|
Quote:
I don't choose to believe there is no theistic god. I find it IMPOSSIBLE to choose otherwise. I struggle to define a lack of belief as a belief system. |
Quote:
Atheism denies the existence of a higher power. Agnosticism does not come down on either side. BIG difference - Atheists are NOT Agnostics, and Agnostics are NOT Atheists. But if God showed her face tommorrow, and it looked like this:  I suspect many Christians would still be Christians - because it's not about THE truth, it's about YOUR truth. (The generic "your", not you specifically bignej) |
Quote:
The point that I was trying to make is - from a personal level - "I" can't determine who should go to hell and who should not. Personally, I would reserve the place for mass murderers and the like. |
Quote:
This reminds me of a conversation I had with a good friend of mine who is very religious and Coptic Orthodox (I'm Jewish...not religious at all, I follow the holiday traditions really because it makes my parents happy, but I do believe that there is some sort of higher power out there). He asks me, "What will you do if you're wrong about your beliefs?" I basically say there is nothing I can do about it, as I'm not planning on changing how I live my life, because my beliefs come from my personal thoughts, experiences, family/friend influences, etc. I asked him the same question: "What if you're wrong?" Him: "I'm not wrong." With that, I smiled, walked out of the room, and have never discussed religion with him again. |
All I know is, god must hate rock and roll.
Dead: John Lennon, Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, the guys from Lynard Skynard, Elvis, Buddy Holly, etc...yet, we are stuck with the Simpson girls, Hanson, Michael Bolton, so many other crappy people now that I don't even know their names. Just not fair I tell ya. |
Quote:
Believers find it impossible NOT to believe. same same. its a belief. Wether you're actively choosing it or not. When given the option of going through 2 doors, one thats labels "God exists" the other "God Doesn't Exist" I'd expect you to choose the latter. If you're saying that you are not choosing TO believe there is no god, then I'd say you're an agnostic, you simply don't Know one way or the other. As soon as you state there cannot be a god or there is not a "god" then you're stepping into the realm of choice. and as such -- belief. |
Quote:
To borrow a quote ... "Everyone on the planet has aleady decided not to believe in many different Gods, Aetheists just go one God further than non-aetheists" |
Quote:
Also, the New Testament isn't exactly the most accurate document out there. The police try to interview people involved in a crime as soon as possible so they can get all the details they can remember before they forget. Best case scenario, the New Testament was written 30-40 years after Jesus Christ died. I'm not putting too much stock in how accurate the stories are. Quote:
Isn't asking God to be a perception of a worthy God in order for us to believe in him something reasonable? I mean, if you truly don't think he's a worthy God, why would you believe in him? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Excellent quote Marc. Imagine how the Romans with their many gods felt about those pesky christians and their ONE god. How dare they think that there can only be one god? |
Quote:
Perfect quote for this |
Quote:
Haha! I didn't think of them. That's pretty funny. I was actually thinking of Jessica and her little sister, Ashley. |
Quote:
Calling yourself an agnostic is just a p*ssy way of saying your an atheist. You don't believe but you kind of do? Please. Believers believe in something regardless of facts. Non-believers (by definition atheist) believe what the facts tell them. Its not a "belief" system at all. |
Quote:
I think of Jessica and her little sister Ashley a lot too. Call me a sinner. |
Quote:
It's not that simple in my opinion. The fact that there are so many religions that all believe they are the only religion makes it impossible for me to even be agnostic. I don't see any reason to believe one religion over the others when they are all (the big ones, at least) mutually exclusive, and have the exact same basis in faith rather than fact, with their own believers equally convinced they are correct and that it's unthinkable that they are wrong, or that the other religions are right. When it comes to organised religion, I am an atheist. However, I'm open to the idea that there might be some kind of higher power that might fit the category of what we call a "god". I guess I'm agnostic in that sense, but I don't really think that, if it existed, this power would, a) resemble any of the gods in our religions, or b) give a shit about the human beings on Earth, let alone demand that they worship it. |
Quote:
It's not that simple. Of course, in the eyes of the Christian/Jewish/Islamic god, it matters not. An agnostic is no better than an atheist, so maybe you are better off hedging your bets by choosing one side of the fence over the other. ;) |
Are you all agnostic to the tooth fairy? I mean you never know.
|
Quote:
That's different, because when you're a parent you know how the tooth turns in to money - because you do it. The faith argument is both the weakest and strongest argument that there is. It's a complete lack of evidence, but that same lack of evidence makes it impossible to deny. The fact that the same method can be used to prove that absolutely anything MIGHT exist doesn't seem to hurt the argument at all. |
Quote:
I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything when I read this. |
I'm just pissed the "I Have Been Shaved" parody thread has yet to materialize.
|
Quote:
but there might be a tooth fairy somewhere just not in your house. Atheists denial that that god exists is not absolute and would change in the face of contrary evidence. This a huge difference to how believers act in the face of contradictory evidence. Isn't an agnostic denying to believe in God by not agreeing that he exists? How is that different that some of these definitions of atheists? |
Quote:
Agnostics possess the open-minded quality of Atheists without the arrogance of declaring that god doesn't exist. |
Quote:
No. All an agnostic is saying is that he or she doesn't know. Maybe one of the religions is correct. That's it. They aren't denying that God/s exist. |
Quote:
I don't consider it arrogance. Is someone arrogant for not believing in Zeus? |
dola
Although I'm more than willing to concede that there are an awful lot of "militant atheists" that well deserve the "arrogant" label. I'd consider those folks more anti-religion than atheist. |
Quote:
This is very true. I think this stems more from the fight fire with fire way of thinking. |
Quote:
No. Not that that has anything to do with the discussion. |
Quote:
I think it does. If you have given it some thought and decided that gods are man-made, I think that still makes you far less arrogant than the majority of believers - Logan's friend for example. |
Quote:
"According to the Bible" According to a book written hundreds, if not thousands of years after the "facts" it tries to pass on. Try passing whispering a sentence from one person to another through a line of 20 people to see just how badly it gets altered by the end. Now do that for 1000 years and let's see just how far from the original it is. "God gave the world to humanity" Strong statement there with no evidence to base it on. "Humanity screwed up by sinning" The "original sin" was eating a fucking piece of fruit. Not killing someone, not tortuing someone, but eating a damn piece of fruit. Does this strike anyone as petty? This god is petty enough to set this rule. This god is supposed to be all-knowing so therefore he knew how this was going to turn out before it even began so what is the point? "we are all born with it (sin)" So much for allowing each person the true individual choice. By this logic everyone who has decended from a person who may have commited an act worthy of the death penalty should also be killed? This perfect god seems to use logic which is far from perfect. "Sin is an affront to god's logic and is punishable by death" It is punishable by death? Isn't one of the ten commandments "Thou shalt not kill"? Does this mean that god is breaking his own commandment? Doesn't this make god less than perfect? "god sent his son to die for us" Another act that makes no sense. There is no need for this act. If god is the one determining if we are "worthy" he can just as easily determine this without the drama queen act of the crusifiction. He sent his son to die, this also seems to go agains the whole though shalt not kill thing. Sending someone into a known fate equates to performing the act yourself. Unless you think god does not see it as a sin if you know that person A will kill person B when he sees him and you knowingly point person B to a location where person A is waiting. It kind of sounds like my kids telling me "but I didn't do it". Sorry, but way too many holes in this logic. All we can do is live life the best way possible and whatever happens will happen. |
Quote:
For me, it puts you on exactly the same level. |
Quote:
It would be just about the same as believing in the tooth fairy, except it may warrant a call to homeland security. :devil: |
Quote:
The big difference for me is that if one of the gods of one of the religions proved its existence to me, I'd have no choose but to "believe" in it, because I know it exists. The same is not true for believers. |
Quote:
Not seeing much difference from my perspective. You have both made leaps of faith in arriving at your conviction. |
I bet Front Office Cricket Central in New Dehli is having the same back and forth about being Hindus. Doesn't it scare Christians that you are a Christian pretty much because you were born in a Christian country. Doesn't that show you how illogical religion is?
I am sure there will be some poster born in China that is Christian or some Jewish poster that became Chrisitan, but let's face the hard facts here. Your parents were Christians and so are you. Had your parents been Muslim you probably would be that. Had you been born in some African country you would worship some God that Christians probably shake their heads at here. As been mentioned before if your were thousands of years before here you would be following Thor, Zeus, Athena, etc. It's scary that such an easily proven point seems to be left out of the discussion and is almost certianly the reason why a lot of Americans are Christian. Even scarier is no matter who ends up being right (Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Atheists) almost 75% of the world is wrong. I will put my bets on the atheists as they are the only ones that seem to apply any logic to the discussion. Everyone else is just scared that when they die that is it. We are no different than deer, bees, wolves, bacteria, trees, dogs... we die and that's it. |
Quote:
Certianly doesn't feel that way to me. As I said above, a ton of mutually exclusive religions to choose from, all with the exact same facts to back them up. It didn't take much of a leap of faith for me to reach my conviction. |
Quote:
Duh, we're right, of course. ;) |
Quote:
Certainly nothing arrogant about coming to the only logical conclusion. Bravo! |
Quote:
Good, we're in agreement then. ;) |
Quote:
Not at all imho - agnostics say they don't know whether there is a God or not. To be quite honest I think in their heart of heart all people whether describing themselves as religious or aetheist have moments where they are unsure, agnostics are just honest enough to admit they don't know 100%. Admitting you don't know something is often a sign of security and strength of character - its also far better imho than those who don't truly believe in something but pretend. |
Quote:
Actually one of the things which intruiges me is that Christianity has very limited roots in the areas where it was born, instead having the bulk of its believers far from the middle east. Anyone who's a Christian scholar want to try and explain this oddity? |
Quote:
Strange though because similar arguements can be used for many Christian aspects - I know Christian parents who try hard to ensure that prayers their children have said come true because that will help strengthen their faith. Similarly I've seen people (cough) speaking in tongues who are obviously just playing a role, I've been at demonstrations of the holy spirit which were based in basic tricks of balance and disorientation. This doesn't discredit Christianity, just shows that there are fakes out there. Just because as a parent you put the money under the pillow - how can you prove thats the case in every instance ;) |
Quote:
Being an agnostic is hedging your bet. Believe in something at least. I don't see it as a sign of security and strength of character. I look at it as being undecided and going with the winner. |
Quote:
I'm not a religious scholar, but I suspect that Christianity would have stayed niche in Judea--as it would have been perceived as another Jewish cult. Freed from that context, the message of Christianity had a greater chance of acceptance as a religion in its own right. Certainly a minor reason for its spread, but one of the reasons. There are other examples of religions gaining acceptance to a greater degree in regions other than the homeland. Buddhism is one example--it is Indian in origin, but has very few adherents in India relative to other parts of Asia. |
Quote:
Each to their own, I think admitting you don't know something is something which requires strength of character - partially because a lot of people think like you do. If you KNOW you're going to be pushed by people into one camp or another yet realise you don't believe either arguement is convincing enough to sway you completely then it takes a special sort of person to remain true to themselves and admit that they'd prefer not to please anyone and continue to wait on the evidence. I see this more as a scientific approach to religion to be honest, getting all the facts in before deciding if a theory holds water ... will these people ever know for sure, probably not ... but nothing wrong with them admitting it imho. |
Quote:
I think it has something to do with the Civ IV culture boundary and inadequate culture/religious spending by the Civ that discovered Christianity. Their focus on the tech tree and related civics was more towards the scientist as opposed to culture/religion. |
Quote:
Thanks for the post, very valid ideas and thats a good point about Buddhism, I have to admit I don't know enough about that religion to have realised that myself. |
Isn't it a prove fact that the smarter people are the less they believe in organized religion anyway...?
|
A lot of it depends on the ruling class. Rome adopted Christianity as it's state religion, and if that hadn't happened, who knows what would have happened to Christianity.
Buddhism is a very interesting example. I've read an awful lot on Buddhism while learning about Chinese and, in particular, Japanese history. In Japan especially the rise of Buddhism took a similar form to that of Christianity in rome - the ruling noble class adopted it, largely because at that time Japan looked to China as the cultural capital of the world (probably fairly so, too), and at that point in her history, Japan imported a hell of a lot of Chinese culture - religion, art, music, etc. What is most interesting of all, IMO at least, is how Japan incorporated Buddhism in with it's own native religion - what the Japanese now call Shinto. The two stood side-by-side and were by no means mutually exclusive. It was far later that Japan split Buddhism and Shinto in to two seperate religions, as part of the government's desire to restore Japanese tradition (ie. non-Chinese influenced tradition). |
Quote:
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours" -- Steven F. Roberts |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Agreed. |
Quote:
I can understand that point of view although I don't think I'm pleasing anyone by saying I don't believe. I could see where I would please someone by stating that I do believe, but not necessarily where I don't. Saying you don't know is honest, but I think the preponderence of credible evidence points towards a disbelief in a higher power. I think this goes again to possibility vs. probability. Is it a possibility the Christians are right? Absolutely. Is a probability? No. There is no evidence to prove that there is in fact a Christian God. The only evidence that has been brought forth is circular in nature. To give this possibility the same weight that you would give any other proof of an argument is ridiculous. Either believe or don't believe. Atheists also admit that they can't disprove that there isn't a God. There's some doubt there, but it's negligible at best. |
Quote:
he went back to the Dark Side after reading most of the "hahaha, you believe in God and the Tooth Fairy!!1" and is now realizing drinking and whoring is much more fun than bible study. :devil: |
Quote:
|
Can anybody honestly blame Tarcone for not wanting to weigh back in on this?
Dude just had his mind blown and wanted to share what, to him, was phenomenal news. He never asked for a grad school rhetorical shitstorm to break out. Not that there hasn't been some really intelligent and thoughtful discussion, but damn . . . . |
Despite the fact that I self-identify as a believer, I tend to lean more toward Marc's thinking about religion. The primary reason I'm a Christian is because my parents are. If they'd been Muslim, I'd be Muslim. Doesn't make my faith any less real to me or of any less value.
I also tend to think of religion the same way I think about sports: I'm a Colts fan because they're the local team. They're the team I hear about most often, so I've developed an attachment. I don't always think they're right. I don't always think they're the best team, but you also can't talk me out of believing that they're MY team -- no matter how much logic you apply, how many statistics you throw at me or how many other sexy teams with better systems and better personnel there are out there. I think that's also why I don't argue religion -- either with believers in other faiths, agnostics or athiests. I believe in my team. I believe that your team is not as good as mine -- no matter how much evidence you throw at me, because I also assume that you're invested in your team. At the end of the day, only one of our teams is going to win the Super Bowl. Might be mine. Might be yours. Even if it's yours, I'm still going to believe in my team. Point is, none of us really know. So it's really not worth arguing about. |
Quote:
Yes, it must have been a complete shock to tarcone and everyone else here at FOFC that an innocent post on religion has instead become a debate re: religion/atheism/agnosticism. I mean, who could have possibly seen that coming. |
Quote:
i had this realization when i was about 13 or so, and it's what totally turned me off to religion. subsequently my views have become more well thought out, but initially it was just more of like...anger at this type of thing |
Quote:
That doesn't make it right. Another related thread that was simply made for debate would have been much more classy and would be easy to be started, imo. |
Quote:
Maybe not, but that's how it always is with any threads to do with religion or politics. There's been some pretty interesting posts in this thread from all sides IMO, which makes the thread a little more worthwhile than 30 or so congratulation posts then sinking off the frontpage, don't you think? |
Quote:
Tarcone's been here long enough to know what would happen to this thread. To be honest I thought it would turn out WAY worse. |
And let's not forget that key sentence he chose to include.
|
It has been mostly civil, I agree.
Schmidty reinforces my point: why not just start another thread to debate, or "resurrect" one of the 75 other religious-themed threads. I just told my kids this evening: many things are right or wrong simply based upon the context within which they happen. I guess the real answer is that Tarcone should not have chosen this forum / medium to share his news. However, like I posted earlier [and as he probably knew deep down] this stream of debate was inevitable. |
Quote:
I guess my answer would be this is a message board and threads take whatever direction they take. I saw a thread about some Denzel Washington movie someone started, why not put it in the Movie thread? I'm not gonna get annoyed because they started a new thread, I can always just choose to not click on it. |
Quote:
I didn't to be honest - this forum is one of the few ones I've visited where people actively try and show respect by and large to other peoples opinions and the level of debate is generally quite intelligent and some patience is shown to people with regards to posts. (so in summary - this board rocks ;) ) |
Shut up, loser!! Your beliefs suck ass!!
;) |
Congrats to you Tarcone on your discovery. :)
One thing I'd like to add.. I've always considered FOFC to be my local dive pub of the world wide web. Now as is customary in the bar scene, discussion of politics and religion is supposed to be avoided, as everyone has their own esteemed opinion on the issue at hand. That's just me though. |
I think some of you are completely full of shit. I read this thread and can not believe some of the crap that is being thrown around.
:banghead: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Outside of a couple of posts, I'm not seeing anything that would elicit that response. |
Quote:
This is one of the best layman's term descriptions of belief I have ever seen. Bravo. Fucking Bra-fucking-vo. |
Quote:
Indeed, this thread had its moments on the brink but it has remained quite civil, even with an HA sighting ;) Quote:
I disagree, I think there is a place for some topics, that being said, this is the "off topic" forum so he put it in a perfectly acceptable place. The fact that it created actual discussion and debate simply shows the higher class of people we have here at FOFC. Quote:
You haven't delved into some of the OLD discussions then have you ;) There were some real doozies back in the day. Where's Franklinnoble and his freak....err wife when you need them =) |
Quote:
I have to agree with you GH, Noop: Whats the deal man? why did you have this reaction to things? |
Quote:
Might be because I sat down and read this entire thread rolling my eyes at the usual cast of characters peddling their bullshit just with another topic. |
Quote:
Ok, maybe I'm not seeing what you're seeing? Is there an example you can give? There are a few people that appear to be a little less knowledgeable overall (I may be one of them, who knows?) but other than some inflammatory stuff that got beaten down hard and fast I think this has been quite interesting? |
Quote:
And us agnostics are like those losers who are fans of the Yankees even when they don't live near the NYC area, just because they're the best team and most likely to come out on top. :chickendance: |
Quote:
yes yes, please you must divulge more so we all know whether you're on our side or one of them. :devil: :devil: :devil: |
Quote:
Never said it contradicted the theory of evolution; I said it called Darwinism, which people thump as vehheminlty as the bible.. As for the bible, I agree that it's a collection of stories, but whether you like it or not, of lot of it's characters actually walked the earth and that is supported by historical fact. It's not just some Salinger novel. The stories...yeah, heavily skewed by years of being passed down from mouth to mouth and then modified by the powers that be to keep the masses in line, but David, Mary, Jeus, Pilot were real people. There is eveidence from countries that don't give two shits and a fuck about christianity that support this. I don;t think you can deny that, and I think the comparision isn't as far off, IMO, as you're saying it is. People cling to the bible to answer the unanswerable just as people cling to scientific theories for the same reason. It's human nature to go with what makes the most sense to you. I'll admit that it seems to me that science is a lot, lot, lot more viable than the bible, but science is not not etched in stone either. For example: the stated facts on the very beginning of the universe is that there was absolute nothing, and then there was an explosion which created everything. I've seen/read this dozens of times. Umm...what? Why? How? There is no expalination for this that I've ever heard of, and the theory that a god created this is just as viable to me than a pure scientific explaination until I hear someone make sense of it. Because nobody on earth truely knows what's what. I had widespread bone cancer as a lad, there was a benefit/vigil and it disappeared completely. I can't explain why, the doctors coudln't explain why, but it happened. Not to say that I think god intervened, nor do I think he would've if he truely existed, but the fact remains. I went from a terminal, veritable cripple to completely healthy overnight. All in all, any scientist worth his weight in salt will tell you that theories are just that. Theories do nothing but support an idea. IMO, anyone who clings to anything (on either side of the spectrum) is just plain deluded. We're not ever going to know the whole truth. And I'll say it again: anyone who tramples Tarcone for what he believes is a hypoocrite. Regardless of what you think, you're far less ahead of the curve than you might think. |
Quote:
What do you want to know? I'm not sure I get this post? |
Quote:
I agree with this post, a wonderful analogy that in my opinion makes sense. I am not religious(I find religion to be a major problem in our world; mostly western religion.) I believe in God, my reasons why are not important but I have feel comfortable in my belief of God. Also, what exactly is he being saved from? The same things that God created? |
RendeR I read your post, so I don't want you to think I ignored you but for the sake of this thread I will just leave what I stated as it without further explanation.
|
Quote:
Hmmm. OK, I'm interested in which contemporary historical sources support David, Mary, and Jesus? The fact that there wasn't any (that I'm aware of, at least) was one of the big alarm bells for me years ago. |
Quote:
This is a major crux for me in the whole debate. In MY opinion, not everyone or anyone elses, I see two things at odds that really shouldn't be. The Bible gives a reason for creation, for how everything got here and why (because the invisible friend to millions wanted it to be, sorry, it was funnier in my head) and that's fine, people who believe may or may not believe that Genesis is the factual creation story. Science says "this is what the evidence is showing us so far as to how it all began" and while its a decent story also, its also not proven. It is based on the evidence of the world we live in. its not saying "this is how the universe came into being" so much as its saying "this is how the universe works as we know it" those two things aren't mutually exclusive as far as I can see. Personally I think someone looked at the universe and created a story, or fable to help describe the eons of time it took for the earth to get to this point. Which again, doesn't bother me at all. |
Quote:
NP, feel free to PM me if you want to discuss it further! |
Quote:
i'm just bored... |
Quote:
Isn't that kind of the point of a message board? No one forced you to read any of it. |
From the OC Register
UCI asks students what they’d ask God - Sciencedude - OCRegister.com Quote:
|
LMFAO. If Alanis--I mean god--is anything like the angels, she doesn't eat, so I guess pie is out of the questions.
|
Quote:
Well said. It doesn't both me either because it's a basic human function...explain the unexplained. Thank Christ (hardy har) we're past the Zeus thunderbolt stories. **edit** I'm fighting through Dayquil, which is falsely marketed so it seems, so I apologoze for spelling and grammatical error that I've noticed. Hopefully I'm, not losing anyone with jibber jabber. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
You are spot on, my good man. I'm quite wrecked, which I;m not used to anymore. I have bacterial laryngitis (sp.) which is not good for a singer. In fact, I missed my 1st show with my new band tonight. Not a good start. BTW, if anyone is interested in hearing us (way off topic, I know) message me with your addy and I'll send a song by tomorrow night at this time. The band is called Ladentracks and we're all acoustic hard rock. Wow...that was shameless. :lol: |
Quote:
I'll drink to that! |
Quote:
While a good analogy, the flaw in it is that you argue both that your team is the best and that your team is going to win. To continue your analogy, during the regular season teams win and lose. There is only one Super Bowl for all eternity. If your team is 0-16, then I'd hazard to say that they cannot win the Super Bowl. Only the teams that make the playoffs have a chance to win the Super Bowl. Regardless of whether you think your team is the best, the important thing is who you believe is going to win. With that in mind, you can still have good feelings about your hometown team, but you should rationally understand that they cannot win and be able to logically pick a winner out of the various beliefs. |
Quote:
|
For those interested, Daniel Dennett has written a phenomenal book that discusses a lot of the topics in this thread. Particularly why Christianity above other religions succeeded. It also discusses where organized religion came from and why we are so inclined to believe in it.
The book isn't a condemnation of religion and in fact gives many theories as to why it may be a good thing. But it's a fascinating look into why we evolved to accept it. If you're into evolution, the human mind, and religion, it's a must read. Warning though, it isn't a quick read and will really put your mind to the test. Amazon.com: Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon: Daniel C. Dennett: Books |
Quote:
Arguably God loves rock and roll, and simply couldn't wait for these guys to die of natural causes so he could get an awesome jam session going in Heaven.... |
Quote:
I think that's fine, but the problem comes when the fans of your team want non-football fans to live life by their team's rules. That is really my only problem with organized religion. It's the forcing of people to study their fantasy science and discriminating against members of society because your book says so. But on a personal level, don't you want it to be more than a guess? And if it is a guess, wouldn't you want to make an educated guess? To pick the team that has the most scientific evidence behind it? And do you want to live your life based on their rules simply because other people in your area do it too? I personally don't think that this life is just "practice", so I intend to make the most of it. I'm not going to hold back on what I eat or what I want to do because some people in my area believe it's wrong. |
|
Quote:
You guys, with your smarty pants. |
Quote:
Hard to see how one can criticize someone because they refuse to make some leap of faith to either embrace a religion or declare them all false. I think you are hung up on agnosticism vs atheism vs christianity. Is it likely that the christians are completely wrong? Yeah, I think so. That doesn't mean there is no god. Maybe the atheists are right. Maybe one of the hundreds of faiths around the globe have the right answer. The agnostic declares there is not enough evidence to adopt any of those stances and chooses to keep an open mind. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:08 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.