View Single Post
Old 10-19-2006, 09:22 AM   #73
SkinWalker's Avatar
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Give critical thought a chance
Posts: 2,709
LFN Staff Member 
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Skin, you're a walking oxymoron. You do realize that atheists deny the existance of God while agnostics merely question it.
Years after I came to the conclusion that I should refer to myself as "agnostic atheist," I discovered the philosophical writings of a theologian, Robert Flint, who said,
Originally Posted by Robert Flint
"If a man has failed to find any good reason for believing that there is a God, it is perfectly natural and rational that he should not believe that there is a God; and if so, he is an atheist... if he goes farther, and, after an investigation into the nature and reach of human knowledge, ending in the conclusion that the existence of God is incapable of proof, cease to believe in it on the ground that he cannot know it to be true, he is an agnostic and also an atheist - an agnostic-atheist - an atheist because an agnostic... while, then, it is erroneous to identify agnosticism and atheism, it is equally erroneous so to separate them as if the one were exclusive of the other..."
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Still, I'm waiting for you to explain exactly what "God" must do to prove he's more than just bronze age mythology.
Surely, this would be an easy task for one that is alleged to be omnipotent/omnipresent: he could raise a relative from the dead; stop the planet from revolving for a day (he did in the OT); etc. Obviously an omnipotent being would know precisely what revelation it would take to convince me of its divinity. Wouldn't you agree?

A Hot Cup of Joe - My Blog

Not finding an intellectual challenge in the Swamp? Try the Senate Chambers!

Evolution and How We Know It's Right - Post your thoughts!
Debate Strategies & Tactics - Polish your online debate skills and offer your own advice
SkinWalker is offline   you may: