Agnosticism= An Atheist Without Balls?

"On the field of truth, on the battlefield of life, what came to pass, Sanjaya, when my sons and their warriors faced those of my brother Pandu" - The Gita

http://www.nontheologicalbible.com

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Agnostic
• Agnosticism
• Richard
• Dawkins
• Atheism
• Religion
• Christian

[MrAnthonyfilms]

you're really creepy bro.

[LordMalice6d9]

Really, I can remeber as far back as when I was 3 years old.

But then again I'm younger so my memory is alittle better I guess.

[owheydusoapsk]

I have no problem w/the effort by atheists to change the nomenclature. It's off-putting when someone insists that it has already changed.

[nogogma]

I would say that until there is a clear, rational, logical and coherent definition for whatever a god is, then I have no issue saying God does not exist period. I relate God or gods to all the revealed religions in the world that make no sense whatsoever and are nothing more than self refuting entities that were invented in the minds of superstitious, ignorant people who were clueless about the universe. Therefore, I am a strong atheist when it comes to such gods.

[TheNakedAtheist]

(cont)

Also having read almost everything Dawkins has written I wouldn't consider him a "strong atheist" which I consider synonymous with gnostic atheist. He's outspoken in his opinion that there is insufficient evidence to support the God concept, but he has never, and I doubt (as a scientist) would ever say "God does not exist period".

[TheNakedAtheist]

"To me a word means what people understand it to mean generally."

I use the term to describe myself in part because the old generally accepted definition, (which come from a time when the existence of God was virtually an unquestioned fact, and thus anyone who didn't believe was denying his existence as one might deny that the sky is blue or the grass green) needs to be reformed. Every time someone asks me what being an atheist means it's an opportunity to correct their perception.(cont)

[jameskirkwall]

I think all the erroneous secondary definitions suck. They just make things more confusing through over analysis. We have plenty of adjectives. We can simply say dogmatic rather than 'strong.' True about many taking the atheist label simply to join the anti-Christian club.

[jameskirkwall]

I believe my life began around 5th grade. That's about as far back as I can remember. People live and die during life. The child becomes an adult. Brain injury or chemical imbalance can also completely change a person. But yes, my conclusion is the same as yours. Brain injury provides evidence against the soul, evidence against ourselves being outside the physical body. Near death experience is an interesting study however.

[owheydusoapsk]

It's really more about the general perception, colloquial meanings words have. My perception of what people associate w/the word "atheist" is anti-Christian, strong atheist personified by Dawkins, Hitchens etal... That doesn't apply to me. To me a word means what people understand it to mean generally. My impression is the strong/weak/agnostic adjectives aren't generally understood outside circles like this. So I don't use them to describe myself.

[TheNakedAtheist]

@owheydusoapsk

Once last point. I think it may boil down to the type of person you are. You may be the type who is willing to give claims the benefit of a doubt, and withhold judgement unless you have evidence against that claim. I am the type who ignores/rejects claims unless, or until I see evidence supporting them.