Agnostics.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
What I did say, was that concerning anything, not only God, that the only automatic wrong decision is no decision.
That's a correct statement, and position.

So making blind decisions is better than waiting until you know better?

[S. Kroeze]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Religious people don't want to burn in Hell, so they do what they are trained is right.
Atheists don't believe in Hell, so screw it all.
Agnostics are just busy pissing their pants over what to believe.

An intelligent question:
I am religious and I believe there is ORDER in the Universe.

Am I a Catholic, a Protestant, an Orthodox, a Jew, a Sunni Muslim, a Shi‘ite Muslim, a Zoroastrian, a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Confucian, a Taoist, a pagan, a pantheist, a deist, a shamanist, an a-theist, an idolator, a materialist, a scientist, a positivist, a Communist, a sophist, a ..... ..?

I categorically refuse to fit in your small world!

[Ethelred]

Re: Agnostics. Atheists Without Balls ?

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I was looking at Red Jons bisexual thread, and thinking that bisexuals were just sex hogs.

Which somehow got me to thinking about Agnostics vs. Atheists.
Seems to me that, like bisexuals, they just want all their bases covered.
Is this essentially correct ?

No. I am agnostic. I don't have any bases covered. I see no reason to believe any religion nor do I do see a good reason for saying there can't be at least some sort of god. Except of course for the lack of any evidence for a god.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Oh come on.
Religious people don't want to burn in Hell, so they do what they are trained is right.

Is that why most of the people in jail are christians?

Atheists don't believe in Hell, so screw it all.

So why are so few of them in jail?

Agnostics are just busy pissing their pants over what to believe.

You are mistaken we were laughing so hard at your trollish green skin that we all lost controll for a moment.

I know EXACTLY what to believe. That which can be proven or at least have a reasonable probability of being right. So I am Agnostic.

I guess I some faith. I have faith that you aren't aways such a troll.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


On the other hand, the agnostic position is a cop-out, a refusal to choose sides.

I CHOSE a side. Agnostic.

You chose to go on faith wether you are religious or Atheist. I chose to go on facts.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I didn't hide the fact at all that I think agnostics are little pansies who are afraid to make a decision.
Where did I lose you, and what doubts of mine could you possibly be referencing?

I made a decision. You are a troll.

[Guynemer]

He gets that way sometimes. Other times, he's pretty reasonable.

[Ethelred]

I believe you. I BELIEVE.

I used to print Reverend Schuyler's photos. I always wondered what he would think if he knew that an Agnostic working for a Budist was printing his pictures. He is the televangelist that has the Crystal Cathedral near Disneyland in California.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Caligastia
If you really know something for sure then you do believe in it.

No I don't. The Earth exists independently of my beliefs. I know that it exists, such is not required of my beliefs.

Originally posted by Caligastia
If you dont know something for sure then you cant believe in it 100% can you? and if you dont believe in it 100% then you have to admit you dont know for sure - if you are being honest.

No. Beliefs entail uncertainty. Facts require no beliefs.

Originally posted by Caligastia
Agnostics are just being honest about the fact that they dont know for sure, while atheists like to sound like they are sure of the answer when they really arent. Thats arrogance IMO.

Agnostics are dodging a simple question. The question is "Do you believe in the existence of a supernatural being (or a group of supernatural beings?"

Rather than answering, they go through all sorts of verbal acrobatics to avoid an honest answer.

Atheists simply give an anwser they believe in.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by paiktis22
urban,
an atheist and a religious or agnost person can share the same values of life, that includes mainly moral.

one religious person can put more emphasis to :gays go to hell" part of the scriputeres.

another can put more epmhasis to: judge not so you will not be judged.

an atheist can say gays are an abnormality
another atheist can say: freedom of sexual choice is good.

I am not disputing that religious believers, agnostics and atheists can share the same set of moral codes.

That has no bearing on the fact that agnostics are waffling though

[Mihai]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Agnostics are dodging a simple question. The question is "Do you believe in the existence of a supernatural being (or a group of supernatural beings?"

I belive that it is posible that a supernatural being exist, but I don't know for sure. Also I won't worship nor attack it, just ignore it.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
No I don't. The Earth exists independently of my beliefs. I know that it exists, such is not required of my beliefs.

No. Beliefs entail uncertainty. Facts require no beliefs.

Agnostics are dodging a simple question. The question is "Do you believe in the existence of a supernatural being (or a group of supernatural beings?"

Rather than answering, they go through all sorts of verbal acrobatics to avoid an honest answer.

Atheists simply give an anwser they believe in.

Who is dodging? I gave no verbal acrobatics. I gave a VERY honest answer. Yet you cast these vile aspersions on all that do not live by faith.

I live by reality not belief. I do not dodge questions about the existence of god. I answer forthrightly that I DON'T KNOW and NEITHER DOES ANYONE ELSE. Got that? There is not one shred or sign of waffleing in that answer. It is exceedingly specific and exact. NO ONE KNOWS and I don't run my life on belief.

I think of it this way. If you or I had been raised without any knowledge of religion you would not be likely to have any religious belief at all. You certainly would, when exposed to this sort of thinking, consider the Bible to be a load of fantasy. Same for nearly any other fairly specific religion.

You would still be unable to say there was proof that no kind of god could exist. If you were a fully honest person you have to say that while many gods cannot exist because the things said about them contradict reality there is simply no way to prove that there can be no god of any kind.

If you can show ANY waffling in that you will be the first.

[Jack the Bodiless]

Ahem:

Generally, when atheists say "there is no God", they mean it in the same sense as "there are no leprechauns". It does NOT require certainty. The agnostic equivalent would be "maybe there are leprechauns, maybe not, I don't want to commit myself on that one".

I am an atheist. I am also an aleprechaunist. If someone brings me a leprechaun in a jar, I'll believe. Until then, I am prepared to say that I do NOT believe. However, this does not mean that I have closed my mind to the possible existence of leprechauns. I have merely stated my position on whether I consider their existence likely.

If an "agnostic" considers the existence of God unlikely, then he's an atheist who (for some reason) won't state what he believes. Therefore a "true" (non-atheistic) agnostic is one who does not believe that the existence of God is either likely or unlikely.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Jack the Bodiless


I am an atheist. I am also an aleprechaunist. If someone brings me a leprechaun in a jar, I'll believe. Until then, I am prepared to say that I do NOT believe. However, this does not mean that I have closed my mind to the possible existence of leprechauns. I have merely stated my position on whether I consider their existence likely.

I was told that my Great Grandmother put out milk for the Little People even in the US.

If an "agnostic" considers the existence of God unlikely, then he's an atheist who (for some reason) won't state what he believes. Therefore a "true" (non-atheistic) agnostic is one who does not believe that the existence of God is either likely or unlikely.

You are an Agnostic. Though the line is fuzzy between a soft Atheist and an Agnostic. I choose to call myself Agnostic to make it clear that I am not one that actively disbelieves, like a hard Atheist. Nor am I beholden some claim by a writer of definitions to live my life by a dictionary in case anyone is planning on dredging up one.

I don't think there is a Giant Invisible Orbiting Aardvark either but I think a god is a tiny bit more likely than that. If only because a Giant Invisible Orbiting Aardvark implies a dependence on the pre-existence of non-invisible, non-orbiting, non-giant aardvarks.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ethelred
Who is dodging? I gave no verbal acrobatics. I gave a VERY honest answer. Yet you cast these vile aspersions on all that do not live by faith.

That's not an answer, that's a dodge. "I don't know" is not an answer to "Do you believe..." type questions.

If you choose to believe that anyone who view such evasions as casting "vile aspersions" that is your personal choice.

Originally posted by Ethelred
I live by reality not belief.

Everybody has a basic set of beliefs that cannot be proved, even atheists acknowledge that. Such basic beliefs include assumptions such as:

- I exist
- My senses are an accurate reflection of an external reality
- etc.

Originally posted by Ethelred
I do not dodge questions about the existence of god. I answer forthrightly that I DON'T KNOW and NEITHER DOES ANYONE ELSE. Got that? There is not one shred or sign of waffleing in that answer. It is exceedingly specific and exact. NO ONE KNOWS and I don't run my life on belief.

That's a very exact answer, but that's not the right question. The question isn't whether you know a god exists or not but whether you believe in such an existence. There is no relation between your belief on wether a god exists and wether it actually exists or not.

I don't understand why it is so difficult to comprehend such a simple question.

As to whether you run your life on beliefs that's irrelevant.

Originally posted by Ethelred
I think of it this way. If you or I had been raised without any knowledge of religion you would not be likely to have any religious belief at all. You certainly would, when exposed to this sort of thinking, consider the Bible to be a load of fantasy. Same for nearly any other fairly specific religion.

As a matter of fact I am an atheist, my position is agnosticism is a philosophical untenable position. As a matter of fact it cannot be a philosophical position at all, since it violates the Law of Excluded Middle.

Originally posted by Ethelred
You would still be unable to say there was proof that no kind of god could exist. If you were a fully honest person you have to say that while many gods cannot exist because the things said about them contradict reality there is simply no way to prove that there can be no god of any kind.

That's besides the point. Let me reinterate: whether a god exists has nothing to do with whether you believe in the existence of said god.

I am not interested in finding out whether a god actually exists here. I am merely interested in your position as to the existence of said god. There are two choices:

1. You hold that there are good reasons to believe in the existence of this god

2. You hold that there are no good reasons to believe in the existence of this god

What's your choice?