Atheists: Time to Come Out of the Closet!

"Agnostic" is not the only word to be used differently by different people, including in ways that vary widely from any kind of official definition. I've even heard creationist Dr. Duane Gish, ICR, say, "'Agnostic' is just a nice word for 'atheist'."Your use agrees with both mine and Huxley's (according to the Wikipedia link), that it describes lack of knowledge. In my usage, one could be either an atheistic agnostic or a theistic agnostic, the choice between atheism or theism being the reaction to realizing that we cannot actually know. Basically, a theistic agnostic would choose to believe while realizing that he cannot actually know (hence faith) such that, to remain honest, his faith would need to be one of seeking to understand and learn instead of dogmatically insisting on possessing The Truth without question (Unitarian "To question is the answer", in part because if you don't question your misunderstandings you will never be able to correct them nor to learn anything; that applies to all matters, not just religion).A common variant use is as "squishy atheism", doubting but not knowing whether you believe or not. In that sense, she chose the label of "atheist" instead of "agnostic" because she knew that she did not believe, that she had no doubt about that. In that sense, an "agnostic" would continue to pretend to believe instead of just making the break -- "No no no no, I don't think that no more, I'm tired of waking up on the floor. Please mister please it only makes me sneeze, then it's so hard to find the door."And isn't making that break what her writing is all about? You do the same thing with Mr.Deity, complaining about his voice.The strength of an idea does not depend on what you think about how someone parts their hair. Gotta go. I have duty tonight.

Phat writes: Is this a lack of reading comprehension?I would say it's the lying to others.
Pretemding to still believe.

No. In your case its a lack of belief. How is not knowing everything a lie? Though I will admit that peer pressure is a reality, it affects me differently from you since we each have different peers. I could say that some of you pretend *not* to believe. To you, a lack of knowledge could be an absence of evidence whereas, for me, the initial evidence was in my heart and not my mind.Nearly all of you would challenge my statement, pointing out that you see little if any love in me and that I am likely pretending. You overestimate the influence that church people have on me. I will admit, however, that EvC has more influence on me than the church folk.

I would go one step further and say that they are also lying to themselves.

And I would say that you are projecting your own deconversion thought process...assuming you deconverted.

Again off topic and inflammatory. Such a troll.

Agnosticism is not something on the scale between theism and atheism.There are gnostic theists, agnostic theists, gnostic atheists, and agnostic atheists. One term has to do with knowledge and the other has to do with belief.

How is deconversion different than conversion?

Good question.I'm no expert (obviously) but for me, conversion was my experiencing an internal and immediate realization without peer pressure (apart from perhaps groupthink) since I did not even know or desire to know the group I was with. My entire mind changed. I would not say at the time that I suddenly believed....I just knew. A skeptic or a critic might accuse me of having undergone brainwashing. Groupthink was the process of indoctrination in the months following the conversion.As for deconversion, I cannot imagine experiencing that nor would I choose to.I don't really like church, apart from Bible Studies. A valid question for me is why I "like" the Bible and truth be told I occasionally don't....especially when it convicts me of something I should do but choose not to do. But this is more a topic for a Bible Study or faith thread rather than an atheism thread.I think that choice plays a role in either conversion or deconversion.

The Bronze Age Goatherders saw the same stars, the same photons(though they knew no formal science) and such. The difference was, among other things, that they were likely not experiencing fear and anxiety as were you. Imagine being (not a goatherder) but a soldier. Perhaps preparing to invade GAZA. Back home is everything you knew...everything that brought you comfort. Everything worth fighting for. Perhaps you are a lapsed Jew, or perhaps not. You have heard of God and gods, but you are in today's world also familiar with science.How would I feel? One thing is likely. I would feel as if death was suddenly very possible and very inevitable.I would likely be looking to find God. Science at that point would not calm me. I would be about to kill humans and all I could do to manage that thought would be to remind myself that they were different than me for they were animals.

Why do you paint conversion to atheism with a negative connotation?

Your conversion sounds like a description of a revelation.

Phat:

---

for me, conversion was my experiencing an internal and immediate realization

---

I can't see how that can involve choice.There's all sorts of problems with this nonsense of course, the most obvious being that no-one ever gets a revelation from a god he doesn't already know all about, regardless of religion.The more difficult point to get your head round is the sheer unfairness of the thing. Apparently those that aren't baptised into the Christian faith can never enter the kingdom of heaven. So how come you get to see the revealed truth but I don't?

It was in that I could have chosen to question it and attempt to falsify it rather than allowing myself to associate with the group for the next year.I could have chosen to dismiss my initial experience, revelation, or whatever as illogical. I could have chosen to question or even doubt myself. There is a difference between knowing about someone and meeting someone. Besides, how do I know that Allah may not tap me on the shoulder someday? From whose perspective?

uh? How could you have done that, you had a visitation from Jesus himself? That's my point - see above. But the other point is that NOBODY EVER gets a revelation from a religious deity that they've never heard about. From mine and everyone else that doesn't get this revelation you dingbat! You get saved by a personal revelation everybody else doesn't. How is that fair?(Please understand, this is rhetorical.)

No more than Saul of Tarsus did. Neither Saul/Paul nor myself ever saw Jesus. Apologists would say that conversion occurs by the Holy Spirit.AddByEdit: I'm in no way suggesting that I am anywhere near being in the Apostle Pauls league.I am only saying that conversion is not some simple brainwashing delusional process.It was very real to me though my fleshly behaviors suggest otherwise.The relationship is complicated.