If I am open to options, and I believe that there is
a) something in the afterlife, but I'm not sure what and am not going to stress about it until it is revealed, and
b) am also open to the possibility that there may not be an afterlife, and may be nothing out there. Does that make me agnostic, or agnostic and athiest (even though that's not quite possible). (or is it?)
Basically I believe whatever is possible, and I am okay with that. There might be something, or not
(and to any potential frivolous postings, yes God loves me, of course, thank you)
2007-10-11
15:18:24
·
20 answers
·
asked by
Salizler
4
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
^ Okay, that was a precaution, usually I have people telling me that Jesus is the way. And I just wanted to head that off.
Didn't mean to confuse you about the god loves me
2007-10-11
16:18:26 ·
update #1
It makes you a pragmatic realist.
2007-10-11 15:21:20
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Atheist or agnostic has nothing to do with an afterlife or not. It has only to do with a "god"... if you believe in one, then no, you are neither.
Even an atheist/agnostic could have some thought on an "afterlife" of sorts, though it may not be the religious view of it.
Why are people missing the "yes God loves me" part? That would mean she's not either of them, she's a believer flat out, afterlife or not.
2007-10-11 15:23:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Beliefs are dangerous, beliefs allow the brain to go on auto-pilot. A brain that is not thinking is clinically dead. If you believe there is an afterlife you'd probably be a deist, or a strong agnostic. Weak agnostics have no belief either way, and view conclusion can not be reached.
Atheists think there is enough evidence, which I myself clearly do, to not give any more thought to religion than any archetype to come out of the human mind. Strong agnostics, much like strong agnostics, are a bit unlogical in their views, as while I certainly think we can rule out organized religions and the probability of any deity existing, strong atheists claim they know with 100% certainty that there are no Gods.
2007-10-11 15:22:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Jett 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
In general, an atheist is someone who believes there is no god, while an agnostic is someone who believes only that it is not possible to decide. So what you're describing would be agnosticism. However, the term atheist is sometimes more broadly defined as anyone who doesn't believe in a god, in which case an agnostic can be considered a species of atheist.
Note that the word is "atheist", the opposite of "theist". "Athiest" means you're athier than everyone else.
2007-10-11 15:28:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by injanier 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Makes me think you're an atheist with agnostic tendencies...most of us are like that as well, at least the second part. I myself am an agnostic atheist, as in, I don't believe in any god, yet I don't close off the possibility of there not being a god. So, you're both agnostic and atheist, leaning more towards atheistic since you don't seem to believe in a higher power, though you may or may not (you didn't say so in your question.) And yes...God loves me too...Jesus touched me and told me not to tell anyone...^_^
2007-10-11 15:22:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Agnostic
2007-10-11 15:25:02
·
answer #6
·
answered by neil s 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well you didn't mention the most important thing to answer your question. By definition atheists don't believe in any god. You didn't tell us rather you did or not. If you don't know, you are an agnostic. If you do you are some type of theist. If you don't you are an atheist.
My guess is agnostic.
2007-10-11 15:23:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't beleive in the human habit of labeling or thinking I need a lable to understand... the purpose of our spirit is to unite us with nature... all things on the earth (not just humans) emit messages that guide nature... nature reacts and this becomes evolution... as we leave religions and our spirit heal we become aware of being part of something greater... religions have been quick to take credit for this and people far to often return to religion accepting or believing when they are told that religions have the answers... Yet religions don't allow for the truth to be said let alone be heard.... religions cause imbalance in nature and as the human race sets itself on the path to again defend religions over truth nature is preparing to keep other life... plant life, animals...insects and water beast strong and healthy... Nature does not allow for life after death.. As it does so and human hold onto their ignorance for the last time... nature will prepare to destroy the human race.. Every heretic, witch, prophet, natural society has been destroyed and murdered over the last 2000 years... the christian ignorance begins wih beleiving that the death of a prophet (like the story of Jesus) would save them... saves only the lies they follow.. they have a history of murdering all of what nature has used to inform us... From prophets being murdered to Darwin being ridiculed... the human race has denied and destroyed nature long enough.. there is no life after death and if you want all that prophecied destruction to occur nature will find a way to keep the earth sound while eliminating the human race... we are becoming even allergic to plant life.. that is an omen with the results of these allergies being deadly.. what will they do when they start to be allergic even onto the air they breath..
2007-10-11 15:39:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by NO Labels 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Agnostic I suppose, I refer to myself as that and basically I KNOW that I don't know and I am open to anything being possible. I don't follow a religion but I am not absolutely certain in my mind that there is nothing more to life as an atheist is.
2007-10-11 15:23:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by SmEllY! 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
traditionally "agnostic" skill that one thinks that there is not any thank you to make certain if a god or gods exist. recently "agnostic" has come to point "not sure" or is used contained in the experience of "expertise". Realistically, a rational perspective may be to be skeptical of any declare it extremely is made without helping information yet ultimate open to added information. the priority is accessible in with rabid believers that are very such as conspiracy enthusiasts, that anticipate that they understand or have chanced on some thing that has escaped the pool of familiar expertise. unquestionably, if a god existed that replaced into in contact at a private point or stimulated the international at any point, there may be unmistakable information.
2016-10-06 13:02:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by merkl 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
First of all, you are not a fence sitter. People that think in these terms believe that you must believe in one thing or the other, as if there are no in-betweens and as if you can't make your own mind on how the world works.
You don't need to limit yourself to one predetermined set of rules.
2007-10-11 15:38:40
·
answer #11
·
answered by Jack S 1
·
0⤊
0⤋