Thomas Edison, said,
"We do not know a millionth of one percent about anything."
Let's say that you have an incredible one percent of all the
knowledge in the universe. Would it be possible, in the ninety-nine
percent of the knowledge that you haven't yet discovered, that there
might be ample evidence to prove the existence of God?
If I were to make an
absolute statement such as, "There is no gold in China," what is needed
for that statement to be proven true? I need absolute or total
knowledge. I need to have information that there is no gold in any rock,
in any river, in the ground, in any store, in any ring, or in any mouth
(gold filling) in China. If there is one speck of gold in China, then
my statement is false and I have no basis for it. I need absolute
knowledge before I can make an absolute statement of that nature.
Conversely, for me to say, "There is gold in China," I don't need to
have all knowledge. I just need to have seen a speck of gold in the
country, and the statement is then true.
To say categorically, "There is no God," is to make an
absolute statement. For the statement to be true, one must know for
certain that there is no God in the entire universe.
If you don't believe in God, what you must say
is, "Having the limited knowledge I have at present, I believe that
there is no God." Owing to a lack of knowledge on your part, you don't
know if God exists. So, in the strict sense of the word, you cannot be
an atheist. You're either agnostic or omniscient.
--- On Sat, 3/24/12, bestonnet_00 <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
From: bestonnet_00 <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] A little bit of religion never hurt anyone
Date: Saturday, March 24, 2012, 10:40 AM
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Clint
> > Sounds like agnosticism lol
> In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Richard Godwin" wrote:
> No. That would be no deity at all believed, not necessarily claiming
> there is none.
Agnosticism is a statement of knowledge, not belief and is compatible with both atheism and theism (whether believing in one without evidence is rational is another matter).
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]