₦airaland Forum

triplechoice:
It's not about god, but what is agnosticism.
You don't know that

Is agnosticism not about “god”?
Look up agnostos.

Theist sympathizers.

triplechoice:
Focus on the present moment. You mind is stuck in the past

What is god?

Tell ne. I don't know

We are explaining concepts that happened in the past.
Have knowledge on the history of what you are “neutral” on. Don’t be “neutral” on ignorance.

Read the thread from beginning to know.

LordReed:
What would be the point of being skeptical about skepticism?

Reexamining one's state of mind (or thinking), perhaps, or that of others?

I can after all have been a sceptic and now doubt my own scepticism by reexamining my sceptic position, and one may doubt the scepticism of others and examine their scepticism too.

The agnosticism and scepticism that one doubts and reexamines must not necessarily be one's own, since a belief that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God can be examined in its own right, as Mayn has proposed be done here I dare say.

Maynman:
If they say something is unknowable is that not a claim already?
Because if something is unknowable you won’t even know it is unknowable, so putting a name on this “unknowable” already defeats the principle.

Agnostics have not afiirm an unknowable 'something'.

You are confusing deism for agnosticism. You dont know the difference

triplechoice:
Agnostics have not afiirm an unknowable 'something'.

You are confusing deism for agnosticism. You dont know the difference

That something is called “god”.
Atheists don’t believe in “something”, they don’t believe in god/theos, it has names.

If you want to define it as “unknownable something” find another term for it.

Maynman:
Is agnosticism not about “god”?
Look up agnostos.

Theist sympathizers.

You failed once again.

What you brought is on agnostic theist just like we have agnostic atheist.

Agnostic theist are weak agnostics.

You're really desperate

triplechoice:
You failed once again.

What you brought is on agnostic theist just like we have agnostic atheist.

Agnostic theist are weak agnostics.

😂😂

Laughing stock

Maynman:
😂😂

Laughing stock

You're laughing at your own ignorance

triplechoice:
You're laughing at your own ignorance

I am laughing at your illiteracy.

It’s no more agnostic 😂

Are you a weak agnostic or strong one 😂

Been an agnostic theist is contradicting, make una stay one place

Know the difference and stop the blind arguments. A strong agnostic is not the same as agnostic theist. The former neither believes or disbelieves in a god while the latter believes in a god which he claims cannot be known.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

triplechoice:
Know the difference and stop the blind arguments. A strong agnostic is not the same as agnostic theist. The former neither believes or disbelieves in a god while the latter believes in a god which he claims cannot be known.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

Think for yourself; if he believes in higher power then he should just be a theist.

“Agnostic theist” is contradicting, at the end of the day you are BELIEVING in the existence of deities.

triplechoice:
Know the difference and stop the blind arguments. A strong agnostic is not the same as agnostic theist. The former neither believes or disbelieves in a god while the latter believes in a god which he claims cannot be known.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

Can you see the definition of “atheist” there? We do not hold a belief!

Maynman:
I am laughing at your illiteracy.

It’s no more agnostic 😂

Are you a weak agnostic or strong one 😂

Been an agnostic theist is contradicting, make una stay one place

You're right it's contradictory just like agnostic atheist.

But I'm not an agnostic theist. It doesn't make sense to me.

You cannot be neutral and still take sides. That's their own problem not mine

triplechoice:
You're right it's contradictory just like agnostic atheist.

But I'm not an agnostic theist

If you want to be agnostic, be it, if you want to be atheist be it.
Mixing it together is just hilarious 😂

Maynman:
If you want yo be agnostic, be it, if you want to be atheist be it.
Mixing it together is just hilarious 😂

It has nothing do with me . keep that for those who practice that .

Don't try to force something on me because you want to win an argument.

triplechoice:
It has nothing do with me . keep that for those who practice that .

Don't try to force something in me because you want to win an argument.

“Unknownable something”

Maynman:
If they say something is unknowable is that not a claim already?
Because if something is unknowable you won’t even know it is unknowable, so putting a name on this “unknowable” already defeats the principle.

Do they say things are unknowable or just not known at this time?

LordReed:
Do they say things are unknowable or just not known at this time?

They say it is not possible to know.

Maynman:
They say it is not possible to know.

Hmmmm.

Maynman:
They say it is not possible to know.

What did they say it's not possible to know ?

triplechoice:
What did they say it's not possible to know ?

you are in for a long miserable unending argument if you keep replying that dude. He will keep posting things that are irrelevant to the topic.
He drinks arguments like water

triplechoice:
What did they say it's not possible to know ?

Deities.

Workch:
you are in for a long miserable unending argument if you keep replying that dude. We will keep posting things that are irrelevant to the topic.

Why so pained, the agnostic

Workch:
He drinks arguments like water

You drink ignorance like water.

I already told you first learn what “god” means.

Workch:
you are in for a long miserable unending argument if you keep replying that dude. We will keep posting things that are irrelevant to the topic.

Your problem is comprehension.
What you posted is very clear, but you're trying to be clever by half with the whole world watching.

Let's see how you're going to escape again with your Houdini trick

triplechoice:
What did they say it's not possible to know ?

he's psychopath. If you think I'm lying, engage him. You will see for yourself

triplechoice:
Your problem is comprehension.
What you posted is very clear, but you're trying to be clever by half with the whole world watching.

Let's see how you're going to escape again with your Houdini trick

I think you are quoting the wrong person.
I'm not the psychopath you have been arguing with that post a lot of unwarranted definitions.

Avoid that guy

Workch:
I think you are quoting the wrong person.
I'm not the psychopath you have been arguing with that post a lot of unwarranted definitions.

Avoid that guy

It seems the deranged agnostic is pained

Workch:
he's psychopath. If you think I'm lying, engage him. You will see for yourself

You are the deranged fellow thats ignorant on this topic, look at another person showing you your folly.

triplechoice:
Your problem is comprehension.
What you posted is very clear, but you're trying to be clever by half with the whole world watching.

Let's see how you're going to escape again with your Houdini trick

It seems agnostics love the word “god” but not deities 😂😂

Maynman:
Deities.

You're annoying.

" It's not possible for any person to genuinely know whether deities or the supernatural are actually true to their descriptions, or mere fabrications ,regardless of sincerity"

This is very clear.Agnostics are not the ones who have given the descriptions from what's there in that you posted, but you want to dubiously tie to them as if they affirm any deities.

You cannot comprehend what is written in plain English .

SMH. You're not a serious person at all. I'm just wasting my time.
Go back to school or try to be sincere when you discuss with people.

Workch:
I think you are quoting the wrong person.
I'm not the psychopath you have been arguing with that post a lot of unwarranted definitions.

Avoid that guy

My bad. Sorry