Atheism vs Agnosticism

No. Prove you believe of those things, anyways.

Faith can't help conflicting books of scripture but to put it in hell.
 
No. Prove you believe of those things, anyways.

Faith can't help conflicting books of scripture but to put it in hell.
I personally don't believe any of it, but we are speaking philosophically. Which sacred texts do we "put in hell"? And doesn't that statement implicitly acknowledge Christianity? Perhaps the Aztecs were correct in their faith and you aren't. Anyway, the very existence of other faiths proves that you are wrong when you say that faith would not exist if the objects of that faith do not, since you said yourself they are conflicted, and cannot therefore all be true.
 
I am citing the faithful state as evidence for a heavenly afterlife, logically.

What inspires high faith? Big tits, and good science.
 
I am citing the faithful state as evidence for a heavenly afterlife, logically.

What inspires high faith? Big tits, and good science.

But you are only citing the Christian faithful, is that correct? Why is their faith evidence and other faiths not?
 
What do you mean by faith?

Faith, the universal one. Faith the feeling of fire. Christian faith, what does that mean? Faith doesn't associate as a Christian, or Muslim.
 
What do you mean by faith?

Faith, the universal one. Faith the feeling of fire. Christian faith, what does that mean? Faith doesn't associate as a Christian, or Muslim.
So you seem to assume that all faith is monotheistic.
 
Faith states a supreme God, and gods. Faith is a universal feeling, there aren't many faith's.

What does faith depict when used in such a manner; Christian, or Protestant faith?
 
Last edited:
Theists may think faith is knowledge, but I don't think they are the same. And some kinds of knowledge, like knowledge of climate change for example, aren't based on definitive proof, but rather a preponderance of evidence. An agnostic theist could have seen an example of prayer seeming to work, so they believe God did it, but they lack proof.

My point was that Huxley himself didn't view it as you do. (I'm also not convinced the agnostic is demanding definitive proof) I understand and accept that definitions grow and change, but you're talking agnosticism on a fundamental level, and Huxley--the man who coined the term--did not view it as the answer to a different question, but an answer to the very same question. It was an alternative to theism and atheism, not a supplement to those positions.
 
Faith presents knowledge of an afterlife. If I truly posses high faith, then I can say all godly abilities exist.

Faith would not exist if omniscience is not real.

Your line of thinking is similar to the "intelligent design" approach, where the design must indicate a designer. But does it really?

And faith does not point towards omniscience. I think that if there was an omnimax being out there, we would not take it on faith that it exists, it should be crystal clear or very apparent.
 
Faith is a flying man. The bringer of fire. :/

Its not "intelectual design" more than a natural process.

I biologically believe w/o a heavenly afterlife? No.
 
Faith is a flying man. The bringer of fire. :/

Its not "intelectual design" more than a natural process.

I biologically believe w/o a heavenly afterlife? No.

Errrr I have no clue what you're saying now. flying man? biologically believe?
 
I experience high belief, I can fly here.

Faith in an imaginative universe, I can make it rain pot, and summon fire.

Prove faith, and prove the naturally flowing, batterie linked, universal imagination. The imagination, are we a series of computers receiving ,and contributing to her network? Via faith, my imagination can link to yours. :)

Prove me truthful, not a work of fiction.

Believe, like the wish to be here. Is that truth, is it biological? Or do we lie and say we enjoy our existence? Lmao. I can easily say I would not to wish to be here if I can't levitate rocks. If I can prove the wish bone, I can fly.

A little off topic, but a thread about positions of un-faith, and un-know is a little devious. Especially on a science board. A natural lie, or the inner working of the apocalyptic mind. You do believe, or keel over. You do believe, so Light too.

Faith would not evolve on earth, must have been born into a heavenly state. Or kiss his royal ass good bye.
 
I experience high belief, I can fly here.
I now know that you aren't a schizophrenic, just someone with behavior patterns that aren't recognized as "normal" by our culture at the present time. In the future, you may become president of the world.
 
I now know that you aren't a schizophrenic, just someone with behavior patterns that aren't recognized as "normal" by our culture at the present time. In the future, you may become president of the world.

Please share. What is my behavior pattern?
 
1. Why do people choose agnosticism over atheism?
Because it's a more diplomatic belief. An atheist usually is more of a militant in his beliefs that god doesn't exist. An agnostic will never come in conflict as he has the mantra "he might exist, he might not, what do you know". Probably agnosticism is a more logical and scientific approach to the matter of god's existence. However diplomatic beliefs tend to be rather boring and non-intriguing.

2. Do you agree in the idea of: agnostic atheists and agnostic theists.
I don't think it's possible to be both. How can you believe that god doesn't exist and at the same time say that he might exist and might not? Then it should be possible to even be a christian agnostic or a muslim agnostic.
 
Back
Top