["Being an Agnostic would not preclude having faith in something or someone that has not manifested materially."]
Yes, exactly. Agnosticism is a superstition, in other words.
[later post]
We have proved it. The existence of God is evident. The non-existence of God is an unproven theory. That slogan of yours: "Agnostics don’t know if there is or there isn’t a God" is a superstition: an assertion taken without evidence.
27 comments
No, no, no. You were supposed to turn left at the free-fall into madness and incoherence, not drive straight off the fucking cliff.
Here, let me just draw you up a map for next time.
Most people are agnostic, if you take agnosticism to mean uncertainty as to the existence of a god. Richard Dawkins professes himself an agnostic. Agnosticism has come to mean a sort of "sitting on the fence", but it really just means you aren't so arrogant as to assume that you have absolute certainty in your beliefs. Lots of Christians are technically agnostic, in that, when questioned, they are happy to say that they don't know 100% that god exists. They still have faith though, misguided as that might be. But really, how the ability to conceive that you might be wrong can be termed a "superstition" is beyond me.
A superstition is something that involves supernatural causality. The only way in which you could conceive of agnosticism as being in any way related to superstition was if you, annalex, took the position that it is 100% certain that God does not exist. If you reject the supernatural involved in agnosticism, you have no option but to reject the supernatural involved in belief in God. So, annalex, I am left thinking that 1) you are possibly a Poe and are, in fact, an atheist; 2) you don't know what "superstition" means; 3) you are an idiot. Being 3) would not preclude 1) or 2).
"Agnosticism is a superstition"
< "Agnostics don’t know if there is or there isn’t a God" is a superstition: an assertion taken without evidence.>
Shift burden of proof much? You make the claim 'god exists', your burden of proof. It's not up to us to prove he doesn't.
Believers, however, are so sure of the existence of their gods (or, perhaps, fairies) that they claim that those who do not believe in their gods must somehow "prove" their god's non-existence - even in the absence of any evidence for them.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof#God
Agnostics are the only ones whose beliefs are actually rational, since it is, in fact, impossible to prove or disprove the existence of a god/gods or of an afterlife.
An agnostic isn't sure so he's honest in asserting there may be a God. I started calling myself an Atheist years ago, not because I knew there was no God(s) but because I do know yours, God of the Bible, Torah or Quaran, doesn't exist, the books are all plagarizms that aren't consistant within themselves.
What I know from my research has made me confident in my Atheism but is of no use to me as a career or profession, Oddly what I've learned over the years, if I wanted to be a con-artist, would only serve me as a fundamentalist preacher regularly bilking the gullible believers. Oh, I could do it, I'd hate myself but I have more knowledge than most of them about the Bible.
You have proven the existence of God, but... we haven't proven his non-existence ?
Do you even read what you write ?
"The existence of God is evident."
If it were evident we wouldn't be having this discussion, would we?
Non-sequitur.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
