Posted: Apr 17, 2011 4:14 am
by byofrcs
pfrankinstein wrote:
No, you asked me and I gave you my answer on the question of "good". There is no good that can apply to all of existence, only
And so to answer the question regarding "should mankind/science move forward as 'atheist' 'agnostic' or 'christian'?", you have made a category mistake in that you have presented three different things as if they were in the same category.

An "atheism" is to not have a belief about god or to have no belief in gods or to doubt the existence of gods,
The "agnostic" is to take the stance that the proposition of the claims about gods are unknown or unknowable
A "christian" is someone who accepts Jesus as their saviour or lives by ideals that are claimed to be from Jesus.

How can these three possibly be related to consider them an evolution ?.

Forgive my naivety but... Seems to me the lead "G" question remains more or less the same; whilst shifting opinions find evermore complex labels/categories/sub-categories and like minded folk form groups.

Simple questions can be answered most simply "Yes", "No"; or "i don't know the answer, I'm still looking".

"G" Question = Atheist "No", Agnostic, Christian "Yes".


Christian are (generally) monotheist so the god question is actually No for all other gods except one God. That would be fine but they also pile on a whole boatload of other nonsense about people rising from the dead and an afterlife and an ever-shifting set of miracles.

In no way is Christianity ever comparable to Atheism. Theism may be but not "Christianity".

Atheists (usually) consider there to be insufficient evidence for any god and (usually) don't subscribe to any supernatural realm.

These are not an evolution.