There is no such thing as an agnostic.

[CharlestonChad]

That is as lame as 'everyone has one,' as heard from a 5th grader.

it's a fucking expression, tight ass

 

[Annie]

it's a fucking expression, tight ass

Flaming a moderator is not acceptable, so watch it. As using 'everyone in this thread' as an expression, not for adults.

 

[CharlestonChad]

Flaming a moderator is not acceptable, so watch it. As using 'everyone in this thread' as an expression, not for adults.

Ok, sorry for breaking your important rules.

Should I have said, "everyone who has made a serious post in this thread has trashed your ignorant belief that there is no such thing as an agnostic"?

 

[Annie]

Ok, sorry for breaking your important rules.

Should I have said, "everyone who has made a serious post in this thread has trashed your ignorant belief that there is no such thing as an agnostic"?

Again, you are displaying your inability to form a decent argument in a debate; as well as a tendency towards the childish with 'everyone that agrees with me is serious, all others are stupid!'

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Unfortunately we mild mannered atheists are constantly being compared to Atheists like Madeline Murray O'Hare and Michael Newdow. People like that are activists. If they didn't have religion to fight against, they'd find something else.

Most true atheists simply don't care enough to do more than have a good argument on a message board. Agnostics, on the other hand, are believers in every sense of the word. They may not believe in any particular religion, but they all believe in a higher power. They just like to pretend it's an intellectual excercise. Sorry, but when even one agnostic out there can explain why I should hold the concept of God to a different standard than the Tooth Fairy, The Easter Bunny, and Santa Claus, then I'll call myself an agnostic. So far, none of them have been able to.

All agnostics are believers who know how dumb it is.

And so if I say I disagree with you do I instantly fall into the intellectual category who argues with atheists? Where is the line for that classification? Can I offset it by arguing with a Christian an equal amount?

 

[dilloduck]

And so if I say I disagree with you do I instantly fall into the intellectual category who argues with atheists? Where is the line for that classification? Can I offset it by arguing with a Christian an equal amount?

Nope--your screwed. If you disagree you fall into pre-determined category--(you lose):funnyface

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Nope--your screwed. If you disagree you fall into pre-determined category--(you lose):funnyface

I figured as much. She has a very RWA-styled thesis. All dissenters automatically prove her point. Or something. :blah2:

 

[CharlestonChad]

Again, you are displaying your inability to form a decent argument in a debate; as well as a tendency towards the childish with 'everyone that agrees with me is serious, all others are stupid!'

And you are displaying your ability to add nothing to a discussion by making meaningless replies just to increase your post count.

 

[Annie]

And you are displaying your ability to add nothing to a discussion by making meaningless replies just to increase your post count.

Yeah dude, I'm real concerned that you are going to catch up. Seriously, for you to chastise anyone, after your lame attempts to put others down is laughable.

 

[dmp]

CharlestonChad is no longer participating in this thread. Carry-on.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Creating something from nothing is one thing that IS impossible.

I disagree. We (as in the human race) don't know all the ins and outs of physics yet. Anything is possible. Given enough pressure or heat or something maybe nothingness could be forced into existence.

 

[5stringJeff]

I disagree. We (as in the human race) don't know all the ins and outs of physics yet. Anything is possible. Given enough pressure or heat or something maybe nothingness could be forced into existence.

And in the same sense, we don't know all the ins and outs of the supernatural world, and so maybe there is a God. Anything is possible.

 

[nt250]

And so if I say I disagree with you do I instantly fall into the intellectual category who argues with atheists? Where is the line for that classification? Can I offset it by arguing with a Christian an equal amount?

Yes, actually, that would help.

I have never seen a self proclaimed agnostic ever argue with a religious persons. Or another agnostic.

Good luck with that.

 

[dilloduck]

And so if I say I disagree with you do I instantly fall into the intellectual category who argues with atheists? Where is the line for that classification? Can I offset it by arguing with a Christian an equal amount?

Sweet--if you argue with an athiest AND a Christian you can prove you're an agnostic!. There may be hope for you yet !

 

[nt250]

Sweet--if you argue with an athiest AND a Christian you can prove you're an agnostic!. There may be hope for you yet !

Well, it's pretty difficult to prove true neutrality when you only argue with one side. Wouldn't you say?

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Sweet--if you argue with an athiest AND a Christian you can prove you're an agnostic!. There may be hope for you yet !

Sweet. Now if only I gave a shit whether nt250 or anyone else believed I was an agnostic.

For the record, I'd welcome any discussion with anyone about a(A)thiesm or Christianity. I'd say other religions as well, but I'm not nearly familiar with them enough to get beyond the very broad stuff. I would at least entertain the idea, however.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Yes, actually, that would help.

I have never seen a self proclaimed agnostic ever argue with a religious persons. Or another agnostic.

Good luck with that.

Who do you want me to argue with, and what would you like me to argue with them about? And does it have to be an argument? Is civil discussion allowed?

Just trying to come to grips with the rules of the game...

 

[Gunny]

I disagree. We (as in the human race) don't know all the ins and outs of physics yet. Anything is possible. Given enough pressure or heat or something maybe nothingness could be forced into existence.

And maybe there's a God.

 

[nt250]

Who do you want me to argue with, and what would you like me to argue with them about? And does it have to be an argument? Is civil discussion allowed?

Just trying to come to grips with the rules of the game...

Arguments can be civil discussions. It's only those posters who can't stand disagreement that don't see them as civil.


I'd like to see a self proclaimed agnostic argue a point with a religious person. I can understand why you don't. There really is no way to use reason against faith.

I guess my problem with people who call themselves agnostics is that they are so hostile to atheists. Atheists really seem to bother agnostics a lot. But if they are truly the undecided thinkers they claim to be, why would the fact that some us have no problem deciding bother them so much? Beats the hell out of me.

The only explanation that makes sense is that they believe. They just know how stupid it is and they don't want to appear to be stupid. So they've come up with a way to make themselves feel better about the whole thing. So they claim it's "unknowable". Right.

But that's just my opinion.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Arguments can be civil discussions. It's only those posters who can't stand disagreement that don't see them as civil.

Ok. Just wanted to make sure I don't have to burn bridges.

I'd like to see a self proclaimed agnostic argue a point with a religious person. I can understand why you don't. There really is no way to use reason against faith.

Well, I don't go out of my way looking for arguments with Christians the same way I don't go out of my way looking for arguments with atheists, Atheists, or whatever else. Furthermore, painting the potential Christian I would debate with into the corner of them always using "faith" as their cop out answer is rather presumptuous. I would expect a Christian actually interested in debate to realize that using faith is the same as saying "I think so just because." Otherwise the debate would be: why this? Faith. why that? Faith. Why not this? Faith. Rather repetitive and silly, as you've correctly noted.

I guess my problem with people who call themselves agnostics is that they are so hostile to atheists. Atheists really seem to bother agnostics a lot. But if they are truly the undecided thinkers they claim to be, why would the fact that some us have no problem deciding bother them so much? Beats the hell out of me.

Maybe, like the Christian you once met, the agnostics you've encountered in life are not a very representative portion of what true agnostics are.

The only explanation that makes sense is that they believe. They just know how stupid it is and they don't want to appear to be stupid. So they've come up with a way to make themselves feel better about the whole thing. So they claim it's "unknowable". Right.

That's not it at all, actually. At least for me. I'm sure there are certainly people out there who fit perfectly into that explanation, though.