The gospel of Gandalf?

oh shit! dont tell my conservative christian mother, she just saw it with my kids and super super loved it.

Okay, I know this has very little to do with this post, but he mentions that he's agnostic not atheist. This is a pet peeve of mine. You can be both.

Gnosticism is to know or to have knowledge. Agnosticism is the opposite of that; to not know.

There really is no such thing as a gnostic atheist or a gnostic theist, because no one can know 100%. So, we're all agnostic atheists or agnostic theists.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled comments...

^ Are you sure? Atheist as i have always understood it is one who believes that supreme beings specifically do not exist, whereas an agnostic is someone who believes that the existance of a supreme being is unknown or humans can't know it, it's beyond our scope. Agnostics can even be 'not sure' and yet to make up their mind, but i believe an atheist is a god denier.

Perhaps you can firmly deny the existance of any supreme beings and then say that if one does exist, we can't possible know or understand it?

Well anyway.. while it is possible to be both, we are not ALL agnostic atheists or gnostic theists. You can just be agnostic. I think you can even be an agnostic theist - you think there is/are supreme beings but that they are unknowable to us. Or perhaps even just atheist - in the same way people can believe in a god despite evidence, an atheist could deny one in the face of evidence, thus making agnostic a completely inappropriate term.

I think the logic of it is that one CAN'T know for sure because you can't disprove the unprovable, so from a logical standpoint, one must be agnostic, but since there's not a single shred of real evidence for a deity, and that the burden of proof lies on those who make a claim for one, you can remain fairly confident in calling yourself atheist with the ability to revise your beliefs should someone actually come up with credible proof (I'm not holding my breath). That's how I see it for myself, anyway. And besides, if MAN had not invented GOD in the first place, then I wouldn't be an atheist, others wouldn't be Christian, Muslim, Wiccan, or anything at all besides just ourselves. These labels only exist because of other people's religious claims.

Also Princess and the Frog was good fun! So glad Disney Animation is back on track! Keith David is my favorite voice actor.

@dannym3141

I didn't say you couldn't just be agnostic. I was referring to him specifically making a determination that atheism and agnosticism are two different positions that are irreconcilable which he indicates when he says something to the effect of "I'm not an atheist, I'm agnostic."

I'm saying you can be both. Gnosticism = knowing. Agnosticism = not knowing. Atheism = disbelief in deities. Theism = belief in a deity.

If you know god exists, you are a gnostic theist. If you believe god exists but do not know for sure, you are an agnostic theist. If you disbelieve in god but do not know for certain, you are an agnostic atheist. If you know god doesn't exist, you're a gnostic atheist.

No one can be a gnostic theist or a gnostic atheist because there is no way to prove or disprove the existence of any god. Therefore we're all agnostic.

^...for that matter, to all you obnoxious, self-deluded, atheists out there....How about considering becoming a Metagnostic? The unknowable is the safest bet going and you won't have to piss anyone off or make them uncomfortable with your confession while in mixed company when the subject of religion is breached.

Oh yeah, and TYT-the young turks remind me of the only boor at a party that can't seem to get the message that he's not welcome any longer...and I'm always the guy at a party that finds a way to prompt their departure while at the same time, avoiding a broken nose n' makin' em look like a dickhead.

Fairly sure you changed your comment, perhaps you made a spelling error.

^Both comments unedited. Shrug.