So your statement “Evangelistic athiests are just as annoying as any other type of preacher” is non-falsifiable, because every example of a whacky theist with no atheist analog will be considered an aberration.
Well, actually, that’s your opinion.
Evangelical agnostics are no more or less annoying than evangelical theists or evangelical atheists.
Don’t sweat it, tomndebb. Chalk it up to that person’s vernacular. That’s how he/she pronounces it on the street, you see.
Speaking as a stone-cold atheist, Poly, my own views on other people’s religion, not to mention the value that various epistomologies and ontologies can have for various people, is considerably more nuanced, subtle, and respectful now. This is a direct result of time spent on the boards, reading the words of posters like you, Tris, Lib, Seige, tomndebb, etc., etc., world without end. 
I can personally testify (preach, brother!) that the seeds you’ve spent so much time trying to plant have borne fruit.
FWIW.
Horseshit. It’s just harder to do than proving a positive.
As an agnostic I can’t help but be bemused by the folks who will state so simply and unequivocally “God exists” or “There is no God” or any other faith-based assertion. It seems so ludicrously outlandish to be able to claim perfect (or even adequate) knowledge about such a subject. However, you will please note the - to my knowledge - lack of agnostic folks going into any relevant (heh) thread saying “I/We can’t know if God exists, so just shut up about your IPUs or magical sky pixies or your proof that God doesn’t exist or whatever the hell you’ve gotten in your head this week.” Why is this? Ask yourself this: what in the hell is the fucking point?
Theist: “God exists.”
Atheist: “No he doesn’t.”
Theist: “Yes he does.”
Atheist: “No he doesn’t.”
Fucking waste of time. If you’re going to assert such a thing, how about starting your own thread and bringing something other than an opinion about a metaphysical question?
Oh, and Loopydude?
(emphasis mine). Respectful? Calling a belief a delusion is respectful? Someone should alert dictionary writers everywhere to the sweeping change in the meaning of the word.
[sub]For the life of me I don’t see what’s so fucking difficult about not needlessly insulting someone, especially given the emotional charge of the topic.[/sub]
I dunno. I don’t think the God or No God(s) list of choices isn’t necessarily a logically invalid one to consider. Given that, either the theists or the atheists could be completely right (or completely wrong), depending on their positions.
As an agnostic myself, I claim no knowledge or ability to discern the “right” answer absolutely, or even if there are other options. I don’t claim on a factual basis that even both theists and atheists are wrong, and don’t see how anyone could.
I simply state my lack of credence and my preference for evidence of an independently verifiable kind (versus the other epistemologies claimed by some to weild “equal” validity for the purposes of determining existence).
Well given this definition:
“An unfounded or erroneous belief that is held in the face of evidence to the contrary.”
I’d say its an accurate description, whether the believer finds it respectful or no. I can’t help how other people react to what is, in my mind, a fair assessment of their beliefs, nor do I feel especially obliged to change my choice of words, given that “delusion” is a perfectly reasonable noun for the purpose of describing faith, as held by many, if not most, believers. If they find it disrespectful, I can only say we must agree to disagree. If they find it insulting, I’d say, in light of the near-universal refutation of my own position, despite what I perceive as its reasonableness, they take the example of the average agnostic trying to live sanely in this world among the theists and grow a thicker skin.
Poly, I look up to you. Cheer up mate.
It seems to me that the point of this thread is that we should be able to disagree with one another without being total assholes about it. Crazy notion.
We could probably profitably apply the same lesson to political threads as easily as religious threads. And, for that matter, education threads, gun control threads, Star Trek threads, etc, etc, etc…
NEVER!
And how is believing in an invisible being who lives in the sky and likes people to sing to him on Sundays not delusional?
[QUOTE]
I can see how people can be irritated at what seem to be absolutist statements, “God exists,” “God doesn’t exist.” Unfortunately, God’s existence can’t be tested in replicable experiments, so we have to look at tests of probability. What’s the likelihood of the existence of an almighty being whose followers claim is the foundation of all goodness, yet who allows innocent children to die through a grotesque natural disaster?
Note to tomndebb: Yes, it’s spelled “deity,” but some folks like me have a tendency to transpose letters when typing hurriedly, so you may expect to see yet more references to a god of restricted calories.
I was kind of being tongue in cheek.
I don’t know if I’ve ever heard of such a thing as an evangelical agnostic.
Being agnostic does not mean you don’t know if there is a god, it means you cannot know. Therefore, from an agnostic position, anyone who claims they do (either way) must be wrong.
And what evidence do you have that what you hold as evidence that No-God(s) is the truth is, in fact, proof that No-God(s) exist?
That is of course predicated upon the existence of definitive proof of No-God(s).
Bullshit. Utter bullshit. You can most certainly “help” it by, for one, not calling it a delusion. You can (The power of Christ compels you! The power of Christ compels you!) actually refrain from saying “Belief in God? That’s a fucking delusion.”
Incorrect. You can say (The power of Christ compels you!) “Okay, out of respect of you I will refrain from saying that you are operating under a delusion.” That would be respectful.
As an agnostic trying to live (sanely? Ha. It is to laugh) in this world among theists, I take issue with your wanton (and, it seems, happily disrespectful) attitude. You have here something you say just because you bloody feel like it and with absolutely no regard for anyone else’s feelings, yet you can’t summon the fortitude not to assess someone’s religious belief a delusion?
I haven’t the faintest idea. I wouldn’t know how to guess one way or another. This is one reason I am agnostic.
Sorry you’re not happy. Poly, but you’re not going to bring peace to thjis discussion. And my objections to religion are not limited to Christianity; I have no use for Islam, Judaism, Wicca, Hinduism, or any other supernatural belief system.
I don’t think that’s entirely true. I have known both theists and atheists that claim to be agnostic. Just because you cannot know does not mean you can’t believe one thing or another about it.
Oy. Lemme clear up one mindfuck and one misstatement.
IOW, how do you know that what you hold as proof is valid?
…yet you can’t summon the fortitude to not needlessly indicate to someone else that you find their religious belief to be nothing but a delusion? I can see it as a statement made in anger, but not something easily-justified in casual conversation. That seems like the exact opposite way to give someone else a chance.
Meanwhile, Futile Gesture, I was under the impression that there was more than one definition of agnosticism: the “I don’t know” school and the “Nobody can know” school. And of course there are those who will take some from column A and some from column B.
Well, you get 'em in these debates from time to time–people who barge into discussions to claim, not always tongue-in-cheek, that both atheists and theists are just being silly and wrong and clinging to their irrational faith-based belief systems and the only sensible view is agnosticism.
Ah, see, I’m just not so closed minded. I don’t believe in God (or I have no belief in any god, and positively disbelieve in some gods), but while I’m pretty sure I’m correct in those (dis- and lack of) beliefs, but I don’t want to totally reject out of hand even the possibility of knowledge of God (by some definition or another). (It’s funny, because some Christian evangelists will go to great pains to convince self-professed atheists that they’re “really” agnostics, apparently under the impression that this means that this means the heathen in question is more open to religious belief.)
The faithful are unable to accept reason, and the reasoned are unable to accept faith. Surely accepting that is the end of the argument?
(well It sounded good when I was drunk)
I am so very sick of strawman characterizations of God like the above. “God,” to an awful lot of Christians, is a MUCH more complex entity then a “an invisible being who lives in the sky and likes people to sing to him on Sundays.” Making such a deliberately peurile charecterization of what others believe is despicable.
Can’t you read? It’s a delusional notion, not a crazy notion. Be respectful. 
You didn’t read my posts very carefully, did you. I don’t have a proof one way or the other. Nor does anyone else. I find it rather delusional to believe in the absense of such a proof. Things get even more delusional when all the details get thrown in (He rose from the dead, He walked on water, He rises from the Pumpkin Patch every Halloween), yet there’s no proof. I say “I highly doubt it”. What’s delusional about that?
To me, it’s rather like insisting Leprechaun’s live o’er the rainbow keepin’ a pot o’ gold, and that I accomodate that position, despite the fact I’m quite sure it isn’t valid.
How can I respect others if I have no self-respect, nor demand respect in return? No, you are simply wrong. Actually, I disrespect folks all the time for the sake of familial civility, by participating in their rituals despite my utter lack of credence in them. I lie to their face on a regular basis, just to preserve their erroneous perception of harmony, and despite the fact that I am the one who must make all the accomodations to the comfort and feelings of others in my day-do-day affairs. In this place, I can actually say what’s on my mind, and do so candidly. I cannot think of how I might portray myself in a more respectful manner. I do not dissemble here; and I don’t speak my mind merely to insult.
I am not wanton in my position, nor, I think, without regard. I’m aware I may annoy, but I assume so is anyone else who holds an oppinion and states it openly. Ultimately, I cannot concern myself always with the negative reaction my oppinions might generate, especially in The Pit, of all places. I don’t expect, nor do I want, quite frankly, anyone else to treat me any more lightly, and typically they don’t.