agnostic vs atheism

There you go again, making me agree with you! :oD Well said! +++++++ rating!

i disagree, i debate with agnostics all the time.. i must admit however, that they are the hardest type of people to debate with. atheists dont try to convert, we look for good logical rebuttal's to our answers.

I guess we've just known different types of agnostics. The agnostics I've known have never cared about other people's religious beliefs one way or the other. In fact, most of them tend to not broach the topic of religion at all, or have any comments to add on it if other people are talking about it. It's not that I don't like atheists, but I have known a lot of them who are very pushy about trying to talk other people out of their beliefs. I'm tired of being told that I'm insane for believing in something, or that just because no religion is perfect they should all be completely rejected as useless.

that is not true, we simply say that through occams razer, there is no proof, therefore, there is no god. its not like atheists cannot be "spiritual", its just that we say there is no way there can be a "higher power" for soooooo many reasons..

lol... there is no evidence, so, using Occam's Razer, there is no god. if there is no evidence, you are entitled to say that he does not exist, even if nothing is 100%.. for evidence may be found.

here i will copy your argument down Santaccie: You say that 'atheists say there is no god, because there is no proof.' You are incorrect. Atheists deny God's existence completely. You say that 'agnostics say, "i dont know."' This is only partially accurate. Agnostics want proof, and until they have proof, they tend to lean toward the doubting side. If you're saying that I am the one who "accused" you of being agnostic (as if there's anything wrong with being agnostic), allow me to quote myself, verbatim: 'To fightingistheonlyway, I respect your statement here. Whether you agree with me or not, I see you as being more agnostic than atheist. It's not that you are convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is no God; you just aren't one to blindly accept such a notion. You want proof, and you haven't found it yet (or you've found it, and still need to ponder it for awhile).' Now, if it was indeed me you were referring to, please tell me where the "accusation" was. You'd do well not to put words in other people's mouths, and you'd also do well to consult a dictionary before you put yourself on "Front Street," with inaccurate definitions in a discussion about other people getting their definitions wrong. You really blew that one! LOL You also say atheists 'disprove contradictions that are made.' You have yet to disprove any of the points I have made. People have broken down your arguments more than once already, and each time, you've started a new thread, or simply said they don't understand logic, or their level of education is too low. You talk about other people's posts being "fallacious," without giving a decent explanation why. Part of growing up is being able to accept correction. Pride and flaming are not the answer. Some of the things you've said to me are just plain rude!

im an atheist... there is no god, for there is no proof. atheists do not deny god. agnostics dont know, but do not lean towards any side. are you saying if there is proof of god i would stay an atheist? lololll... come on.. i dont like being agnostic for i admire people who take a stand on a solid base, agnostics, like my friends in class, can always kind of, beat me in discussions because they can jump around to any belief they want... and even though ultimatly it comes to a draw, i usually get my a$$ wooped, philisophically that is, until i rebound with statements.. lol... theists on the other hand, they are REALLY easy to defeat.. i am convinced, that because there is no evidence, there is no god. i am however, open to the idea and since i cannot prove negatives, i can only disprove contradictions, IE freewill VS god. ok, when i explain everything to the person, with the easiest of words, and they still resort to their old beliefs, i just pack up and move on, for there is no point of me teaching that X+X=2X, when they cant figure out what X is... and i really really dont care if you care whether or not im nice to you, because, im here improving on my philosophy and debating on my own grounds, if you really find this debating not to be helpful, you can leave. its that simple, just dont join future discussions... however, i happen to value your oppinion, when, however, it is NOT redundant, AND it does not get personal. you dont necasserally need to agree, but you need to be open to the ideas at hand, like i am when i even accept the notion of god, and even when im not supposed to because, god itself is not proven, so i cant go through with any questions other than that.. and thats why im open to it. most atheists wont even go there.. but i do go, and i do solve contradictions.

'im an atheist... there is no god, for there is no proof. atheists do not deny god. agnostics dont know, but do not lean towards any side.' C'mon, dude. I gave you the dictionary definitions. It says, and I quote, "someone who denies the existence of god." Care to call me a liar? i dont like being agnostic for i admire people who take a stand on a solid base, agnostics, like my friends in class, can always kind of, beat me in discussions because they can jump around to any belief they want... and even though ultimatly it comes to a draw, i usually get my a$$ wooped, philisophically that is, until i rebound with statements.. lol... theists on the other hand, they are REALLY easy to defeat..' I beg to differ. I am a theist, and I have beaten you several times already. Each time, you've said I don't understand logic, or my level of education is too low, or my statement was "fallacious." When I've caught you in a lie, you've told me "this isn't an exam!" 'i am convinced, that because there is no evidence, there is no god. i am however, open to the idea and since i cannot prove negatives, i can only disprove contradictions, IE freewill VS god.' You are the only one saying there is a contradiction here. I'm saying there's not, and until you can prove otherwise, no "contradiction" has been identified here, much less disproved. 'ok, when i explain everything to the person, with the easiest of words, and they still resort to their old beliefs, i just pack up and move on, for there is no point of me teaching that X+X=2X, when they cant figure out what X is...' Now you're getting into basic pre-algebra, which has NOTHING to do with theology. Out the window goes that one. 'and i really really dont care if you care whether or not im nice to you, because, im here improving on my philosophy and debating on my own grounds, if you really find this debating not to be helpful, you can leave. its that simple, just dont join future discussions... however, i happen to value your oppinion, when, however, it is NOT redundant, AND it does not get personal. you dont necasserally need to agree, but you need to be open to the ideas at hand, like i am when i even accept the notion of god, and even when im not supposed to because, god itself is not proven, so i cant go through with any questions other than that.. and thats why im open to it. most atheists wont even go there.. but i do go, and i do solve contradictions.' The reason for redundancy is because you have yet to disprove any of the points I have made. And as far as getting personal, the only one who has done this is you. You have told me twice that my level of education is too low, you have told me once or twice that I don't understand logic, and you have told me once that I would be going to hell. You wanna start taking inventory? Have a go at it, coach!

lol..true

I think there will always be two sides. Even if there was a press conference with Jesus, there would be atheists and agnostics. Or if there was concrete proof that there's no G-d and it was reported on CNN, there will still be religious people.

You're correct in saying agnostics want to have faith (at least some do), but it is the agnostic who "has faith in facts and things they can prove." Atheists not only doubt that there is a God, they believe there really is no God, and that they can prove it. Unfortunately, if either side could be proven, there likely wouldn't be two sides. One would be dissolved by the other. :)

People have said for years, centuries, and even millenia that they NOW have "evidence," or even "proof," of God's nonexistence, as well as His existence. This is nothing new. Here is a 13-1/2-year-old interview with an authority in nuclear medicine and chemical research, entitled "Chemical soup is not your ancestor!"...http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v16/i2/soup.asp

no that is a "deist" who is against religion.. agnostics just dont know

nono, agnostics are not religious either, deists are just AGAINST organized religion. agnostics just dont know..