Sunday, June 7, 2009 12:28:15 PM
Too bad I'm late for this discussion but I couldn`t help correcting you: what you try to put in the word "gnostic" needs some different expression because this one is occupied. Gnosticism was an heresy which derived from Christianity in the first centuries AD so when you call yourself or your opponent "gnostic" in this thread it seems quite laughable to me. Nevertheless your point is clear and pretty reasonable.
Friday, June 5, 2009 9:26:32 PM
I am not labeling you, if you are agnostic, then you are, but you (and your profile) said you were atheist. I was simply pointing out you cant be both, there is easy certainy til doubt...or just doubt. if you are athiest, you are gnostic..and certain til reason of doubt..plain and simple..no judging, no label..it is was it is. If you are agnostic then fine, but then you are not athiest..you see? because you are no longer certainty.. ( refer to the chart)
Theist and Atheist are the certainty beyond gnosticism. You have it backwards, if agnostic was a certainty, then it wouldn't be a doubt of, because thats not certain..there`s no x and y axis, theres no rating system that narrows what you are, "doubt" and "certainty" define against each other,they aren`t the same, and cannot be used on a grid with out being an oxymoron