The one thing about agnosticism is that it is extremely easy to prove – because all you have to prove is that you don’t know!
A definition of agnostic is from the greek, – a gnosis – without knowledge.
Now, let’s clarify the point; it is foolish to say that I know that you can’t know.
…that is also self defeating
However there are many honest agnostics who can say that they have honestly studied the subject at hand …”and I am convinced that with the evidence that I have studied and the philosophical issues that I have wrestled with; I dont believe that it is really possible to know with certainty if there is a God.”
Now, that is a different and respected position.
The other type of agnostic is the one that chooses from an opposing viewpoint – regardless of how much information is brought to him he is of the same opinion.
So, we are back to being self defeating…
To give evidence to him who loves not the truth is only to give him more plentiful material for misinterpretation.
In my previous post I point out the current, past and future manifestation and demonstrable consequence of trading the truth for the theory of evolution.
I am now going to discuss atheism and atheists and how they affirm a negative in the absolute? Huh, what’s that?
Well it goes like this – we will start with a definition – ‘A’ ‘Theist’ or Alpha negative God – (and you can sit and argue the definition if Continue reading
Right, what a broad subject creationism, evolution, agnosticism, pantheism, paganism etc. etc. and again I say etc. is. I have been dodging this subject (and replacement theology…) for quite a while. The main reason is that mostly I do not want to offend anyone and yet, the moment you go into the “reality” of these isms, you are bound to get up someone’s nose. However, it seems that creationists, evolutionists, agnostics, pantheists, pagans etc. etc. that is, all of us seem pretty comfortable shooting off our mouths and in this case keyboard. Continue reading