteous. There will be no injustice in His casting the wicked into the lake of fire. If a human being was doing it, it would be evil. Our Holy God can and will do it, and it will not be a contradiction to either His holiness or His love for humanity. He is not willing that any should perish but that all would come to repentance. But many will perish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by deacon blues
Rob Bell is the author and he's promoting universalism. That isn a teaching that no one will be lost, no one goes to hell. It's a false doctrine and Bell has fallen out of favor with many.
I am sure he is out of favor with all those who love to spend their time expounding on who all is headed to (or already in) HELL.
Given your view or his view I think I like his better. If God is doing something that would be evil if someone else did it, guess what??? It would be evil. And He as much as says so:
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. Isaiah 45:7
I still like to believe that in his relationship with humanity, good prevails.
Last edited by Titus2woman; 01-13-2012 at 04:56 PM.
well when you get serious, you'll stop looking for someone to prove God to you, which is impossible, and not even accessible with your mind, and get busy doing your best to disprove God; and then see what happens.
In order to grasp the number "quadrillion," all the grains of sand on all the planets in the universe is often used. If the energy in the universe was off by one grain of sand, our universe would not be possible.
This one particular answer was plausibly denied for years, as being just too impossible to happen. I suggest that the props are quickly disappearing for gnostics or atheists.
well when you get serious, you'll stop looking for someone to prove God to you, which is impossible, and not even accessible with your mind, and get busy doing your best to disprove God; and then see what happens.
In order to grasp the number "quadrillion," all the grains of sand on all the planets in the universe is often used. If the energy in the universe was off by one grain of sand, our universe would not be possible.
This one particular answer was plausibly denied for years, as being just too impossible to happen. I suggest that the props are quickly disappearing for gnostics or atheists.
I feel no obligation or desire to disprove God's existence. Why should I? If it's just an exercise (to see what happens, as you say), well, I don't even know how I'd go about trying.
Unlikely does not equal impossible. We are here. Any miraculous explanation of how we got here is speculation.
If there is a sentient being that created everything, fine. He appears to have wound the clock and stood back to watch (if He is even watching at all). I think if He gave us a written instruction manual, He would have done a better job than any of the candidates I know about. (Not that I have studied them all.) One of the many scriptures that make sense to me and ring true is this one: God is not the author of confusion.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
I feel no obligation or desire to disprove God's existence. Why should I? If it's just an exercise (to see what happens, as you say), well, I don't even know how I'd go about trying.
Unlikely does not equal impossible. We are here. Any miraculous explanation of how we got here is speculation.
If there is a sentient being that created everything, fine. He appears to have wound the clock and stood back to watch (if He is even watching at all). I think if He gave us a written instruction manual, He would have done a better job than any of the candidates I know about. (Not that I have studied them all.) One of the many scriptures that make sense to me and ring true is this one: God is not the author of confusion.
Well, lucky for you, apparently sheep aren't separated from goats based on the sounds that come out of their mouths when asked "what do you believe," as God apparently has a better idea. Perfectly acceptable definition of God bolded.
And working backward, a continuing realization over time that you aren't really sure what you believe, or are often in confusion on a matter because of the contradiction in premises this may cause, a serious student can turn around 180 degrees, and attempt to disprove what you (say you) don't believe (uh, good luck with that)
Well, lucky for you, apparently sheep aren't separated from goats based on the sounds that come out of their mouths when asked "what do you believe," as God apparently has a better idea. Perfectly acceptable definition of God bolded.
And working backward, a continuing realization over time that you aren't really sure what you believe, or are often in confusion on a matter because of the contradiction in premises this may cause, a serious student can turn around 180 degrees, and attempt to disprove what you (say you) don't believe (uh, good luck with that)
)
Linear Mode
