Atheism vs an agnostic

The difference between an agnostic and an atheist is that agnostics don't have a god and are honest enough to admit it. Atheists do have a god. Their god is themselves!

That was not serious, by the way.

naydam........i have more time for a religous person who believes in the biblical account of creation.....they are completly wrong but at least they know the score....its the religous people who believe in evolution and a god are  compatible i dont get ...they are just plain daft......

The difference between an agnostic and an atheist is that agnostics don't have a god and are honest enough to admit it. Atheists do have a god. Their god is themselves!

Agnostics want to hedge their bets, Pascal's wager.

It's just sitting on the fence however and not a valid point. I would be the first to admit I am wrong if there was evidence for a god but simply there isn't one.

'their god is themselves!'
Would you develop that statement a little further OMBH..
I'm atheist and more than a little baffled by that. Help me please?

I challenge you, Ovalman, to convince a shrimp that an elephant exists! If you can't do that, does it mean that there is no such thing as an elephant?

ombh.........your logic is warped

Owmybrainhurtz, most deities are for a certain sect of a certain people of a certain part of this planet.

If there is a deity, he has no bearing on my life and no evidence of his existence.

If I were a Shrimp, would an Elephant have any bearing on me?

Well you wooden want it you stand on you!
Maybe the answer OMBH is seeking is.. 'show it a photograph'?

ok, were did god come from.... he was always there..always were?... in your mind?..you just can,t be there


absolute no proof of a god i would say in 2,014years....


we turn to religion because when we can't explain something, it is an easy answer...imho

I'm not sure there was much proof before that, either!

I distinctly removed the "stood on" question because I knew it would be an answer but photo and stood on is a good retort.

If I don't know about it then how can I predict it. If I worshipped the elephant then could I stop it?

trilby22 got it right in his original post, when he stated that atheists are "so clever and wise that they know better than the Lord"!

God is spirit. There is a greater difference between God and man than between a shrimp and an elephant. The difference is that man can know God; a shrimp can't know an elephant, because they live in different realms! Likewise there is a difference between the spirit realm and our physical realm. And  a man or woman who is not born again and living in the spirit realm is like a shrimp that is so arrogant as to believe that because an elephant can't live in water then it can't possibly exist.

But as the scriptures say, those who seek the truth will find it. Those who've already made their mind up and don't want the truth, won't, and will continue to be their own god! If you're like a shrimp that thinks that no life can possibly exist outside of their little pond or stream, then continue believing that, if that's what you want to believe!

Millions of people over of thousands of years have testified to knowing God, and that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, thereby restoring the relationship that man originally had with God but lost when man rebelled. A court will often make a decision based on just two or three witnesses. What court in the land would disregard the testimony of millions of witnesses? If millions of shrimps knew an elephant, there would be no argument whatsoever in the shrimp community as to the existence of elephants! This is why atheism is so ridiculous and illogical (and I was a confessing aethist for the first 23 of my like, so I know).

ombh........is not playing with a full deck of cards

He's like Bodil on acid..

I didn't think that fairies existed at the bottom of my garden till read the  'shrimp and elephant' parable.

Take it easy with the "Thousands of Years"! It's two! Not a bunch of 'em.

God was created in the image of man which explains why there are so many religions and schisms of individual religions.
We have every right to be suspicious of scripture supposedly handed down by an all knowing god which contradicts basic scientific reality and commonsense.

Agnostics are believers who have yet to decide which prophet to follow. Agnostics will nearly always end up with a God but never become atheists.

Wow - another 'fact' to inform us!
Who did the research on that Dobbo - and where can we find the report and evidence?

(okay, don't answer now - I'm just feeding some shrimps to my elephant).

Ivor,
are those shrimps arrogant enough to believe that they were created in the image of a god which made the world their oyster?

All the agnostics I have ever met "feel" that there must be "something". They hate the void that we atheists embrace. Believers one and all but scared to admit it!

This is all getting very fishy..

A prawn cocktail of analogies.

We shell never know.
God knight all.

Pax vobis

Caveat Empty

мир со всеми вами

I wouldn't say that the two are mutually exclusive.

I would classify myself as an agnostic atheist.

I'm a non believer.  I don't believe there is a God and I don't believe there isn't.

ron......there a word for you.......agnostic or as i sat....sitting on the fence

or as i say*

This sitting on the fence line is nonsense.  I do not have a clue about the existence of God so I'm hardly going to say I do or don't.  Sitting on the fence implies that you have made a decision but choose not to reveal it.

are you agnostic about the tooth fairy

It's not a question where you can sit on the fence, either the evidence is there or not. Pascal's Wager which many Agnostics take the stance, states that it's better to believe because if your wrong then you've nothing to lose. This is a kop out, deep down Agnostics know there is no evidence but they want the wager just in case. As someone who reads a lot of science, every new discovery cements me more into believing there is no god or gods. If there is a creator, he's a very benign one.

I think there's often a misunderstanding of the word atheist. It just means someone who doesn't  acknowledge a god. It does not mean, that you know for a fact that there is no god.
No one can claim a god absolutely does not exist unless he can claim infinite knowledge of the universe.

hh........same can be said of the tooth fairy or appollo

agnosticism isn't actually limited to religious questions, it's a philosophical stance limiting the concept of knowledge to the field of empirical experience, 'n' sh1t.

No one can claim a god absolutely does not exist unless he can claim infinite knowledge of the universe.

I'm never 100%, it would be unscientific otherwise but there is a distinct lack of evidence. The God of the Old Testament seemed to be speaking from the clouds every day, sending his wrath and thunder. He's went very quiet now that we can explain all these fables by scientific methods. If you can show me any evidence, I'll gladly change my mind.

quite Oval.

I had an RE teacher at my first school who tried to explain 'miracles' from the Old Testament. His take on the Red Sea parting was changes in tide etc. Needless to say his teaching career was short lived..

maybe Moses was the Derren Brown of the day.

He'd be more believable even today than the pyramid king..

So we're all agreed then! If you're a shrimp, then there's no possibility whatsoever of the existence of an elephant. If you're not a shrimp, then there might be!

If you're an atheist, then there is no possibility whatsoever of the existence of God. If you're not an atheist, then there might be!

Seems logical to me!

Well you landed a knockout punch their sir - we're all floored by that logic.

*THERE!

Thanks, Ivor! I know you're a man who appreciates logic!

Ron Pillock is on the right lines. An agnostic is somebody who doesn't know whether there is a First Cause/God if you must. Doesn't belief he/she CAN know and doesn't believe anybody else can either.
Nothing to do with sitting on the fence.

i have a guy that sits on my right at work who says things along the lines of 'what? God? don't be so stupid, as if that's true, a man in the sky? lol' He is an atheist.

the guy opposite me just refuses to engage in conversation. he says things along the lines of 'i don't know, i don't want to know, i don't car, i'll find out when i die' He is an agnostic.

HTH

waste of time trying to debate with a theist - they have an answer for everything and they always move the goalposts when yet another one of their beliefs gets blown out the water

When you look at the mind blowing size of the universe I think believing that there are aliens somewhere is actually fairly sensible.

If stuff was created by the Big Bang then what was before that, a void , but what created the void how did that come into exsistence.
Science doesn't have the answer.  If there is a God then were did he come from and what was before that.   Infinite questions for the limited finite human mind to comprehend.    Agnostic = open minded and willing to amend opinions when further evidence comes to light.

Perhaps I'm old and tired, but I think that the chances of finding out what's actually going on are so absurdly remote that the only thing to do is to say, "Hang the sense of it," and keep yourself busy. I'd much rather be happy than right any day.

I love the "I believe in God because of the Bible and I believe the Bible is true because my belief of God tells me so" circular logic of the religious.

Believers seem to think because they believe in their God  they will be safe , whereas if an atheist lives a decent honest life he will get shafted in the after life( if there is one ) because he didn't believe.  That has to be be non sense , if there is an after life those who have done bad things will get judged heavily irrespective of whether they believe in God or not. Good post Make my Hay.

I.S. members believe in god to a man

and look what mayhem ensues .....

yesterdays truth: 'there is a god'

todays truth in the western world : 'there is no god'

tomorrows truth.....we'll have to wait and see.........

'Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious convictions' - Blaise Pascal

As an agnostic I deny that I am sitting on the fence or secretly believe so that I don't miss out as it were. The facts are that there is not enough evidence to be an atheist or a believer. Agnosticism is the logical position to adopt in the matter.

A toothy take on it..

The chances of God being what any one of us believes Him to be are infinitesimally small.

That's assuming that there is one God, and not none, nor lots.

What I care about is the consequences of belief or unbelief.

If there is no God, but a belief in God steered people towards true goodness, then surely that should be welcomed, even if one is not a believer.

. Guinness!

Indeed religion and faith can be invaluable to many billions of humans. A source of responsibility, mental comfort, community, identity, routine, pleasure and guide to good living etc.
BUT - I can enjoy all those same attributes without 'living a lie' at the same time.

It's the begging bowl part of it that gets me.

Anyone got any idea how much the Pope is worth? (well The Vatican)

If I lived in squalid poverty in the middle ages in a bleeding hut and looked out of my non-glazed window and could see St Pauls/St Peters/Any Feckin Massive Cathedral towering above everything else on the horizon, I am sure I would have believed in God.

(No excuse for it these days, IMO)

marychain1
I love the "I believe in God because of the Bible and I believe the Bible is true because my belief of God tells me so" circular logic of the religious.

.

HH Sultan Vinegar. I cast out demons and heal the sick in the name of Jesus. And there isn't a day goes by that I don't see or hear about people who do that far better than I do! Please enlighten us as to in whose name you cast out demons! Is it in the name of Allah, or Mr Tickle?

There also isn't a day when I look at current world events that I don't see it line up with bible prophecy. I've looked in vain for the prophecies of Mr Tickle. I can't seem to find them! Do you have a link?

Religion doesn’t cause most wars. Most take place  on race and ideological grounds. Hitler’s attempt to wipe the Jew’s off the planet was on the grounds of them being an  inferior  race to Aryans. Nazism and Communist ideology was at the forefront of the German /Russian conflict though the Nazi’s racial hatred of Bolsheviks was another factor. Hitler and Stalin could hardly be considered religious. Pol Pot ,another atheist and communist dictator ,commited some of the worse crimes of the last century.    The Balkan conflict was another based predominantly on racial  grounds.The allies conflict against the axis powers took place on ideological    grounds  as did the U.S’s conflict against the NVA (an attempt to stop the spread of communism).

The Balkan conflict not about religion? You jest, surely.
Kosovo 90% muslim
Bosnia - muslim
Croatia - RC Christian
Serbia - Eastern orthodox christian

The conflict was about ethnic cleansing/massacres (in other words we don't approve of your brand of religion). It was dressed up in the press as about Serbs, Croats and Albanians but the tensions brewing during the years of suppression by Tito were religious ones.

Germany was predominantly Christian when then WW2 took place but it doesn't mean it was on those grounds the war took place, it was because of Nazi ideology and racial hatred.
The Serbs  may be Orthodox Christian but they never went to war on those grounds it was built on racial grounds . Not so much we don't approve of your religion as we don't approve of your race.Did they believe God was on their side ,  they probably never gave it a second thought as they committed Genocide just as Hitler didn't when exterminating Jews.  Racial hatred run wild.

WW2 was a follow up to WW1 as the Nazis never accepted that they were defeated. WW1 ended without an invasion of Germany which allowed this view to persist.
The holocaust was not the main event, just a sideshow emanating from Hitler's hatred of the Jews.
I'm sure that there are others here who are better able to discuss the holocaust but I am convinced that it was as much motivated by religion as race.

The Balkan war was depicted as between Serbs, Croats and Muslims in the press. An unfair and biased comparison as two are nationalities and the third a religion. Sarajevo and Mostar was about Christians killing Muslims. Kosovo was about driving out  Muslims and destroying Mosques.

Religion gives free rein to murder, it is undeniable.

"Mien Kampf" had no religious base.    No way can Hitlers war in Europe be termed a religious one, it was Nazi ideology that drove it. If Muslims  in the former Yogoslavia had  said they wanted to be Christian would that have spared them , No because it was their race that was hated and vice versa.  Religion can give free reign to murder but so does atheistic ideologies both are extreme and both think there's is the right way.

I did not say that Hitler's war was a religious one. The systematic murder of 5 million Jews was motivated by religious hatred, he wanted to kill them all but mercifully ran out of time.
We will have to agree to differ on the Balkans, I can not answer hypothetical questions.

But the all the Propaganda put out by the Nazis ,was of the Jews  being an inferior race to Aryans and Darwinist belief of survival of the fittest.

They said the same about the Bolsheviks but didn't have a plan to exterminate the Russians, just conquer all of Europe and grab the resources. They regarded the Poles as inferior but segregated the Polish Jews for shipment to concentration camps.

Hitler treated the Russians dreadfully , only  around 5% of those soldiers captured ever made it back to Russia alive.   British troops treated better as they were considered a better race.  Agree Hitler had a special hatred for the Jews , but was that not down to his encounters with them as a child , their racial traits and maybe he feared how bright a lot of them were rather than their religion.

Did Hitler hate the Jewish race or the Jewish religion? It didn't matter in "the final solution" whether they were a religious Jew or an atheist Jew ,all that mattered was their racial lineage.

I can't be bothered to look up the figures at this time of night but I think that 20 million Russians died compared with 5 million Jews. The Jewish deaths accounted for a much higher percentage of their population. The Nazis created in effect a machine for slaughtering the Jews from captured territories. The Russian deaths were mainly soldiers and civilians caught up in the invasion of their lands.

An agnostic friend of mine also suffered with dyslexia, and seemed to spend most of his time pondering the existence of Dog.

Did Hitler hate the Jewish race or the Jewish religion?

Probably both.
Atheist Jew? Am I an atheist christian because of my parentage? No, I'm an atheist.

5 million Jews Foinavon? There weren't even the oft quoted 3 million dead in Europe in '39.

Adolf hated bankers, who were predominantly jewish.

Canary Wharf is missing an Adolf..

Good morning Al Dente.

I don't know how many Jews were killed during the war but 5 million is probable. In this article it is stated that of the 9 million Jews residing in Europe at the start of the war approximately two thirds were killed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust

There are conflicting views but it was a horrendous slaughter of defenceless civilians of all ages.

Christianity isn’t a race it’s a belief. Jews are born Jews by race some  choose to believe in the OT God  and  practise Judaism  , some become Christians (Messianic Jews) or  have other spiritual beliefs and some choose to believe there is no God and are Atheist but they are all still Jews by race.  Britain has no definitive race as such.

just fyi, the balkan war happened in the early 20th century and was essentially about the states of the balkan peninsula breaking free from the Ottoman empire. the fact that what you refer to as the balkan wars is actually the yugoslav wars just demonstrates you lack of knowledge on the subject. I think if you went off and read about Milosevic and Ratko Mladic and what their motives were, you'd find it pretty hard to continue grinding this religious angle. for the serbs, the yugoslav war was always about the land, they believed that the land which included Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia and Slovenia was rightfully theirs (ironically enough because of the bitterness over the way the land was split after the balkan war). They wanted 'their land' back and they would have set about murdering whoever was there, mulsims, chritians, space aliens, it made no difference. yeah they slaughtered the bosniak muslims becasue they were weak but they would have done just the same in Zagreb and Maribor if they'd been powerful enough and I don't think you'll find a lot of muslims round there. when it comes to religion, people will create any old platform for their hatred, however fanciful!

Milosevic and Mladic were indicted for war crimes including ethnic cleansing. The Yugoslav war is also referred to by some historians as the Third Balkan War. Different historians have different views. here is one summary, perhaps you can give another reference source.

http://www.historyguy.com/balkan_war_third.htm#.VDrtPfl4pQU

i saw a scarecrow having a w@nk once, now he was REALLY clutching at straws!

When you resort to insult and profanity you have already lost the argument.
Here is Christopher Hitchens' view copied from Wikipedia

Hitchens argued that the choice in Yugoslavia was between a multi-ethnic plural democracy led by Muslim president Alija Izetbegović in Bosnia and a fascistic, nationalistically inspired ethnically-cleansed state driven by Serbian leader Slobodan Milošević. He called Milošević a fascist and a "national-socialist",[29] and considered the Croatian nationalist president Franjo Tudjman "equally detestable".[30] In God Is Not Great, he wrote about Christian Orthodox Serbian and Roman Catholic Croatian nationalism- and religion-inspired crimes against the Muslim Bosnians, at the hands of proponents of "Greater Serbia" and Croatian "revived Ustashe formations" during this period which are "often forgotten".[31] He was highly critical of Western inaction in protection of the Muslims, partially blaming this on the Clinton administration and specifically Hillary Clinton.
In effect, the extremist Catholic and Orthodox forces were colluding in a bloody partition and cleansing of Bosnia-Herzegovina. They were, and still are, largely spared the public shame of this, because the world's media preferred the simplification of "Croat" and "Serb," and only mentioned religion when discussing "the Muslims." But the triad of terms "Croat," "Serb," and "Muslim" is unequal and misleading, in that it equates two nationalities and one religion. (The same blunder is made in a different way in coverage of Iraq, with the "Sunni-Shia-Kurd" trilateral.)[32]

i could say the same to you about your views on religion.

my last fyi for tonight, Christopher Hitchens, like you Foinavon is a vicious atheist extremist who spends his life desperately seeking out platforms to hammer away at the religious. he also has a problem with the Clintons and has a similarly crass strategy of attack against them. his views on anything are utterly bigoted by his blind hatred of anyone who disagrees with him so I'll continue to base my opinion on the yugoslav war from the words of ald Ratko himself. Thanks for taking the time to c+p from Wikipedia  and history guy though, you're clearly committed to seeking out the truth here (sic)

You're welcome fkqmz.

May your god go with you.

It seems that athiests believe they need to be shown evidence that there is a God and God believers don't see anything convincing in the arguements for the on existence of God. The truth is you can never live in absolute certainty that there is or isn't a God. But people struggle to cope with uncertainty and want things black or white as it makes life easier for them so will convince themselves they are right either way.
If people weren't as extreme in their views then they would be more tolerant of others and open to the  possiblity their views could be incorrect.

I live in 'absolute certainty' there is none - can't see why you'd think that's a problem for 'us'.

Because it breeds an intolerant, divisive society. "I'm right 100% and you can believe there is no God but your wrong 100%" attitude.
The Muslims believe with"absolute certainty" the Koran is the truth, Christians the NT and Jews the OT.
Someones deluded somewhere down the line ,but many  never believe its themselves who could be mistaken.

Nope - still can't agree sorry.
My 'absolute certainty' ATTITUDE has no effect on society, nor neighbours, not even family.
I don't do anything to interfere with anyone else's beliefs or lives - they can carry-on as they wish as I watch in despair.
Other than telling Jehovah's or similar at the door that I'm atheist I doubt few else would know or care.
It wouldn't matter how many times I tell my Mum or lady-friend 'there is no god' - they'll continue to believe - bless 'em.

You are right about the others you mentioned though RickiBobby.

For the sake of simplicity, assume the world was split into 3 religions, lets call them Christians, Muslims and Hindus…one third of the world's population believed in each religion.

Every single devotee of each religion believed, totally, that their god/s was the right and only god and that all other religions were completely wrong, and their god/s
did not exist.

Statistically, which is more likely?

a) that one of the three religions was the right one and their god did exist and both the other two religions were wrong and their god did not exist
b) that all 3 religions were wrong and there was no god at all?

Good question, Jack Hacksaw! But I would have called the three religions atheists, Muslims and Hindus, since, as a Christian, I don't have any religion, but only care about the truth!

^There's one for you Ricky

Ivor, if your lady friends accepted that they might be wrong and you accepted that they might be right ,whilst your  still believing that your probably right it could create a more open dialogue and a few shocked faces.

Some Christians believe Muslims ,Budhists, and Jews can connect with God through there religions and vice versa. So if that's the case its the same God with different ways to him.
All boils down to 2 questions
(a) There is a God and an After life
(b). There is no God we are descendants of monkeys and there is no after life.
  The only certain answer can be found upon death ,everything else is speculation.