Fellow agnostics

---

There are many things requiring faith regardless of any proof of the existance of God one may have. The personal proof of God's existance does not cancel any and all need for the requirement of faith.

Yes, but faith in God is the same as truth to the person who holds the faith. I have faith that the chair I sit in won't collapse under me, but if it does, it won't exactly rock the foundation of my world.Those disparate forms of faith are not on the same plane.

But it is a belief regardless of how strongly it's held or compelling the experience that manifested it.What is the motivation for calling it proof? Why not bask in it as faith, faith through belief.You may feel god working in your life, you may believe he's working in your life, you may have faith he's working in your life but you can never have proof. Isn't that the beauty of love and the test of faith, to believe in the absence of proof. Isn't that the Christan demonstration for the love of god.For me personally it seems almost heretical to claim proof of Christ. I find faith and belief far more admirable than wishful proof.

That Steve, all depends on any injrys you sustain from that chair collapsing.For instance if it breaks and a leg pierces your bowels, it woud indeed have a earth shattering effect on your life and world.

Yeah, but the idea of the chair collapsing, or the idea of being mortally wounded, would not shake my foundation of reality.In a practical sense, there's a probability, less than 100%, to the real-world things we have faith in. You might have faith that the road will will support the weight of your car as you're driving down the highway, but you rationally understand that there's some possibility that it might collapse under you. You believe that it will most likely support you, though, based on the actual evidence of your past experiences, where the road had held.On the other hand, for many, the probability of the existence of God is 100%. The thing is, it is based on no concrete evidence.

Damnit steve, why come when I inject a bit of nonsense to a thread tht will never have a definitive answer, you have to bring it back to reality?This will never be answered, the original topic can be, sure, its a yes or no type of question.But the debate of god will wage war forever, or atleast till the end of life on the planet.i can have definitive proof that god does not exist, and there still will be all those that belive that will say my proof is bullshit.This is a pointless debate, when we speak on god.

The religious man says "There is a God."The atheist man says "There is not a God."The agnostic says "Who cares?"The A2A member says "God damnit haven't we discussed this about 20 times already?"

If you have a mathematical or logical proof of God's existence, I'm all ears. Have you been holding out on us?The point of this discussion is not to settle the unanswerable question of Gods existence, but rather, Why do people believe this stuff?

Haha, that's a good A2A T-shirt quote.

Sad times sad time as I have no proof of god or of the lack of god. But if I did only those that aisded with the proof would listen, the others would say its not proof, its jsut shit i made up.

Originally Posted By: animefreak135The religious man says "There is a God."The atheist man says "There is not a God."The agnostic says "Who cares?"The A2A member says "God damnit haven't we discussed this about 20 times already?" LOL...ain't it the truth.

I guarantee you that if someone came up with a proof that made sense, either way, that most people would eventually listen.