From: rstevew@deeptht.armory.com (Richard Steven Walz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.humor,alt.folklore.urban,rec.arts.sf.misc,alt.religion.kibology
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Date: 25 Aug 92 12:51:58 GMT
Organization: The Armory

In article <1992Aug6.171400.4668@doug.cae.wisc.edu> pochanay@cae.wisc.edu (Adisak Pochanayon) writes:
>In article <1992Aug05.035518.9289@deeptht.armory.com> rstevew@deeptht.armory.com (Richard Steven Walz) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul23.220035.347@news.columbia.edu> pw15@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Philip  Wang) writes:
>>>
>>>>I think people put too fine a point on this.   Agnostics proudly stand up
>>>>and say that there is no way one can know for sure, but the fact is
>>>>that the vast bulk of them do not believe there is a god, and thus
>>>>in my book they are athiests, (literally non-theist.)
>>>>The number of athiests who state that they know there is a god and that
>>>>it is impossible that there be any sort of god is small.   The Objectivists
>>>>are about the only ones I have met of that stripe.
>>>>Most athiests and agnostics are the same.  They think there is no god,
>>>>they admit it is possible but unlikely and that nobody knows for certain.
>>>>There's no difference between them.
>>>>-- 
>>>>Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-0366
>>>
>>>My perspective here is that atheist seems to be derogatory and agnostic more
>>>positive in the sense that I find in my experience atheists out to prove that
>>>God doesn't exist while agnostics don't think there is a God, but they don't
>>>discount the possibility of God's existence and therefore don't try to prove
>>>anything (or don't try as hard). I'm agnostic, but I don't try to prove that
>>>there is no such thing as dieties or supernatural beings (I do believe in
>>>ghosts). My point being that the way I see it, atheists are definite that God
>>>doesn't exist and agnostics just aren't sure and choose not to believe in God
>>>as sort of a default. At least that's what I do.
>>>
>>>philip
>>--------------------------------------------------------------
>>But agnostic means one doesn't think that one can know one way or the
>>other, not only that they themselves don't but that no one can know one way
>>or the other, nor can anyone state any "fact" about any such entity or
>>non-entity or none of the above.
>>-RSW
>
>   And as an atheist, I consider people who do believe in God or Gods to
>be often offensive because they are NEVER open to the possibility that their
>Supreme Beings don't exist.  I think that they are just too weak to survive on
>their own and feel they must be led, either by churches or an invisible supreme
>being.  I also think that they are annoying when they claim we are not open
>to ideas.  If someone showed me any *REAL* proof I would believe in a God.  When
>I ask for proof of the Bible, some people have the nerve to tell me the story
>of the watch on the beach (where they claim an atheist would believe that 
>molecules had suddenly formed together to spontaneous bring a watch into
>existance rather than creation by an intelligent being and then claim the
>same has to be true of humans and God).  There *IS* SCIENTIFIC PROOF that the
>Universe is older than 4,000 years.  There *IS* SCIENTIFIC PROOF that man did
>not exist on the planet Earth within 7 days of its creation.  There *IS*
>SCIENTIFIC PROOF for evolution.  There *IS* SCIENTIFIC proof for the Big
>Bang Theory of the Universe.  There *IS* NOT EVEN THE SMALLEST SHRED OF 
>TANGIBLE PROOF for the existance of GOD!!!  I would as soon believe in
>Scientology than Christian Mythology.
>
>    Oh and BTW, there is no afterlife.   You die and that's it.  Live for
>now and for your memory to be cherished but don't live for your reward
>after death.
>
>    PS  I hate it when people included entire articles in a long boring
>thread and are self-righteous.  However, since the Christian Mythologists
>seem to be so annoying, I've decided to stoop to their level just to show
>how annoying you cFac
----------------------------------
You sure think you know lots of things. That doesn't sound too safe to
me as an open-minded thinker. Too many monkeys have been wrong in the
past, science included. If you placed yourself as a hardboiled and
firmly bent agnostic I'd have a bit more respect for your position, as
it seems a far safer one to take. After all, you haven't been dead
yet, something totally weird and unrelated to the existence or
non-existence of some neato keen supreme being might happen after
death and you wouldn't be ready for it at all. 

-- 
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Richard STEVEn Walz   rstevew@deeptht.armory.com   (408) 429-1200 *
* 515 Maple Street #1   To remain ignorant enter in your KILL file: *
* Santa Cruz, CA 95060     /From: rstevew@deeptht.armory.com/h:j    *
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books