So yeah I'm a new face here.
I'm in high school.
I joined this because I actually like talking about books, politics, and religion.
I'm an Agnostic Christian, so I don't claim to know everything.

My favorite authors are Chuck Palahniuk, Irvine Welsh, Bret Easton Ellis, Eric Russel, and Anthony Burgess

So yeaahhhh,
hit me up if you wanna argue

Hello Do_what, welcome to Booktalk!

Welcome to BookTalk.org. many of us loooove to argue. You'll fit right in.

Is that kinda like, you have two fields and a fence? On one side of the fence is atheism, and the other is Christianity, and depending on which way you're prodded, that's the field you'd fall into? Or were you raised Christian and are currently climbing the fence toward atheism? Be careful, you're about to go to hell and suffer forever! Besides, Jesus loves you, so just jump back on the Christian side, stop thinking, and have faith.

Interbane wrote:Is that kinda like, you have two fields and a fence? On one side of the fence is atheism, and the other is Christianity, and depending on which way you're prodded, that's the field you'd fall into? Or were you raised Christian and are currently climbing the fence toward atheism? Be careful, you're about to go to hell and suffer forever! Besides, Jesus loves you, so just jump back on the Christian side, stop thinking, and have faith.

no, thats the idea people get though when it comes to agnosticism. i try not to stay neutral.
i have christian faith but i believe the orginization and business of religion is BS. Mainly because I have so many friends that are just controlled and go enforcing their religion (or lack of religion) on other people because a church tells them to.
i just try to base religion off of faith not fact, like how we're supposed to.
agnosticism really means that i believe that their are things that we can try to answer but i also believe their are things that we'll never be able to answer.
i can accept the fact that my religion might be wrong.

Hi Do what, I'm new here as well (I haven't posted an intro yet, though).

Doesn't the fact that you think there are things you will never be able to answer mean you aren't actually a Christian at all? I think when you're a part of just about any organized religion, it means you give up all other alternatives. If you leave any chance of the religion you believe in to not be true, it means you're not a part of the religion. Do you understand what I'm trying to say?

I think you might be an Agnostic Theist, like me....

do_what; a noble struggle indeed. i like your healthy skepticism toward organized religion. in my next novel, out in March 09, i pit the philosophical underpinnings of the Catholic Church against the Atheist movement in the United States. When I was 17, I read Augustines "City of God" in the original Latin. The English version is very readable and is a meditation on exactly the struggle you are undertaking. Augustine, who is quoted to have said as he entered the Catholic preisthood "Give me Chastity, but not just yet", contends there is much we don't or ever will know and agnosticism is a fact of life. i do not recommend the book because I want you to be a Catholic; far from it. it just speaks so clearly to the issues you raised in your introduction.

no, thats the idea people get though when it comes to agnosticism. i try not to stay neutral.
i have christian faith but i believe the orginization and business of religion is BS. Mainly because I have so many friends that are just controlled and go enforcing their religion (or lack of religion) on other people because a church tells them to.
i just try to base religion off of faith not fact, like how we're supposed to.
agnosticism really means that i believe that their are things that we can try to answer but i also believe their are things that we'll never be able to answer.
i can accept the fact that my religion might be wrong.

Welcome to booktalk, Do_what. Your statement above makes sense to me exactly as you state it. I believe you are a Christian Agnostic, as you say, and that those words make sense together exactly the way you explain they do, and you have a right to that self-definition without letting anyone on any side of any fences drape, push, pull, throw or otherwise coerce you over them. (They just like to think you're like them, whatever they are. It's their way of being friendly and arguing both at once.) Have fun here!

(They just like to think you're like them, whatever they are. It's their way of being friendly and arguing both at once.)

And seeking clarification. Sorry if I verbally joust a bit too harshly at times, it just feels like we play dodgeball in these forums and I get overly excited.

"i just try to base religion off of faith not fact, like how we're supposed to."

I disagree with basing anything on faith, besides faith in your senses. Faith is a religious manipulative tool so that you don't question that which you've been indoctrinated into believing. Start from the bottom up, build a good epistemological foundation and feed it with information. Complex Faith seems to start from the top down, and that irks me.

Hellz yes, already there's conflict lol

Well to me, faith is anything you can't prove.
You can tell someone there is or isnt a god, but how exactly do you prove that? Because the books you base faith off of were written by other men (or women)?
I know that statement is somewhat contradictory, because I said I try not to base beliefs on fact. To clear it up I'll say that it's one thing to treat your particular faith as a fact, but to impose a faith higher than another individual's faith defies the purpose of faith not being fact.

If it was possible to prove the non-existence of a god, would theists still follow their religion based on faith?