And? I don't understand what the problem is here. If 666 says the correct theory is not on the table yet, then doesn't that mean for now at least that Agnosticism makes the most sense? Middle of the road. Or I'm missing something entirely.

...I'm agnostic.

__________________

You and your f..king agnosticism.

It is not a decision, it is not an option. It is only saying that there is not god untill there is proof that there is one.

Agnosticism = atheism until god shows up.

__________________




-i got kicked out of barnes and noble once for moving all the bibles into the fiction section

My Facebook thing. . .

Think You Watch Movies? http://www.halo3forum.com/movies/81621-movies-you-need-see-before-you-die-weekly-review.html

I know, I'm just failing to see what 666 is talking about. I think there's a misunderstanding in the context.

That would be an oxymoron. How can you temporarily deny all existence of any creator until a creator appears? I don't deny any existence, I just think that if there is a very good chance there is a creator, but if there is, it's not any of the gods we've been presented with so far.

He smells like an atheist to me. Are you sure it's a dude? I seem to remember 666 having a vag.

__________________

Alright, I misunderstood what you were getting at.

__________________

Atheism, by definition, is claiming that there is no chance of a God existing. Agnosticism doesn't claim anything. In my eyes, atheism is just as justified as Christianity, which is not at all for anyone who hasn't been paying attention.

__________________

No atheism is the statement that there is no god. A belief in that there may at some time be a god is a totally different thing.

Right now there is no evidence of a god. So I am an atheist. Do I think there will be a god later? No idea.

If you start thinking of the future like that and including it in your definition of agnosicism is trying to predict the future.

def:Atheists assert various reasons for their position, including a lack of empirical evidence for deities, or the conviction that the non-existence of deities (in general or particular) is better supported rationally.

If evidence of a god pops up, atheism will no longer exist.

THUS no need for the term agnostic. That is like a person that doesn't believe in god trying to predict the future in that it is possible that they are wrong. . . .

and Colostomizer gets a kick in the nuts.

__________________




-i got kicked out of barnes and noble once for moving all the bibles into the fiction section

My Facebook thing. . .

Think You Watch Movies? http://www.halo3forum.com/showthread.php?t=81621

Atheists assert that there is no God. But an apparent lack of evidence isn't enough. Thing can exist whether or not you find any evidence of them, you just can't say for sure one way or the other.

By definition, atheists claim that there is no chance of a God, ever. If you admit the possibility that a God could show up one day and throw atheism out the window, then you're not atheist. Admitting a chance that you're wrong makes you agnostic.

We've already been over this. The word "agnosticism" exists simply because religion exists. There shouldn't really be a need for it, but the fact that people claim to know God necessitates that it be identified.

And MarkedAchilles gets punched in the ovaries.

__________________

I quoted the definition of Atheism.

Poke in the eye.

And I am off to work, renting movies to the masses.

Oh yeah, I discoverd some odd single celled hairs on the stipules of a grape species today. I am going to name them Ben's Receding Hair Line if I can.

__________________




-i got kicked out of barnes and noble once for moving all the bibles into the fiction section

My Facebook thing. . .

Think You Watch Movies? http://www.halo3forum.com/showthread.php?t=81621