rawls2
Mr. Bigglesworth
+89|7008

Bertster7 wrote:

rawls2 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

It wasn't an attack on anyone else's beliefs but rather a statement of my situation, but I see what you're getting at. This thread is not the forum in which to open up a 'here's what I think', 'well, this is what I think' tit-for-tat postathon. I won't respond to further flame-bait (although I'm sorely tempted after seeing rawls response...).
Help understand something though: what illogical concepts and doctrines do you speak of? If you look at the Ten Commandments there is nothing illogical about them. They are simple fundamental rules that should be followed. What's is there to struggle with? Maybe this doesn't belong in this thread but still.
Who's talking about the Ten Commandments?

Things like a man parting the Red Sea and then walking through it, or a man being crucified and then coming back to life. Those strike you as logical concepts?

Personally I see many events depicted in the Bible and other religious texts to be thoroughly illogical. If people started claiming that some sort of activist had been executed and then come back to life in a contemporary setting (or something different but equally improbable), I find it highly unlikely that the majority of religious people would accept this as fact because it is so far fetched.

Everything we know tells us these things cannot happen, why should the fact that some people claim they did happen thousands of years ago change that?

On top of the fact that I find the scenarios depicted in religious texts highly improbable, is the fact that almost all religions have borrowed much of their ethos, doctrines and so forth, from other pre-established religions.
Here is where it gets tricky. In my beleifs you just have to follow the ten commandments to be close to God. That's it. All of the other things you mentioned are for story telling purposes to see how God's rules affected life back when.

Even simpler, God tells us to love him above everything else and to love others like we would like to be loved. Do those things and your good to go. Problem is you like to get stuck on the other things in the bible even though everything in there just leads to the two things mentioned.

Last edited by rawls2 (2007-02-26 12:41:08)

IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6939|Northern California

CameronPoe wrote:

'Revelation' or 'epiphany' something I have not experienced, nor will I ever experience much like many people here, is a purely psychological and spiritual experience. It is in the mind. It is an intangible, and can be quite an illogical, 'event'.
And having not experienced this, how can you cast that opinion on it?  Because I and probably millions of others will say you are completely wrong in assuming so.  My experiences, which I have often and have had often for 16 years or so are not psychological or just spiritual.  There are physical evidences (which are not as strong as spiritual, but they're still physical occurrences) like my daughter who was healed last night from an oncoming flu.  There is divine intervention ALL THE TIME in the lives of people, possibly even you.  Recognizing those events is yet another debate.  There is answers to questions that a frenzied mind cannot make up, there are proofs and evidences just as real and even more so than seeing, hearing, touching and tasting them.  But again, if you've never experienced them, you are not capable of making the opinion.  And no, watching jesus camp isn't going to give you enough insight on personal, sacred divine experiences in the lives of millions over thousands of years. 
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|7003

IRONCHEF wrote:

I'm suggesting that people just don't decide they're going to be atheists all of a sudden.  It is a learned decision just like it is to be religious.  You are suddenly religious because you questioned things, or were so influenced to be so. I believe that to become atheist, you have to have serious questions about God, and then turn away from that and believe there is no God...and that something adverse happened to make you believe that.

If you're raised never hearing about a god or a supreme being, you don't suddenly say "I'm Atheist!"  You shouldn't have any idea what that is, nor would you have any substance behind that declaration if you don't know about religious belief.
Atheism, IRONCHEF, IS an absence of faith in a higher being. That is the very definition of an atheist. As such, the child 'raised never hearing about a god or a supreme being' is atheist by default. The title matters not. You talk about serious questions 'about God' but that is from your perspective I would describe it as serious questions 'about my existence, the world in which I live and the purpose, if any, of my life'.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|7003

IRONCHEF wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

'Revelation' or 'epiphany' something I have not experienced, nor will I ever experience much like many people here, is a purely psychological and spiritual experience. It is in the mind. It is an intangible, and can be quite an illogical, 'event'.
And having not experienced this, how can you cast that opinion on it?  Because I and probably millions of others will say you are completely wrong in assuming so.  My experiences, which I have often and have had often for 16 years or so are not psychological or just spiritual.  There are physical evidences (which are not as strong as spiritual, but they're still physical occurrences) like my daughter who was healed last night from an oncoming flu.  There is divine intervention ALL THE TIME in the lives of people, possibly even you.  Recognizing those events is yet another debate.  There is answers to questions that a frenzied mind cannot make up, there are proofs and evidences just as real and even more so than seeing, hearing, touching and tasting them.  But again, if you've never experienced them, you are not capable of making the opinion.  And no, watching jesus camp isn't going to give you enough insight on personal, sacred divine experiences in the lives of millions over thousands of years. 
Well IRONCHEF - you can call it 'healing' or you can call it 'her antibodies combatting the oncoming bout of flu'. You say black, I say white. It's all about what you believe. I believe in evidence based hard fact, the only thing that can say in support of your claim of 'healing' is that you 'believe that to be the case'. It's an unbridgeable divide in opinion, fact versus thoughts. Having experienced clinical depression I am very aware of the architecture of the mind. I know what it's like to be close to the edge and I know how minds work from documentary evidence. I know what it is like to be at the opposite end of the spectrum also - with one solitary brief period of mania. That is the only reason why I feel in any way close to being qualified to talk about 'revelation' or other such pschological events.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-02-26 12:47:46)

rawls2
Mr. Bigglesworth
+89|7008

IRONCHEF wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

'Revelation' or 'epiphany' something I have not experienced, nor will I ever experience much like many people here, is a purely psychological and spiritual experience. It is in the mind. It is an intangible, and can be quite an illogical, 'event'.
And having not experienced this, how can you cast that opinion on it?  Because I and probably millions of others will say you are completely wrong in assuming so.  My experiences, which I have often and have had often for 16 years or so are not psychological or just spiritual.  There are physical evidences (which are not as strong as spiritual, but they're still physical occurrences) like my daughter who was healed last night from an oncoming flu.  There is divine intervention ALL THE TIME in the lives of people, possibly even you.  Recognizing those events is yet another debate.  There is answers to questions that a frenzied mind cannot make up, there are proofs and evidences just as real and even more so than seeing, hearing, touching and tasting them.  But again, if you've never experienced them, you are not capable of making the opinion.  And no, watching jesus camp isn't going to give you enough insight on personal, sacred divine experiences in the lives of millions over thousands of years. 
That some powerful stuff right there -- +1
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7049|132 and Bush

CameronPoe wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

'Revelation' or 'epiphany' something I have not experienced, nor will I ever experience much like many people here, is a purely psychological and spiritual experience. It is in the mind. It is an intangible, and can be quite an illogical, 'event'.
And having not experienced this, how can you cast that opinion on it?  Because I and probably millions of others will say you are completely wrong in assuming so.  My experiences, which I have often and have had often for 16 years or so are not psychological or just spiritual.  There are physical evidences (which are not as strong as spiritual, but they're still physical occurrences) like my daughter who was healed last night from an oncoming flu.  There is divine intervention ALL THE TIME in the lives of people, possibly even you.  Recognizing those events is yet another debate.  There is answers to questions that a frenzied mind cannot make up, there are proofs and evidences just as real and even more so than seeing, hearing, touching and tasting them.  But again, if you've never experienced them, you are not capable of making the opinion.  And no, watching jesus camp isn't going to give you enough insight on personal, sacred divine experiences in the lives of millions over thousands of years. 
Well IRONCHEF - you can call it 'healing' or you can call it 'her antibodies combatting the oncoming bout of flu'. You say black, I say white. It's all about what you believe. I believe in evidence based hard fact, the only thing that can say in support of your claim of 'healing' is that you 'believe that to be the case'. It's an unbridgeable divide in opinion, fact versus thoughts.
Actually his belief is in something greater than himself or his understanding.

Last edited by Kmarion (2007-02-26 12:46:33)

Xbone Stormsurgezz
PureFodder
Member
+225|6733

IRONCHEF wrote:

True.  And that's how I based my opening statement by suggesting that the atheists I know/knew became so by being offended by someone or something religious..and therefore became bitter towards all discussion of religion including the existence of God.  I find it hard to imagine an atheist as someone who simply woke up one day and decided (without ANY influence whatsoever) to adhere to their belief that there is not a supreme being.  Seriously, it's impossible to believe that there's a single atheist who became so on their own.  I could be wrong, but it just doesn't make sense to me that you could become so.  You'd have to first have a challenge before you or something that stirs you enough to turn down something you can't see anyway, and then profess to yourself and others that it's not there.
People often question things that they're been taught. When what you're being taught differs wildly from your own experiences you either choose to believe you're wrong or you choose to believe you're right. Most people don't go directly from religion to athiesm in the blink of an eye, it's usually through a long and slow process. Often this is during the teen years as they begin to assess things for themselves and begin to question the validity of the things they are taught.

It's actually biologically encoded into us to just believe everything we're taught when we're young and only to start questioning things later.

Last edited by PureFodder (2007-02-26 12:49:42)

IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6939|Northern California

CameronPoe wrote:

Well IRONCHEF - you can call it 'healing' or you can call it 'her antibodies combatting the oncoming bout of flu'.
No, only YOU can say that.  I said what it was.  Something medicine and the great minds of this world cannot fathom.  And it's not like it's new information.  God has been doing things in emergency rooms and in homes and in battlefields for many generations that we could not describe, define, scientifically or logically prove if we tried.  Some embrace it..some, call it nonsense.  I'm sorry you don't accept it for what it is.  I, on the other hand, cannot deny something I know to be so true and real.  I may not be able to explain it, but I don't have to..thank goodness! lol
devildogfo
Member
+32|6770|Camp Lejeune

CameronPoe wrote:

I often criticise religion and use quite inflammatory language when talking about it but those views are what I personally think about religion, they are not an attempt to win anyone over to atheism.
That is what he is talking about, and what I agree with. Why is it so hard to realize that these are deeply personal beliefs and you should have a bit of respect when talking to someone about it. That means intelligent conversation WITHOUT "inflammatory language." Being offensive cannot be justified by saying "Well I never said they should be atheist."
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7029|SE London

IRONCHEF wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Well IRONCHEF - you can call it 'healing' or you can call it 'her antibodies combatting the oncoming bout of flu'.
No, only YOU can say that.  I said what it was.  Something medicine and the great minds of this world cannot fathom.  And it's not like it's new information.  God has been doing things in emergency rooms and in homes and in battlefields for many generations that we could not describe, define, scientifically or logically prove if we tried.  Some embrace it..some, call it nonsense.  I'm sorry you don't accept it for what it is.  I, on the other hand, cannot deny something I know to be so true and real.  I may not be able to explain it, but I don't have to..thank goodness! lol
Any examples?
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|7003

IRONCHEF wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Well IRONCHEF - you can call it 'healing' or you can call it 'her antibodies combatting the oncoming bout of flu'.
No, only YOU can say that.  I said what it was.  Something medicine and the great minds of this world cannot fathom.  And it's not like it's new information.  God has been doing things in emergency rooms and in homes and in battlefields for many generations that we could not describe, define, scientifically or logically prove if we tried.  Some embrace it..some, call it nonsense.  I'm sorry you don't accept it for what it is.  I, on the other hand, cannot deny something I know to be so true and real.  I may not be able to explain it, but I don't have to..thank goodness! lol
Well I would be the kind of person who would hold out for an actual explanation - one must logically exist. One could equally attribute the 'feat' to magic! In medieval times I suppose I would have been the guy who would have questioned the assertion that the world is flat although there was no documentary evidence to support the claim. Everything will be explained eventually, by the ingenuinity, hard work and endeavours of man.

One thing I will say is that it is very easy for someone who believes in something to 'fit' events into supporting and consolidating their belief system. It's like a mother who can't believe that their son is a murderer - her mind finds ways of rationalising the irrational to enable her to continue the delusion.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-02-26 13:08:30)

Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7049|132 and Bush

devildogfo wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

I often criticise religion and use quite inflammatory language when talking about it but those views are what I personally think about religion, they are not an attempt to win anyone over to atheism.
That is what he is talking about, and what I agree with. Why is it so hard to realize that these are deeply personal beliefs and you should have a bit of respect when talking to someone about it. That means intelligent conversation WITHOUT "inflammatory language." Being offensive cannot be justified by saying "Well I never said they should be atheist."
In addition, you must realize that so much of a person identity comes from their religious beliefs. It is an attempt to answer who we are and why we exist. Any inflammatory remark will be stamped on the very fabric of that persons being.

Last edited by Kmarion (2007-02-26 13:05:41)

Xbone Stormsurgezz
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6939|Northern California

Bertster7 wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Well IRONCHEF - you can call it 'healing' or you can call it 'her antibodies combatting the oncoming bout of flu'.
No, only YOU can say that.  I said what it was.  Something medicine and the great minds of this world cannot fathom.  And it's not like it's new information.  God has been doing things in emergency rooms and in homes and in battlefields for many generations that we could not describe, define, scientifically or logically prove if we tried.  Some embrace it..some, call it nonsense.  I'm sorry you don't accept it for what it is.  I, on the other hand, cannot deny something I know to be so true and real.  I may not be able to explain it, but I don't have to..thank goodness! lol
Any examples?
Would it matter if I gave you examples?  I"m assuming you want examples of divine intervention so you can dispute them away?  Or am I wrong and will you embrace them for what they are?  And yes, I have many, many sacred experiences that are huge, and even more little things that happen that I give thanks for daily.

Tell you what, I'll go ahead and give you and watch what you do with it.  While living in Brazil, I knew a woman named Benedita Soares who was diagnosed with HIV antibodies and she had aids.  After receiving a priesthood blessing from me and my friend, she no longer had the HIV antibodies nor did she have the symptoms for AIDS.

I know, I know...bad diagnosis, or incompetent doctors...or maybe it's back now.  Again, if you haven't experienced these things, you won't understand them and can't really evaluate them as false or unreal occurences.
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6939|Northern California
Poe, Bert,

You know, Jesus brought people back to life from death, he healed sick people (not just the common cold sickness but lifelong illnesses, palsy, crippling conditions, etc), and people in his company commented the same exact way you two are commenting.  Of course you don't believe that Jesus actually existed because there's no census record from Nazareth from his time, but it still happened.  My point being, and I believe many other religious types reading the posts on this thread aren't commenting like I am is because they are saying "it won't do any good because they just can't be reasoned with" or "such things are too sacred to comment on" (something I've said in the past).   It's ok, and I'm certainly not faulting you or criticizing you for anything.  Please believe me when I say I still regard you two as friendlies, and I'm sorry if I"m rubbing you the right way.  It's just when people try to tell me that my fully qualified and proven beliefs are false that I'm easily provoked into such debate.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|7003

IRONCHEF wrote:

Poe, Bert,

You know, Jesus brought people back to life from death, he healed sick people (not just the common cold sickness but lifelong illnesses, palsy, crippling conditions, etc), and people in his company commented the same exact way you two are commenting.  Of course you don't believe that Jesus actually existed because there's no census record from Nazareth from his time, but it still happened.  My point being, and I believe many other religious types reading the posts on this thread aren't commenting like I am is because they are saying "it won't do any good because they just can't be reasoned with" or "such things are too sacred to comment on" (something I've said in the past).   It's ok, and I'm certainly not faulting you or criticizing you for anything.  Please believe me when I say I still regard you two as friendlies, and I'm sorry if I"m rubbing you the right way.  It's just when people try to tell me that my fully qualified and proven beliefs are false that I'm easily provoked into such debate.
This thread has officially degenerated. This was not the purpose of the thread and we are all guilty of degenerating it to this. You post 'beliefs', we post 'disbeliefs'. Perpetual cycle of circular arguments. I'm comfortable with your views and I'm glad they make you happy. Return the favour and be happy for me in my atheism and my own personal truths please.

Poe signing out of this thread btw. cya

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-02-26 13:20:18)

Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7029|SE London

IRONCHEF wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

IRONCHEF wrote:


No, only YOU can say that.  I said what it was.  Something medicine and the great minds of this world cannot fathom.  And it's not like it's new information.  God has been doing things in emergency rooms and in homes and in battlefields for many generations that we could not describe, define, scientifically or logically prove if we tried.  Some embrace it..some, call it nonsense.  I'm sorry you don't accept it for what it is.  I, on the other hand, cannot deny something I know to be so true and real.  I may not be able to explain it, but I don't have to..thank goodness! lol
Any examples?
Would it matter if I gave you examples?  I"m assuming you want examples of divine intervention so you can dispute them away?  Or am I wrong and will you embrace them for what they are?  And yes, I have many, many sacred experiences that are huge, and even more little things that happen that I give thanks for daily.

Tell you what, I'll go ahead and give you and watch what you do with it.  While living in Brazil, I knew a woman named Benedita Soares who was diagnosed with HIV antibodies and she had aids.  After receiving a priesthood blessing from me and my friend, she no longer had the HIV antibodies nor did she have the symptoms for AIDS.

I know, I know...bad diagnosis, or incompetent doctors...or maybe it's back now.  Again, if you haven't experienced these things, you won't understand them and can't really evaluate them as false or unreal occurences.
It depends. I'm curious.

With reference to the example you've given there, there have been simillar examples fairly recently which were thoroughly investigated which did end up being attributed to misdiagnosis.
Here's one of the initial articles on the incident, before the investigation had been completed.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4432564.stm

It's my belief that there is always a rational explanation for everything, even if no one has any idea what it is.
BVC
Member
+325|7143
In my younger years I was Christian.  I never went to church, and the only elements of religious worship I ever came into contact with were weddings/funerals, and my Uncle saying grace every time we ate with them (they're more religious than us).  I gradually abandoned it for a number of reasons; disunity, hypocracy and stuff that just plain didn't make sense.  It was a gradual decision which I made solely on my own, without input from others.  I basically came up with what I later found was called the "argument from evil" on my own by the age of 13...the events in Northern Ireland certainly didn't help my view of things ("why are the christians killing each other in the name of god?")...thats just a couple of things.

Given that I abandoned Christianity in favour of Atheism, I needed to get my morals from somewhere.  It wasn't hard, treat others as I'd like to be treated.  Some of you will know this as the "golden rule"; its common across all major religions (including Islam), and in an Atheist context is actually quite close to the ten commandments, god stuff excepted of course.  Incidently, did you know that all of the ten commandments are alluded to in the Quran(sp?)?

These days, I'm seeing more of the same.  Sure there are people I see who fit the example of "good christians"; people who are friendly and kind, some of them are my friends.  But I continue to see stuff in the world which reaffirms my beliefs.
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6939|Northern California
It is a rather relaxed, non-directional OP so I wouldn't say it degenerated.  Posting beliefs and disbeliefs is how you debate.  Further, I have no problem with your atheism nor have I had a problem as was reported by someone at one point.  I did have a slight problem with the reasoning you had for why I believe things, but you were not inflamatory in the least, as you usually are with your level headed and mature debate style.
IRONCHEF
Member
+385|6939|Northern California

Bertster7 wrote:

It's my belief that there is always a rational explanation for everything, even if no one has any idea what it is.
Well to those who have experienced divine things (blessing from God), they are very rational explanations.  He promised, and he delivered.  Surely someone who created all things could prevent a tree from falling on you, or recall bacteria growing in my daughter's body.  Explaining how the USA beat USSR in 1980 is probably possible to rationally explain if you understand things pertaining to hockey.  But explaining how god heals sick through blessings and prayers is not going to be understood rationally for someone not familiar with god, blessings, and prayers.  I put that as "logical" as I could..pun intended. 
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7029|SE London

IRONCHEF wrote:

Poe, Bert,

You know, Jesus brought people back to life from death, he healed sick people (not just the common cold sickness but lifelong illnesses, palsy, crippling conditions, etc), and people in his company commented the same exact way you two are commenting.  Of course you don't believe that Jesus actually existed because there's no census record from Nazareth from his time, but it still happened.  My point being, and I believe many other religious types reading the posts on this thread aren't commenting like I am is because they are saying "it won't do any good because they just can't be reasoned with" or "such things are too sacred to comment on" (something I've said in the past).   It's ok, and I'm certainly not faulting you or criticizing you for anything.  Please believe me when I say I still regard you two as friendlies, and I'm sorry if I"m rubbing you the right way.  It's just when people try to tell me that my fully qualified and proven beliefs are false that I'm easily provoked into such debate.
I'm not trying to tell you your beliefs are false, but I would argue that they are not qualified or proven and cannot ever be so. Holding such beliefs purely on the strength of faith in a benevolent supreme being and living ones life in a manner that would please such a being, is fine by me. But any idea that this conclusion is based on logic and reasoning, rather than on faith, is incomprehensible to me. I cannot see how one can logically justify such illogical notions.
KylieTastic
Games, Girls, Guinness
+85|6900|Cambridge, UK

I agree with ....

IRONCHEF wrote:

I believe that to become atheist, you have to have serious questions about God.
However not with the sudden jump to ...

IRONCHEF wrote:

...and that something adverse happened to make you believe that.
Why something adverse? I'm not being flipant, and not trying to offend, but too me 'god' is just a made up thing like the tooth fairy or ghosts.... I asked questions as a kid and just thought that makes no sence... in fact I found that most of the answers when I was a kid were along the line of just "He does exist, its a fact."


IRONCHEF wrote:

If you're raised never hearing about a god or a supreme being, you don't suddenly say "I'm Atheist!"  You shouldn't have any idea what that is, nor would you have any substance behind that declaration if you don't know about religious belief.
No I didn't suddenly say "I'm Atheist"..... for years if anyone asked what religion I was I would just say "none, I don't believe in god". 

I'm not claiming that becoming an atheist isn't something that requires some knowledge and thought, but the same goes for religion: I believe everyone is agnostic till they are presented with some idea of a god, then they could stay agnostic, go atheist or believe..... which ever you are now their are always new ideas/opinions that may change your views from one of the 3 states to another.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,073|7219|PNW

Kmarion wrote:

Even with words like "undeniable, scientific, and fact".
What some atheists don't understand is that you cannot use words like 'undeniable' and 'fact' without them meaning exactly 'undeniable' and 'fact,' which is impossible to do with religion given the amount of knowledge of potentially supreme beings science presents to us. Therefore, they should stick with what science has discovered, rather than what it has not.

---

After skimming through this thread, I've found that it has become exactly what the OP has told us to relax about.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-02-26 13:32:28)

Rex08
Member
+4|6736
ok, here's the thing:
You cannot prove the existence, or lack thereof, of an omnipotent being with a system of limits. And that's all humans have to work with, a world of limits.

It doesn't matter whether there is a god or not. What does matter is How We Live.

So quit fighting ;p

Last edited by Rex08 (2007-02-26 13:36:54)

ATG
Banned
+5,233|6977|Global Command

EVieira wrote:

ATG wrote:

EVieira wrote:

Atheism has absolutely nothing to do with proving the bible is wrong. It has to with either not believing in god or believing that there is no god. Anyway you put it, it is also a belief. But allot of atheists seem to miss that, which makes them look alot more lost than anything else...

Kamrion was right on, though. Many of the atheists, agnostics, etc, here seem to be trying to convert you. Pretty ironic...
And what do agnostics try to get you to believe?

That there is no rational sense in believing. Perhaps being religious is a enviromental thing, that is, a thing born of many people gathering together, needing guidance.

Perhaps we postulate that it is a colossal waste of energy, and a argument in search of a point. How many people in just the last ten years had their lifes extinguished by some true believer? Too many. A rational person can look at a vial of medicine and determine that drinking too much may be bad, and therefor keep it out of the reach of children. Religion should be like that.
True, ATG, I guess I need to complement my post. Allot of "church-goers" are hypocrites, studying the bible and listening to the preacher but inside are as rotten and corrupted as any. Terrorist use peoples ignorance to manipulate people and say they should blow themselves up to go to "heaven". These are truly much more lost than any atheist or agnostic desperate to prove Noah's Ark never existed.
You still don't understand.

atheists pooh pooh Noah's Ark, agnostics go mmm. could be, but whatever anyways...could not be too.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6977|Global Command

jonsimon wrote:

Atheist and Agnostic have no specific definition, and it is easy to misinterpret another's use of either term.
Atheist don't believe in God, period.
Agnostics consider it unknowable until death.

Pretty clear difference there.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard