On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 12:52:06 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 07:18:09 -0800, George Plimpton
wrote:

On 12/16/2011 6:13 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Dec 2011 12:50:27 -0800 (PST), Michael Gordge
wrote:

On Dec 17, 3:18 am, "Zacharias Mulletstein"
wrote:

I told you that athiests hate God.

Shrug, it is rational to hate an idea especially when that idea is
used to validate laws which force peaceful human beings to conform to
idiotic ****ing nonsense.

MG
Athiests, by definition, believe there is no God.

No, that's not the definition.

Strong atheists, or anti-theists, believe there is no god. Weak
atheists, or just plain atheists, don't believe in god. There's a
crucial difference. Anti-theists have faith that there is - that there
*can be* - no god. Atheists just don't believe in one, but they don't
claim there can be none.


No, that is the definition of Agnostic. An Agnostic does not believe
(in god). To him, a God may or may not exist, but it is of no
importance to him ;nothing is known or can be known of the existence
or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena.
An Atheist believes there is no God, and will defend his position
with fundamentalist, evangelical fervour.
It is worth noting that the 'positive atheist' need not have certainty
that God doesn't exist: it is a matter of belief, not knowledge (i.e.
- cannot be proved). As such,Atheism is a RELIGION - closely
associated with HUMANISM (not to be confused with Humanist theology)
and believes Man is his own "god".

By contrast Nihilist doesn't believe in ANYTHING.

Plimpton is right. An "a-theist" is one without a god; strong atheists
(anti-theists) believe, or reason, that there is no god; weak atheists
(sometimes called "scientific atheists" after the method, not their
profession) simply say there is no evidence for god that they think is
convincing, so they don't believe.

The term "agnostic" is widely misused. It was coined by Thomas Huxley
in 1869 and it refers to an epistemological position that says the
answer to god's existence is not only unknown, but also UNKNOWABLE.
Specifically, it rejects the possibility of "gnosis," or "spiritual
knowledge."

There are problems with Huxley's philosophy, which aren't worth
arguing. And the term "agnostic" has been so abused and misused that
it can mean any kind of a-theism today. But when you're distinguishing
varieties of non-belief, it's worth getting it right. Plimpton has it
right.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote
...
The term "agnostic" is widely misused. It was coined by Thomas Huxley
in 1869 and it refers to an epistemological position that says the
answer to god's existence is not only unknown, but also UNKNOWABLE.
Specifically, it rejects the possibility of "gnosis," or "spiritual
knowledge."

Ed Huntress

Agnostic is not the opposite of Gnostic, a despicable heresy punishable by
death.

-Raymond de Toulouse

On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 13:42:10 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:


"Ed Huntress" wrote
...
The term "agnostic" is widely misused. It was coined by Thomas Huxley
in 1869 and it refers to an epistemological position that says the
answer to god's existence is not only unknown, but also UNKNOWABLE.
Specifically, it rejects the possibility of "gnosis," or "spiritual
knowledge."

Ed Huntress

Agnostic is not the opposite of Gnostic, a despicable heresy punishable by
death.

-Raymond de Toulouse

A-gnostic means "without gnostic belief," similarly to a-theist
meaning "without theistic belief."

Take it from the guy who coined the word. Huxley knew what he meant.
d8-)

--
Ed Huntress