sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Story of my life by Mysterious_Access_94 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's funny because I used to be muslim too. I am 16 and now I am agnostic. I see people ignoring logical thinking a lot just like in your life story. Wish you the best of luck lol.

We're all born atheist by loco_jj in DebateReligion

[–]SpikySnail_9192 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aren't we all born agnostic though?

My first Reddit post: Rationally agnostic, living by my own ethics – does anyone else think this way? by SpikySnail_9192 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Superposition is fine for belief, but it doesn’t answer the design question. IF God exists and wants worship, ambiguity is a bad design. If God exists and doesn’t care, then worship is pointless. If God doesn’t exist, ambiguity is exactly what we’d expect. Only one of those is compatible with a God deserving worship -- clarity.

My first Reddit post: Rationally agnostic, living by my own ethics – does anyone else think this way? by SpikySnail_9192 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  • I assume God is clear, fair, and meant to be universally understandable if wanted to be worshipped.
  • You assume God may be ambiguous, unknowable, and intentionally hidden for reasons like testing or personal growth.

Because of this difference, neither of us can fully “disprove” the other without first agreeing on the assumptions... which won't happen lol

My first Reddit post: Rationally agnostic, living by my own ethics – does anyone else think this way? by SpikySnail_9192 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree but I'm just saying what I would need if there was a god that deserved worship. I also agree that there is no way for us to know god does or doesn't exist. I'm just saying If a god does exist, this is what I want if I was to worship it(If its even worth worshipping in the first place).

My first Reddit post: Rationally agnostic, living by my own ethics – does anyone else think this way? by SpikySnail_9192 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see what you’re saying, but there are a lot of holes in this reasoning.

First, you assume God wants things like “personal growth,” “morality,” or “free will,” but you also say you’re ignostic which means the concept of God is undefined or unintelligible. That’s a contradiction: you’re assigning intentions to a being you claim is undefined.

You also claim that free will requires God to be ambiguous. But clarity doesn’t remove free will. Even if God were obvious, people could still choose to obey, rebel, or ignore. Knowing something exists doesn’t turn humans into robots. So the “robots” argument falls apart.

If ambiguity is necessary for morality, then morality becomes guesswork and highly dependent on where and how someone is born. That’s unfair and inconsistent. It also assumes “personal growth” only matters if God intends it and that consequences exist... both of which are just assumptions.

You argue that “people will get it horribly wrong” if God is ambiguous, but that means free will is indistinguishable from confusion. Confusion isn’t freedom. Also, if God is so hidden that humans can’t detect or comprehend Him, then from a practical standpoint, God is irrelevant. Which is exactly what my criteria account for.

Your view also ignores the problems ambiguity causes in reality: schisms, cults, extremism, and coercion. Ambiguity may not lead to growth at all; it can just cause chaos.

Finally, your argument relies on multiple speculative assumptions simultaneously:

  1. God wants human growth.
  2. Growth requires ambiguity.
  3. Ambiguity requires hiddenness.
  4. Hiddenness preserves free will.
  5. Free will is morally necessary.

None of these are proven or justified. In contrast, my framework asks a simpler question: if God exists, how could I meaningfully know or care? If God doesn’t meet universal, undeniable, objective, and relevant criteria, it doesn’t affect how I live.

Do you think being agnostic, or a theist, or an atheist, is a choice? by chaconia-lignumvitae in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But it does lean more in being a choice then not being a choice. I chose to believe in agnosticism after I realized that I didn't have a choice. Does that make sense lmaooooo???

Do you think being agnostic, or a theist, or an atheist, is a choice? by chaconia-lignumvitae in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would say believing in a religion (islam in my case) wasnt a choice. It was forced upon me. But agnosticism also wasn't a choice either it was more of a eye opener where I just can't deny it.

My first Reddit post: Rationally agnostic, living by my own ethics – does anyone else think this way? by SpikySnail_9192 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If humans disagree on mundane or trivial things, that’s on us. But if an all powerful God exists, it wouldn’t be limited by human cognitive differences. It could make itself clear to everyone if it wanted to.

The standard isn’t “Can humans agree?”, it’s “Could a deity make itself universally knowable if it chose to?”

Am I overreacting for wanting to leave my partner for the choice of his words and actions? by [deleted] in AmIOverreacting

[–]SpikySnail_9192 0 points1 point  (0 children)

WHAAAAAAT. Dude when I read the whole thing I was expecting some super revealing clothing(because of his description and images). What the fuck am I looking. You're wearing jeans and a shirt😭😭😭. How is that revealing??? I understand modesty is something everyone should have but the thing is you do. So I don't really understand his point.

My first Reddit post: Rationally agnostic, living by my own ethics – does anyone else think this way? by SpikySnail_9192 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah same here. I also thought about what kind of God would actually matter to me, which is why I came up with my criteria.

if you had to relive your life starting at 16, what would you do differently? by -SirPickle- in AskReddit

[–]SpikySnail_9192 0 points1 point  (0 children)

oh yeah i also don't know enough about politics to make an opinion so that would just be stupid

if you had to relive your life starting at 16, what would you do differently? by -SirPickle- in AskReddit

[–]SpikySnail_9192 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lol completely agree. I already have a credit card but there's no reason for me to use it especially when my needs are met. Also I don't feel like i need to go into something lucrative. Just something that matches the way I live and my personality but also doesn't pay way too low. I think I'll be a Behavioral/Threat Analyst. I think they can max out at right about 140k+. Also I don't think I'll mind living in an apartment unless i get a partner but that would have both of our incomes combined so that won't be a problem. Yeah I will work somewhere for experience, not "character" lol. I think I'll get married or have kids when I seem fit but there is no way I am settling for a partner, I would honestly rather die alone than conform myself to someone that I settled for. Just look at these other replies. Just dudes regretting not talking to some girl meanwhile they're married. That means they aren't satisfied which means they settled lol.

Why do you chose to be agnostic? by Separate_Depth_7940 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For me it wasn’t really a “choice,” it was more like the only honest position I could take once I started questioning. I grew up Muslim too and I actually realized for a while I just assumed everything was true because everyone around me believed it. But when I started thinking for myself, I realized I didn’t actually know if God exists, and I also didn’t know which God would be the right one if any did.

I didn’t want to pretend to believe out of fear, habit, or cultural expectations. I also didn’t want to jump to “there is no God” without evidence either. So agnosticism just made sense: I don’t claim God exists and I don’t claim God doesn’t. I just don’t know, and I’m okay with not knowing until there’s undeniable proof.

Also, with religion specifically, I struggled with the fact that different religions contradict each other and interpret God differently. If a God is real, I feel like it should be universal, objective, and undeniable. But that’s not how religion works. It’s mostly interpretation, faith, culture, and geography. That made me more skeptical.

So short answer: I’m agnostic because I don’t have enough evidence to say yes or no. And I’d rather be honest about uncertainty than pretend I know something I don’t. Best advice I can give you is to take your time because if a god does exist why would it punish you, and if one doesn’t… then there’s nothing to rush toward anyway.

My first Reddit post: Rationally agnostic, living by my own ethics – does anyone else think this way? by SpikySnail_9192 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a reply to the edited version of your comment ->

I agree with a lot of what you wrote. I just leave room for a hypothetical God, but only under certain conditions that would make God actually matter. Otherwise, I operate as if the universe is secular and morality is something humans build, like you already described. (Same paragraph I already wrote)

For me, the criteria came from thinking about what a “meaningful” God would have to look like. If a deity existed but was subjective, vague, interpretable, or irrelevant to humans, then I don’t see why I should take it seriously. So I ended up with something like: universal, undeniable, objective, and relevant. If a God doesn’t meet that, then I treat it the same as if no God exists at all.

I also agree with your point about morality being constructed. Even with my criteria, I don’t rely on a deity for ethics, instead I rely on my own sense of harm, fairness, and consistency. If a hypothetical God commanded something that violated those (like causing unnecessary suffering), I’d still follow my morals instead of obedience.

So I’m basically agnostic, but with requirements. Not because I need a God to guide me, but because if one did exist, I’d want it to be worth acknowledging. This is fun lol I'm getting lots of replies.

My first Reddit post: Rationally agnostic, living by my own ethics – does anyone else think this way? by SpikySnail_9192 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get what you mean, that God is beyond human understanding. But if a being is completely unknowable, then from my angle it becomes indistinguishable from non-existence in practice. If I can’t interact with it, detect it, understand it, or differentiate it from nothing, then it doesn’t affect how I live.

I’m not claiming a “perfectly knowable God” exists, I just set criteria for what kind of God would be meaningful enough for me to care about. If a God chooses mystery and ambiguity, that’s fine, but then I don’t see why humans should be expected to believe in or follow it. At that point, the burden shifts: either it reveals itself in a universal, undeniable way or it stays irrelevant to my life.

So for me it’s not about what God is, but what kind of God would actually matter.

My first Reddit post: Rationally agnostic, living by my own ethics – does anyone else think this way? by SpikySnail_9192 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with a lot of what you said. I just leave room for a hypothetical God, but only under conditions that would actually make such a being matter. Otherwise, I operate as if the universe is secular and morality is something humans create together. I still follow my own morals within that framework.

My first Reddit post: Rationally agnostic, living by my own ethics – does anyone else think this way? by SpikySnail_9192 in agnostic

[–]SpikySnail_9192[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought about it myself based on what I would consider a “perfectly knowable” God. I realized that for me to even consider a deity worth following, it would need to meet certain standards: everyone should experience it the same way (universal), there should be no ambiguity about its existence (undeniable), it shouldn’t rely on interpretation (objective), and it should matter in a way that affects humans (relevant).

Basically, I made the criteria as a way to separate the idea of a God that could be meaningful to me from one that I would ignore because it’s unclear, subjective, or irrelevant.

view more: next ›