Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Agnostic-Theism furthest to truth

Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2016 11:54:21 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
With 4,200 religions its obvious there is not one supreme influential faith that can metaphysically explain everything. However I think as an agnostic-theist that there is an overwhelming energy whether you think its God or some other universal thing that is influencing everything that it exists. Spinoza's God was the universe or in essence, nature. I want to take a step further and say that I think there is something of a collective conscious that has enacted everything into existence. Taking an Averroes position, I do not think its polytheistic since I believe that collective minds are not of an individual nature otherwise (as Averroes would say) "kings would fight amongst each other.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,134
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 2:09:58 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/27/2016 11:54:21 PM, Hiu wrote:
With 4,200 religions its obvious there is not one supreme influential faith that can metaphysically explain everything. However I think as an agnostic-theist that there is an overwhelming energy whether you think its God or some other universal thing that is influencing everything that it exists. Spinoza's God was the universe or in essence, nature. I want to take a step further and say that I think there is something of a collective conscious that has enacted everything into existence. Taking an Averroes position, I do not think its polytheistic since I believe that collective minds are not of an individual nature otherwise (as Averroes would say) "kings would fight amongst each other.

Welcome, Hiu! We don't have too many agnostic theists around here. I look forward to your contributions!
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Willows
Posts: 2,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 3:37:13 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/27/2016 11:54:21 PM, Hiu wrote:
With 4,200 religions its obvious there is not one supreme influential faith that can metaphysically explain everything. However I think as an agnostic-theist that there is an overwhelming energy whether you think its God or some other universal thing that is influencing everything that it exists. Spinoza's God was the universe or in essence, nature. I want to take a step further and say that I think there is something of a collective conscious that has enacted everything into existence. Taking an Averroes position, I do not think its polytheistic since I believe that collective minds are not of an individual nature otherwise (as Averroes would say) "kings would fight amongst each other.

I look from an atheist point of view. I agree with you that there is a collective conscience, enacting everything into existence though is a bit rich. Perhaps existence itself has created collective conscience.
Just like "Mother Nature", and "mind", collective conscience is still just terminology a bit like the medical profession classifying common disorders as a syndrome. Through hard work and research on a syndrome, we can perhaps isolate a disease and act accordingly.
We can earnestly research collective conscience, however until something conclusive is discovered it will remain terminology.
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 5:53:21 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 3:37:13 AM, Willows wrote:
At 8/27/2016 11:54:21 PM, Hiu wrote:
With 4,200 religions its obvious there is not one supreme influential faith that can metaphysically explain everything. However I think as an agnostic-theist that there is an overwhelming energy whether you think its God or some other universal thing that is influencing everything that it exists. Spinoza's God was the universe or in essence, nature. I want to take a step further and say that I think there is something of a collective conscious that has enacted everything into existence. Taking an Averroes position, I do not think its polytheistic since I believe that collective minds are not of an individual nature otherwise (as Averroes would say) "kings would fight amongst each other.

I look from an atheist point of view. I agree with you that there is a collective conscience, enacting everything into existence though is a bit rich. Perhaps existence itself has created collective conscience.
Just like "Mother Nature", and "mind", collective conscience is still just terminology a bit like the medical profession classifying common disorders as a syndrome. Through hard work and research on a syndrome, we can perhaps isolate a disease and act accordingly.
We can earnestly research collective conscience, however until something conclusive is discovered it will remain terminology.

Well one can take the empirical view that the collective conscious could be all that exists, and all that interacts with each other like matter etc. But since I have a theistic point of view, I tend to think this collective conscious takes an independent role of matter and that all things emanate from it almost like how a sun has a gravitational effect of objects around it.
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 5:53:37 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 2:09:58 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/27/2016 11:54:21 PM, Hiu wrote:
With 4,200 religions its obvious there is not one supreme influential faith that can metaphysically explain everything. However I think as an agnostic-theist that there is an overwhelming energy whether you think its God or some other universal thing that is influencing everything that it exists. Spinoza's God was the universe or in essence, nature. I want to take a step further and say that I think there is something of a collective conscious that has enacted everything into existence. Taking an Averroes position, I do not think its polytheistic since I believe that collective minds are not of an individual nature otherwise (as Averroes would say) "kings would fight amongst each other.

Welcome, Hiu! We don't have too many agnostic theists around here. I look forward to your contributions!

thank you...
Willows
Posts: 2,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 11:29:51 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 5:53:21 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 8/28/2016 3:37:13 AM, Willows wrote:
At 8/27/2016 11:54:21 PM, Hiu wrote:
With 4,200 religions its obvious there is not one supreme influential faith that can metaphysically explain everything. However I think as an agnostic-theist that there is an overwhelming energy whether you think its God or some other universal thing that is influencing everything that it exists. Spinoza's God was the universe or in essence, nature. I want to take a step further and say that I think there is something of a collective conscious that has enacted everything into existence. Taking an Averroes position, I do not think its polytheistic since I believe that collective minds are not of an individual nature otherwise (as Averroes would say) "kings would fight amongst each other.

I look from an atheist point of view. I agree with you that there is a collective conscience, enacting everything into existence though is a bit rich. Perhaps existence itself has created collective conscience.
Just like "Mother Nature", and "mind", collective conscience is still just terminology a bit like the medical profession classifying common disorders as a syndrome. Through hard work and research on a syndrome, we can perhaps isolate a disease and act accordingly.
We can earnestly research collective conscience, however until something conclusive is discovered it will remain terminology.

Well one can take the empirical view that the collective conscious could be all that exists, and all that interacts with each other like matter etc. But since I have a theistic point of view, I tend to think this collective conscious takes an independent role of matter and that all things emanate from it almost like how a sun has a gravitational effect of objects around it.
OK but remember you are making an analogy between a hypothetical and an actual. And I think that's where I feel theists start taking too much artistic licence so to speak.
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 4:47:41 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/27/2016 11:54:21 PM, Hiu wrote:
With 4,200 religions its obvious there is not one supreme influential faith that can metaphysically explain everything. However I think as an agnostic-theist that there is an overwhelming energy whether you think its God or some other universal thing that is influencing everything that it exists. Spinoza's God was the universe or in essence, nature. I want to take a step further and say that I think there is something of a collective conscious that has enacted everything into existence. Taking an Averroes position, I do not think its polytheistic since I believe that collective minds are not of an individual nature otherwise (as Averroes would say) "kings would fight amongst each other.

I don't think Spinoza's "god" fits the traditional definition of god since it is not interventionist. The traditional definition says that god "rules", which would require intervention. A universal consciousness does not fit that definition in my opinion. If that is true, you would be better described as an agnostic deist or agnostic pantheist.
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2016 12:08:35 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 11:29:51 AM, Willows wrote:
At 8/28/2016 5:53:21 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 8/28/2016 3:37:13 AM, Willows wrote:
At 8/27/2016 11:54:21 PM, Hiu wrote:
With 4,200 religions its obvious there is not one supreme influential faith that can metaphysically explain everything. However I think as an agnostic-theist that there is an overwhelming energy whether you think its God or some other universal thing that is influencing everything that it exists. Spinoza's God was the universe or in essence, nature. I want to take a step further and say that I think there is something of a collective conscious that has enacted everything into existence. Taking an Averroes position, I do not think its polytheistic since I believe that collective minds are not of an individual nature otherwise (as Averroes would say) "kings would fight amongst each other.

I look from an atheist point of view. I agree with you that there is a collective conscience, enacting everything into existence though is a bit rich. Perhaps existence itself has created collective conscience.
Just like "Mother Nature", and "mind", collective conscience is still just terminology a bit like the medical profession classifying common disorders as a syndrome. Through hard work and research on a syndrome, we can perhaps isolate a disease and act accordingly.
We can earnestly research collective conscience, however until something conclusive is discovered it will remain terminology.

Well one can take the empirical view that the collective conscious could be all that exists, and all that interacts with each other like matter etc. But since I have a theistic point of view, I tend to think this collective conscious takes an independent role of matter and that all things emanate from it almost like how a sun has a gravitational effect of objects around it.
OK but remember you are making an analogy between a hypothetical and an actual. And I think that's where I feel theists start taking too much artistic licence so to speak.

What do you mean by "artistic license.."
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2016 12:13:08 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 4:47:41 PM, matt8800 wrote:
At 8/27/2016 11:54:21 PM, Hiu wrote:
With 4,200 religions its obvious there is not one supreme influential faith that can metaphysically explain everything. However I think as an agnostic-theist that there is an overwhelming energy whether you think its God or some other universal thing that is influencing everything that it exists. Spinoza's God was the universe or in essence, nature. I want to take a step further and say that I think there is something of a collective conscious that has enacted everything into existence. Taking an Averroes position, I do not think its polytheistic since I believe that collective minds are not of an individual nature otherwise (as Averroes would say) "kings would fight amongst each other.

I don't think Spinoza's "god" fits the traditional definition of god since it is not interventionist. The traditional definition says that god "rules", which would require intervention. A universal consciousness does not fit that definition in my opinion. If that is true, you would be better described as an agnostic deist or agnostic pantheist.

By intervention what are you referring to exactly? You mean miracles?
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2016 1:10:31 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/29/2016 12:13:08 AM, Hiu wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:47:41 PM, matt8800 wrote:
At 8/27/2016 11:54:21 PM, Hiu wrote:
With 4,200 religions its obvious there is not one supreme influential faith that can metaphysically explain everything. However I think as an agnostic-theist that there is an overwhelming energy whether you think its God or some other universal thing that is influencing everything that it exists. Spinoza's God was the universe or in essence, nature. I want to take a step further and say that I think there is something of a collective conscious that has enacted everything into existence. Taking an Averroes position, I do not think its polytheistic since I believe that collective minds are not of an individual nature otherwise (as Averroes would say) "kings would fight amongst each other.

I don't think Spinoza's "god" fits the traditional definition of god since it is not interventionist. The traditional definition says that god "rules", which would require intervention. A universal consciousness does not fit that definition in my opinion. If that is true, you would be better described as an agnostic deist or agnostic pantheist.

By intervention what are you referring to exactly? You mean miracles?

Basically, a "personal" god that answers prayers and judges the daily lives of humans.