Mercia, I wouldn’t get too hung up on the atheism/agnostic thing. I call myself an atheist because I’m someone who doesn’t have any belief in god/s. That’s all there is to it. Theists believe in god/s; atheists don’t.
I might qualify that by saying I’m an agnostic atheist, because although I don’t believe in the existence of god/s my position isn’t one based on absolute knowledge. It can’t be. You will rarely come across atheists who claim to know for certain there is no God. Even Richard Dawkins – who you seem to think has something to hide – rates himself as a 6 ‘leaning towards 7’ on the 1 – 7 belief scale.
If I may make some liberties here (and I’ll apologise in advance to anyone I may be representing), I’d describe many of the Christians on this forum as being agnostic theists. They believe in God but – when pushed – they wouldn’t claim the certainty of absolute knowledge about this. YMMV.
Sorry, I hadn't a chance to properly read ths until now.
Theists believe in god/s; atheists don’t.
So what do you call those who believe in all probability that there was some sort of intelligence
behind all that came from the big bang, but that there is little evidence this intelligence, (whoever wrote the html/css for the creation process of life), being around anymore or at least intervening. So a sort of belief that their probably was
a 'god'/creator who existed at one moment in time?
If I had not followed the instructions and had the veil removed, I think I would find the above 'third way' the most rational conclusion.
You will rarely come across atheists who claim to know for certain there is no God.
I can think of one straight away, Ricky Gervais, he is absolutely certain and loves saying it on TV, with an emotional relish. He is a classic emotional atheist and is so ignorant of the things he says before thousands of cackling ignorant people
He says at one point (and this was broadcast on TV), when talking about the Creation account 'I used to believe this rubbish'. Nowhere does he or those like him ever hint at the possibility that it is a metaphoric riddle and in the literal sense a parody, never mind a beautiful prophecy about the spiritual evolution of man as I believe it is.
These sort of emotional atheists tend to get frustrated and angy at any mention of this metaphoric or allorgerecal sense, usually because the implications may force a change in their POV onthe matter and their ego won't let them go their.
I will just add that I know this is not you and I have never thought that way about you. You are not an emotinal atheist, I don't think. I used to think most non scholary atheist were emotional atheists but I may be wrong about that?
My uncle help runs a humanist organisation, he is a Left wing professor and almost militant humanist. Everyone in my family used to say from my 4 uncles we were the same. We ony meet now every 5 yeas or so but we met recently at a wedding and shared a hotel room and that night we walked the county lanes near the hotel and talked for hours about just this subject. He is highly intelligent thinker and he had heard of my born again experience and spiritual experience in 1982 through other members of my family so we taked all night about it...conversation was deep and in the end he agreed he could be wrong. He has a very buddhist atheist view but he had mixed up Evangelical Right Wing Christianity and Right Wing harsh Catholicsm of his childhood with his Leftist woldview so coudn't help to some degree
being an emotioal atheist. This is very common.
Did you read about my story earlier about how when I was agnostic/atheist a nurse who trusted my opinion asked me if Chistianity was true? My initial emotional response was 'nahh I doubt it', but struck by the implications of this person trusting my opinion if I was wrong, I then said, 'the honest answer is I don't know'. Ricky Gervais and emotional atheists like him have too much pride and ego at stake to worry about the thousands they are trying to keep as ignorant as them. Unlike you, this type hate to say, 'the honest answer is I don't know' - and even if they do they use in the unlikely event as an absolute.
because although I don’t believe in the existence of god/s
What about the possibility of the existance of other unseen forms of life? Other realities? I would prefer you to say that you do not believe the existence of [an intelligance], just in case you are attaching emotional baggage and caricature to the word 'gods' as many atheists do. I don't know you enough yet to be sure.
Even Richard Dawkins – who you seem to think has something to hide – rates himself as a 6 ‘leaning towards 7’ on the 1 – 7 belief scale.
I bet he hated having to say that, but he knew he had to as he was getting a reputation in the mainstream UK media as a bit of an extremist. You see Darwkins cannot on the one hand give a 30% probability that their is a God and then take an absolutist position
that there is no possibility whatsoever the Bible is the Word of God in any sense and the worlds largest theist religion has negibile possibility of being true. As this is his narrative in the video of him I posted above.
Edited by Mercia2, 03 June 2011 - 05:22 PM.