Discussion 1 to Ask the Patriarch 151
Knowledge and Belief
by: Will Petillo
To add to this discussion (or any other,) please use the Contact form. This discussion has been continued.
Hmm, I don't think I worded my question very well.
A better way of saying it might be as follows: does "agnostic" mean "not knowing if there is a Supreme Being" or "not believing or disbelieving in a Supreme Being"? It seems as though the latter is not necessarily the case, because it is not--as far as I can tell--implied in the three articles of faith.
For one can not know if God exists and not rely on receiving a benefit for believing and yet still believe (the same is true for disbelief). So then,
- Is this reasoning true?
- If true, is it intentional?
- If intentional, why? I understand the sentiment about not having any interest in cross-examining every member, but it would be pretty easy to make this sort of distinction simply by adding
(4) "We do not believe or disbelieve in the existence of a supreme being."
to the articles.
Whether this would actually be a good idea...probably not, especially as it might not be true for many people--and why be unnecssarily exclusive? Still, I'm curious.