No one knows for sure whats up.So be AGNOSTIC !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - Page 12

PirateWhistle · #**111** 2003-06-16, 20:42

Skipping through 5 pages of (what is likely to be) complete crap, didnt anyone make the argument that George Smith does in "The Case Against God"??

Atheism= With No Belief

Theism= With Belief

How is there a middle ground? Its a two-sided question; thats why agnosticism doesnt exist.

IzzyReele · #**112** 2003-06-16, 22:56

"How is there a middle ground? Its a two-sided question; thats why agnosticism doesnt exist."

how is it just a two sided question?

does god exist? yes, no, i don't know.

in the late 1800's when people spoke of large furry man-like creatures that were up to 10 feet tall. the ridiculed answer was to believe in them.

nowadays, the zoos the world over are full of gorillas.

galileo was imprisoned for saying the earth is not the center of the universe, today flat-earthers are ridiculed.

atom is a greek term for indivisible, now we know there are many things that make up an atom.

did all of these things not exist until their discovery, or were they not known.

until a thing is proven one way or the other, i don't know is perfectly legitimate answer.

PirateWhistle · #**113** 2003-06-17, 04:46

I didnt ask you if you had knowledge of god. Thats a whole different argument (gnosticism v. agnosticism) Id care to not hack out right now. The ideas are centering around belief in god; its simple. Either you have a belief (which includes "I dont know if he/she/it's there but Im looking") or not (atheists and nihilists etc.).

It is not "is there a god?", it is simply "do you believe in god?". On or off, there is no half-power in the field of terms for theological positions.

PirateWhistle · #**114** 2003-06-17, 04:50

Almost forgot; agnosticism (grk.--without knowledge) is not a chosen position; it is the starting point for all humankind in any field. Once you gain knowledge, you are gnostic. You can be an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist. However, simply "agnostic" does not denote any true theological stance.

I still like Bertrand Russell though...

Speed_rebel · #**115** 2003-06-17, 06:54

your so fuckin stupid.

People who are agnostic (speaking from observation, im a satanist) do not beive in a god, budda, karma etc... Maybe they will one day, but that time is not now.

PirateWhistle · #**116** 2003-06-17, 17:26

no, you're "so fuckin stupid", my friend.

The point is, the term "agnostic" does not mean what most of the pussy "i cant say Im an atheist, its scary" crowd wants it to. Its literal meaning is simply "without knowledge". Therefore, you cd believe or not believe in god, and have no real knowledge of the being.

How are you not understanding the distinction? A/Theism and A/Gnosticism are apples and oranges. Agnosticism has nothing to do with believing in god. Its all about "KNOWING" about god.

[This message has been edited by PirateWhistle (edited 06-17-2003).]

CesareBorgia · #**117** 2003-06-18, 19:14

Who are you? Have you read anything published about religion post-George Smith? Obviously not, because Smith has been debunked ten times over.

Perhaps you should think before onpening your mouth?

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by PirateWhistle:

Skipping through 5 pages of (what is likely to be) complete crap, didnt anyone make the argument that George Smith does in "The Case Against God"??

Atheism= With No Belief

Theism= With Belief

How is there a middle ground? Its a two-sided question; thats why agnosticism doesnt exist.

PirateWhistle · #**118** 2003-06-18, 22:53

After reading those four pages I skipped over, I must say, Cesare, that I most definitely respect your philosophical prowess. I mean no offense to people who are making extremely well-thought-out and factually-based statements. I dont like being called "fuckin stupid" simply because I dont post in this board every day though; thus my harsh tone.

But...who am I? What the shit does that matter? Am I supposed to be someone you know, or someone who is constantly posting here? I am what I am, to quote the sailor.

Unfortunately, I haven't read too much of Philosophy of religion/theology lately. The last book I read was LePoidevin's "Arguing for Atheism" which cited a similar incongruency in the basic assumption of agnosticism as a theological stance. I'd be happy to hear some arguments to counter Smith's, if you'd be oh-so kind enough to throw me a link or title to look up.