Penn Says: Agnostic vs. Atheist

hopefulmiracle01 Says:

Nov 22, 2009 - i believe that agnostics are people who more often then not have issue with christian doctrine but abstain from atheism in fear of damnation if wrong. they sort of ride the fence which i believe is worse. god is really not into being played. or letting people think he can be.

ieatpeopleok Says:

Nov 22, 2009 - @bobcranwell But no one would have believed that then, as it would have involved foresight. You're not saying "I think there will be a God in the future, when we discover him," you're saying "I believe there is a God NOW." The Pink unicorn is invisible as well. You're very closed-minded to be an atheist in respect to him. We could very well discover him in the future, after all. Buy the way, I'd like to point out that all the wonderful technology you mentioned was created by science. :)

Ormaaj Says:

Nov 23, 2009 - Technically this video is totally wrong. If god spoke to you and told you to do something like kill someone, then you must necessarily believe that god told you this and thus believe god exists. Its possible to believe that god exists and still disobey. It is not possible to not believe that god exists, and believe that god told you something in order to disobey something you don't believe exists... circular argument. Bad definition of atheism.

whatisit51 Says:

Nov 23, 2009 - whos this guy telling me I have to believe or not believe in his concept of god?

bobcranwell Says:

Nov 23, 2009 - @miken16 Yes, I agree that the gradual acceptance of evolution may have been the catalyst for many believers to give up on religion, but I suspect that they may not have been firm in their belief to begin with. And though I don't know the statistics from the 1800's, 84% of the world's population still believe in God. (or, to be more accurate, many different versions of God) So it appears that for many people, there is no conflict between science and religion.

bobcranwell Says:

Nov 23, 2009 - Yes, good point. But if people like Tesla and Marconi hadn't been open-minded enough to believe that something invisible like radio waves existed then, (not in the future) even though everyone else told them they were crazy, they wouldn't have made the discovery. And though I'm a huge science fan, I wouldn't say these things were "created" by science, I would say that they've always been there, it just took us humans a million years or so to discover them and learn how to use them.

ieatpeopleok Says:

Nov 23, 2009 - Well I was referring to your idea of "SENDING pictures, video, and sound" not the EXISTENCE of these waves, so I assumed you meant the devices we created and not the waves themselves. And your point about Tesla is good, but I would say that he made a hypothesis based on his observations and previous science. If he had just SAID they exist without ANY evidence (ala faith in God) and been right, that would have been a remarkable coincidence. So I think it's unnatural to equate the two things.

chippyprice1993 Says:

Nov 23, 2009 - But if they hadn't found proof of radio waves would they have stuck by it? if they had used arguments which cannot be disproven, but do not give conclusive proof under the scientific model, would the scientific community acsept their theories as correct and behave as such?

Idude893 Says:

Nov 23, 2009 - There might be a higher entity that exists in this universe, but if we spend our entire lives looking for this entity, our life would be wasted. That's why I'm agnostic, because it's more in the neutral zone, not like certain atheists and followers of certain religions who prefer to fight each other aggressively.

shawondemand Says:

Nov 23, 2009 - i guess we won't know if Santa Claus existed or not eh. I suppose we're all agnostic towards that statement too.

nukeum2 Says:

Nov 23, 2009 - There might be an 'Invisible Pink Unicorn' that exists in this universe, but if we spend our entire lives looking for this entity, our life would be wasted. Have you ever tried looking at the probability of things existing?

DDowza Says:

Nov 24, 2009 - You are watching the video, he says repeatedly that it is how it feels to him and his view. Congratulations on not being able to comprehend something so simple.

bobcranwell Says:

Nov 24, 2009 - @ chippyprice1993 1st question- Tesla worked on many wild ideas and hunches right up to his death, many of which have never panned out, so I think he would have stayed with it. 2nd question- Probably not. Science demands repeatable, verifiable proof. I had a beautiful, vivid dream last night in which I was conversing with a good friend who passed away two years ago. I can't prove it to you, I can only tell you and you may choose not to believe me. But that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

cochisekid Says:

Nov 24, 2009 - "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." -Albert Einstein

animation3dfx Says:

Nov 24, 2009 - cochisekid, If you are a Christian I really wouldn't bring up Einstein quotes because Einstein also said Christianity was pure bullcrap. That is the huge mistake Christians make when using Einstein to support their claims...lol

laughinoutloud1000 Says:

Nov 24, 2009 - i am a FULLY DEVOTED christian and i am positive beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is a God. a God which consist of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, i know that he is real because i can FEEL him in me. please if you would like to discuss this with me, i would be most happy to talk with you.

AggressiveAgnostic Says:

Nov 25, 2009 - my belief is that i am unable to know. there ya go

cochisekid Says:

Nov 25, 2009 - @animation3dfx You're right. Einstein was not "religious" in a traditional sense. Here's his view: "My religion consists of a humble admiration of the unlimitable superior who reveals Himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God." Einstein did not like to be called an atheist.

atheisthandbook Says:

Nov 25, 2009 - cochisekid, Are you a Christian? You seem to be hiding what you are. Second, I never said Einstein was an atheist (he was a pantheist), but he didn't have any problem with being referenced as one since in his own words he referred himself as an atheist when it came to the ideas of Christian and Judiast priests. So it still comes down to the same line: "If you are a Christian, you are pissing in the wind when you use Einstein quotes".

aoishounen Says:

Nov 25, 2009 - I asked my mother the same question and she couldn't answer. When it comes down to the basics people who believe in deities don't want to answer the really tough questions. Honestly why would I want to obey anybody that refuses to show themselves, let alone ordering me to kill a loved one in order to prove my allegiance.

gregory19862007 Says:

Nov 25, 2009 - @aoishounen it would be funny if she said yes.

sirbristel Says:

Nov 25, 2009 - penn, you're my fucking hero

Orion6415 Says:

Nov 26, 2009 - Seriously? So, Penn thinks The only way anyone who isn't Atheist is dangerous? First do you believe God would ask you to kill your child? Sure, he did to Abraham but remember.. it was a test and in the end he was given a lamb in his place. Penn stop talking about religion because you know NOTHING about it!

orlandrake Says:

Nov 26, 2009 - Except that primative bronze age goat farmer didn't know it was a test at the time and pretty much said "Okie dokie, you're the boss God, kill my son." So that's not really making your argument any better.

Orion6415 Says:

Nov 26, 2009 - So, your choice in argument is the insult of a man who lived 4,000 years ago. First you call him "primative" (primitive) based off his ancient existence. Then you attempt to insult him by calling him a "goat farmer" as if to insult the profession it's self. I know when people are losing an argument the best defense is an insult. and as much as I'd like to argue this with you I believe your total ignorance on the subject won't provide much of a conversation.