 | | Re: Is religion dead in the water?
|
|
(...) I could say the same: A-gnostic: without knowledge of god(s) A-theist: without belief in god(s) (...) Those are essentially different ways of saying the same thing. Anything that can serve as proof for the one group should serve equally well (...) (20 years ago, 16-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is religion dead in the water?
|
|
(...) You summed up what I would have responded with very succinctly, Orion. I agree with you assessment of atheists, and proper definition of agnostics. -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 16-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is religion dead in the water?
|
|
(...) Actually you're confusing terms here. Agnostics believe that the existance of God is "inherently unknowable" whereas (most) atheists believe that God's existance is "unproven". There is a relativly small faction of atheists (known as hard (...) (20 years ago, 16-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Halloween vs. the Bible Belt
|
|
(...) I've actually known a few people who fall into that category, and, despite the fact that the Christian church tried to annex Halloween (remember All Saints' Day, the day after Samhain?) and basically failed (especially when compared to the (...) (20 years ago, 15-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Is religion dead in the water?
|
|
(...) ...until it becomes agnosticism, the only true non-religion. The fundamental difference between atheists and agnostics is that atheism, like all religions, makes firm dogmatic claims regarding the existence of a supernatural being and the (...) (20 years ago, 15-Oct-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
