Posted on 12/28/2006 4:15:11 PM PST by quesney
I agree fully. Most people, religious or not, like to speak of the ethics or morality of Jesus as an ideal. Often though, I don't think they mean it--as they try to divide ethics from religion. Jesus however said all morality flows from the two great commandments:
Love of God (with heart, mind, soul, and strength)
Love of neighbor as yourself.
Atheists (or agnostics...the lazy atheists) definitely fail on the 1st--and so can't help but be weak on the 2nd; what atheist political regimes have indisputably proven.
Why do you give a damn what others believe about the after life as long as they're decent and moral here? Frankly, that's none of your business.
I'm done here.Have a nice day!
If Huxley coined the word, he borrowed it from the Greeks
Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic
Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW
1 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god- Merriam Webster
No-one has a monopoly on the use of a noun or verb.
Keep searching your Wikipedia.
Agnosticism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Certainty series
Nihilism
Agnosticism
Uncertainty
Probability
Estimation
Belief
Justified true belief
Certainty
Determinism
This box: view • talk • edit
Agnosticism (from the Greek a, meaning "without" and gnosis, "knowledge", translating to unknowable) is the philosophical view that the truth value of certain claims — particularly theological claims regarding metaphysics, afterlife or the existence of God, god(s), or deities — is unknown or (possibly) inherently unknowable. Some agnostics take a stronger view that the concept of a deity is incoherent, thus meaningless and irrelevant to life. "Agnostic" was introduced by Thomas Henry Huxley in 1869 to describe his philosophy
There is a lot of interest in my "religion" lately. I like it. Being ignored sucks.
"Some agnostics take a stronger view that the concept of a deity is incoherent, thus meaningless and irrelevant to life." Wikipedia
Some agnostics take a more humble view that the creator's universal intelligent design is beyond human comprehension. - sodpoodle
Little narcissistic, are you? Not to mention the fact that you didn't answer my question.
Seriously? Bullshit.
There's a plethora of that neighbor lovin' thingee goin' on here.
I, for one - feel the love.
Have not saved any lives or souls today - must work on that tomorrow.
However, reasons why an INDIVIDUAL will vote, or not, for a candidate are his own business. I won't vote for example for someone--if their office has any impact on the subject--who is not pro-life. Is this a kind of "religious test" on my part? Of course it is.
Is my choice a "religious test" as meant by the Constitution or the Founders? No, of course not--they meant something written into law that says a candidate must be say, Episcopalian, to run for office--THAT is a religious test. If I made a choice, my personal choice, only to vote for Episcopalians though (foolish as that may be--and likely always contradicting my pro-life choice) that does not constitute a "religious test" as meant by the Founders.
So, please don't accuse those of the many of us who won't vote for atheists as somehow being unconstitutional in demanding a religious test....that's just rubbish.
We have an inalienable constitutional right to vote for whomever we wish for whatever reasons we wish--even (or especially) if those reasons are religious.
"Reading, reflection and time have convinced me that the interests
of society require the observation of those moral precepts ... in
which all religions agree."
Thomas Jefferson
"Of all the dispositions and habits which least to political
prosperity, Religion and morality are indespensable supports.
In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism who should
labor to subvert these great Pilliars of human happiness."
George Washington (Farewell Address, 19 September 1796)
"It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of
Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits,
and humbly to implore his protection and favors."
George
Washington
Here's the rub, though. You can 'hear' whatever you want about a candidates religious affiliation. When it comes down to brass tacks, it doesn't mean crap. What boggles my mind right now is that so many people here would and do blindly follow some fool just because they say they believe in God or Jesus. These are the same idiots (the politicians this time) that don't get one foot out of the church door without saying something immoral. You know people like that, so do I. Why do you base someone's life on a spoken sentence?
Now Now SD
Clinton had that gret big Bible - he was a Man of God.
Oooooooooops.
I wuz confuzed!
Damn, you're right. He believes in God so he be moral. Or so the story goes.
Note that Richard Nixon took his oath of office on, not one, but two Bibles.
Personally, I'm more interested on what a man does than what he professes to believe.
I bet he dun red that Bible to Monica.
Well that's just silly.
What about when more and more of them believe in Allah. Will you feel better then?
I hate to repeat myself;
There's a plethora of that neighbor lovin' thingee goin' on here.
I, for one - feel the love.
Have not saved any lives or souls today - must work on that tomorrow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.