Uyi Iredia:
I answered one question and replied a question with another, simple. Reply my first statement and answer my question if not i won't be taken you seriously.

You're simply making my case my friend. We've insufficient knowledge to determine how our universe began. As a Christian, you make up for that by believing in whatever that Bible of yours says.

I'd give you an example.

I tell you there's a number 2. You may choose to believe that the number 2 didn't just come about, but that it's a solution to a problem, probably 4-2. Someone else may agree, but would think the problem was square root of 4. The atheist believes there was no problem in the first place. The agnostic says there's not sufficient evidence that there was a problem or not.

Uyi Iredia:
You aren't giving our discourse the seriousness required. That said I must say your answer here doesn't PROPERLY address my point.,

I am. I'm simply pointing out how much knowledge you lack to infer any absolutes that should be taken seriously. Agnostics take a honest standpoint. We do not know, but we're open to 'all' knowledge. We're ready to investigate all possibilities, yes even the possibility of a god. Follow my posts. I keep making this point.

Uyi Iredia:
Do buddhists serve gods ? No. You mentioned millions of gods and I noted that most religions acknowledge some Supreme God of some kind they share that characteristic with Christianity.

Would you care to share what common characteristics these Gods share?

Uyi Iredia:
Keep laughing and keep decieving yourself. You are an atheist.

Funny guy. Whatever makes you feel more comfortable in the presence of the Lord.

Dp

musKeeto:
You're simply making my case my friend. We've insufficient knowledge to determine how our universe began. As a Christian, you make up for that by believing in whatever that Bible of yours says.

I'd give you an example.

I tell you there's a number 2. You may choose to believe that the number 2 didn't just come about, but that it's a solution to a problem, probably 4-2. Someone else may agree, but would think the problem was square root of 4. The atheist believes there was no problem in the first place. The agnostic says there's not sufficient evidence that there was a problem or not.


I am. I'm simply pointing out how much knowledge you lack to infer any absolutes that should be taken seriously. Agnostics take a honest standpoint. We do not know, but we're open to 'all' knowledge. We're ready to investigate all possibilities, yes even the possibility of a god. Follow my posts. I keep making this point.


Would you care to share what common characteristics these Gods share?


Funny guy. Whatever makes you feel more comfortable in the presence of the Lord.

*1 I don't see how your reply is germane to what I stated. You asked why there must be a God. I gave a reply pertaining to Nature and now you go of on some tangent about the universe beginning. Please give a relevant reply.

*2 So your way of pointing that out wqas by saying that animals may believe men created them. On what basis do you even say we don't have enough info. Becayse I can't take you seriously if you have none.

*3 I have pointed out one. They are creators of the universe.

*4 Funny fellow. Wallow in your atheism whilst dubbing yourself agnostic.

it's a very thin line

no need to get annoyed

most agnostics are like soft core atheists

atheists are like hard core agnostics

that's one way to look at it

Uyi Iredia:

*1 I don't see how your reply is germane to what I stated. You asked why there must be a God. I gave a reply pertaining to Nature and now you go of on some tangent about the universe beginning. Please give a relevant reply.

*2 So your way of pointing that out wqas by saying that animals may believe men created them. On what basis do you even say we don't have enough info. Becayse I can't take you seriously if you have none.

*3 I have pointed out one. They are creators of the universe.

*4 Funny fellow. Wallow in your atheism whilst dubbing yourself agnostic.

Smh. You're going the Anony route.

Question: How much do you know of our universe? On a scale of 1 - infinity..

musKeeto:
Smh. You're going the Anony route.

Question: How much do you know of our universe? On a scale of 1 - infinity..

And you are toeing the argument from ignorance fallacy. What matters isn't what we don't know but what we do know. Because we build on what we know in order to know more. In any case on that scale lemme take a 1000.

Uyi Iredia:

And you are toeing the argument from ignorance fallacy. What matters isn't what we don't know but what we do know. Because we build on what we know in order to know more. In any case on that scale lemme take a 1000.

On a scale of 1-infinity, you picked a thousand. I hope you understand the Agnostic's point of view: we don't know enough to make any final conclusions. This is being honest in my opinion.

Do we hold beliefs in any God? No
Do we think God exists? Maybe, maybe not.

musKeeto:
On a scale of 1-infinity, you picked a thousand. I hope you understand the Agnostic's point of view: we don't know enough to make any final conclusions. This is being honest in my opinion.

Do we hold beliefs in any God? No
Do we think God exists? Maybe, maybe not.

You don't hold any beliefs in God you are an atheist. I say we know enough to conclude.

Uyi is 100% correct.

Is there an Atheist-Agnostic position i.e Atheist - disbelief in the existence of God(s) and Agnostic - I am skeptical because I don't know or I am not sure.

No Atheist can prove that God does not exist due to the nature of evidence available (unavailable) hence the disbelief but that gap presents an agnostic position as well.. what do you say

lagerwhenindoubt: Is there an Atheist-Agnostic position i.e Atheist - disbelief in the existence of God(s) and Agnostic - I am skeptical because I don't know or I am not sure.

No Atheist can prove that God does not exist due to the nature of evidence available (unavailable) hence the disbelief but that gap presents an agnostic position as well.. what do you say

Agnosticism is actually an epistemological stance. One can be agnostic about other things apart from God\s existence. However in the case of God's existence_as I've said_ I find agnosticism fraudulent because all agostics posses a disbelief in God while claiming a neutral stance which very clearly isn't the case. It seems to me like they say: 'We don't whether or not there is a god but I think there is no God.'

Uyi Iredia:

Agnosticism is actually an epistemological stance. One can be agnostic about other things apart from God\s existence. However in the case of God's existence_as I've said_ I find agnosticism fraudulent because all agostics posses a disbelief in God while claiming a neutral stance which very clearly isn't the case. It seems to me like they say: 'We don't whether or not there is a god but I think there is no God.'

y'know you have a point. I was in that phase at some point during my personal "de-conversion" I do believe it smacks of ignorant dishonesty to claim not to know the level of disbelief enough to form an Atheist position. you either disbelieve or you don't

There certainly is a source of life but not from Yahweh. Yahweh is only a manipulator! the source is pure undiluted LOVE. That is the source we are all from. This is part of the teachings of the agnostics. What ever you do in this life determines the next. The teachings of jesus was about liberation and empowerment of oneself,not to worship him,but to be like him!

^^ I don't understand why the source of all life has to be love?

There is a difference in atheism and
agnosticism, but they are not mutally
exclusive concepts... they simply
address two different concepts.
Where agnosticism addresses
knowledge, atheism addresses
belief.
Agnosticism is the philosophy that
the existence of a god or gods is
something that is not known, cannot
be known, or is inherently
unknowable.
Atheism is, as you said, a lack of
belief in any god.
So, an agnostic atheist might say,
"No, I don't "know" for sure that
there is no god, but being that there
is no evidence, I see no reason to
believe."
An agnostic can also be a theist in
the same way.
Agnosticism doesn't stand alone as a
position on the spectrum of belief, in
my opinion, though some people
seem intent on making that so.
Some dictionaries even define it as
"neither believing nor disbelieving".
If one actually stops to think about
this, one will see it's impossible.
Just as you either know something
or you don't, you either believe or
you don't. There's no such thing as
neither knowing nor not knowing,
and there's no such thing as neither
believing nor disbelieving, either.
The "neither believe nor disbelieve"
thing doesn't even fit in with the
etymology of the word, which is "a"
meaning without and "gnostic"
meaning knowledge.
Agnosticism has been, from its
conception, a philosophy concerning
knowledge, not belief.

401kk: There is a difference in atheism and
agnosticism, but they are not mutally
exclusive concepts... they simply
address two different concepts.
Where agnosticism addresses
knowledge, atheism addresses
belief.
Agnosticism is the philosophy that
the existence of a god or gods is
something that is not known, cannot
be known, or is inherently
unknowable.
Atheism is, as you said, a lack of
belief in any god.
So, an agnostic atheist might say,
"No, I don't "know" for sure that
there is no god, but being that there
is no evidence, I see no reason to
believe."
An agnostic can also be a theist in
the same way.
Agnosticism doesn't stand alone as a
position on the spectrum of belief, in
my opinion, though some people
seem intent on making that so.
Some dictionaries even define it as
"neither believing nor disbelieving".
If one actually stops to think about
this, one will see it's impossible.
Just as you either know something
or you don't, you either believe or
you don't. There's no such thing as
neither knowing nor not knowing,
and there's no such thing as neither
believing nor disbelieving, either.
The "neither believe nor disbelieve"
thing doesn't even fit in with the
etymology of the word, which is "a"
meaning without and "gnostic"
meaning knowledge.
Agnosticism has been, from its
conception, a philosophy concerning
knowledge, not belief.

Your write up is really commendable, especially the agnostic-atheist/theist part. But someone can actually neither disbelieve nor belief, especially when something is confusing, knowledge and belief are not thesame but they are related, for me, it depends on my chain of thought.

hello

Difference bt an unbeliever and an atheist....

For me, agnosticism is a cross. I don't believe in your God, doesn't mean I don't believe a 'creator' doesn't exist...

There is always space for doubt. That's why we are humans...

lagerwhenindoubt:

y'know you have a point. I was in that phase at some point during my personal "de-conversion" I do believe it smacks of ignorant dishonesty to claim not to know the level of disbelief enough to form an Atheist position. you either disbelieve or you don't

The bolded is an ignorant load of drivel. You'd be laughed off in a scholarly debate for that garbage you're spewing. Apparently, you must either worship or denounce god(s) with religious fervour so that some bigotted no-marks won't call you a fraud.

Obi1kenobi:

The bolded is an ignorant load of drivel. You'd be laughed off in a scholarly debate for that garbage you're spewing. Apparently, you must either worship or denounce god(s) with religious fervour so that some bigotted no-marks won't call you a fraud.

So Obiwan.. you claim in absolute exactitude to believe or dis-believe? you can actually prove it with the completeness you claim above.. so there is no I don't have enough information to dis-believe or believe .. well we have a Nobel candidate right there

and why would bigots be of concern to moi? or my opinions?

What is the opposite of belief?

Some may arrogantly say Disbelief. But Disbelief in itself is a form of belief. It is too absolute. I am mindful of any belief structure that claims to explain everything about everything.

The opposite of belief should be doubt or Skepticism and as an agnostic, I pride myself in the fact that I question, examine and constantly review all facts that are put forward, no matter who puts forward those facts.

Not all atheists are truthful and not all theists are fraudulent.

I will like to avert your mind to the fact that atheism applys to those who show zero interest about God. E.G Buddhists.

Certainty/Doubt

Belief/disbelief

elliottibanga: What is the opposite of belief?

Some may arrogantly say Disbelief. But Disbelief in itself is a form of belief. It is too absolute. I am mindful of any belief structure that claims to explain everything about everything.

The opposite of belief should be doubt or Skepticism and as an agnostic, I pride myself in the fact that I question, examine and constantly review all facts that are put forward, no matter who puts forward those facts.

Not all atheists are truthful and not all theists are fraudulent.

There really is no opposite of belief. You either believe in one set of knowledge or you believe in an opposing set of knowledge. Atheism is a belief in no-god, agnosticism is a belief in the unknowable. Hell!! Intelligence itself is a belief. They only entities without belief are entities without life.