49 7

My husband says, google is his god, because it knows everything and always has an answer for his problem. Who can argue with that? When I read through the many post about people who say their agnostic I can’t help but notice they are referring to the written text they don’t believe in. While others are referring to the religious sector they don’t believe in. Some will say they don’t believe in the teachings of a god. A few will say they don’t believe in a god because of war, murder and all the injustice in the world. Very rarely will you find a post that will explain in the first person why they don’t believe in the existence of god. What are you referring to when you say your an agnostic?

Debbera 5 June 27

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


I say I'm agnostic because I see no eveidence that proves or disproves the existence of a God. Once science is able to do either of these than that will change, I'll Either become an Atheist or Anti-diety because I certainly would want to worship a God that lets the worldnbe thebway it is.


I believe there is no God. It seems self-evident to me.

I’m not agnostic. I am as certain of the non-existence of god as the sun appearing to rise in the eastern sky tomorrow. One part of the definition of agnostic is the belief that nothing is known or can be known beyond material phenomena - and I don’t hold that belief. It seems to me our thoughts are non-material and ideas like kindness, neglect, justice, betrayal really exist, are knowable and non-material.

If I find myself in a discussion about atheism and/or agnosticism I usually trot out these arguments:

  1. I cannot prove to 100% certainty that there isn’t an elephant running loose in our city but the absence of frantic Facebook posts, piles of elephant poop, the lack of any circus being in town recently gives me enough evidence to make a determination.

  2. if God, by definition, is omnipresent then there is no way to prove existence because one would need to experience or know the condition of God not being there. To know if God exists the condition of not-God is required (i.e. if all the text on a page is bold how would you know? Contrast with non-bold text is required).

However, I have had what I consider to be spiritual experiences where I truly felt the knowledge of the implications of the reality of the interconnectedness and interdependence of all beings on the planet, especially the human ones (to whom I feel a great affinity). I’ve also had road rage and felt significantly less connected.

I see all religions as pretentious and superstitious nonsense sanctioning and requiring a shared obsessive compulsive disorder. They feel the need to believe that certain hand gestures or body postures will conjure or ward off spirits or judgement. The texts religions produce serve to justify the superstition and group OCD.


I don't believe any gods exist, so I'm an atheist. The only reason I use the word agnostic is because no one can know for sure there isn't some god hiding behind Saturn or somewhere. The concept of god is impossible to falsify, so no one can know for 100 % sure there is no God of any kind. Most reasonable people don't believe in things without evidence showing it exists though. For example, there's also no way to prove leprechauns don't exist, but most reasonable people don't believe they do.


I highly doubt any god exists, but I'm open to actual evidence.

Liam Level 3 June 30, 2019

I don’t believe because the evidence is inadequate. That makes me atheist not agnostic though.

Not knowing makes me agnostic too



The vast and wondrous unknown. "I do not know" is the beginning of knowledge.


By not believing in the existence of God but not knowing if God exists or not. Taking the origin of the word literally. I don't accept what people say it's proof of existence or non-existence.


Agnostic means you don't have evidence not that you don't believe. That's exactly what I mean by it, that I have no evidence God exists. On the other hand, there's enough in the Bible to prove itself wrong. In that case, my lack of belief in the Bible is based in evidence.

Totally agree


actually I'm an atheist..... i couldn't find an atheist site. lolol


Having a naturalistic worldview, I reject claims without evidence and enjoy what's in front of me without resorting to explanations that rely on supernatural involvement.The world is wonderful just as it is.

No need for gods...when I need to know something, I look it up. The idea of a controlling deity is juvenile at best and sadistic at worst.


The Google thing is indeed tricky. I used to be a Mac guy; have been since the 80s. Now I'm a Google guy. I'm every bit as aware of the dangers of Google, but they give me what Apple does not -- all the online Google functions, Android phone, Google home, and I've just bought a Chromebook which was great value for money and fast as a rabbit. My expensive Mac died and I've had it with Apple and their over priced poorly made stuff. It's a whole set of integrated functions that I really like. But... but..I manage my Google account options carefully, and I use a private browser for most searching. I encourage others to do that also So, I exercise what control I can. God? No. But I cannot find a better alternative.

And I don't refer to myself as agnostic, but atheist. My reasons are quite clear and ultimately stem from a total lack of evidence, and a rejection of all mysticism, supernaturalism and magic.


There is little, if anything, we know at all in this life and this universe, with absolute, 100% certainty. Part of this is due to human fallibility and the fundamentally subjective nature of human knowledge and awareness. Therefore, we have to rely on probabilities, or what makes the most sense to believe.

Atheists or agnostics refer to God (or the concept of a god, or gods) when they assert what they believe, or don't know. That seems fairly clear to me. They are constantly saying why they don't believe in posts on here in the first person. I see that all the time.


I reference the lack of evidence. There is no compelling evidence that points to any god existing.


To me, being agnostic means that I don't know about the existance of God. Whereas, atheists claim to know that God does not exist. Religious people claim to know God does exist.

That's not quite right. Agnostic/gnostic deals with the knowledge claim atheism/theism deals with the belief. One coukd claim not to know a god exists but not believe any exist and would be both agnostic and atheist.

Wrong, that is not what Atheists claim. The only claim that Atheists have is that they have a lack of belief in a god. Period

A Gnostic Atheist makes that claim. A very difficult position to support!!

You can divide people by two dimensions - belief of non-belief (theist/atheist) and gnostic or agnostic (“knows” or does not know). So most are agnostic atheists - do not believe in any gods but do not claim to “know.”
Theists, however, mostly claim to “know” there is a god.
But when it comes down to it people can be any combination.


I like reading everyone's responses to this post. Very interesting conversation going on.

With that said, I consider myself to be an Agnostic Atheist. Agnostic because I feel that I could not prove nor disprove the existence of a deity or deities. However, the Agnosticism kicks in when I see—another poster has mentioned this in the comments and I gave it a thumbs up—poverty, mental illness, and other negative parts that exist in humanity. And if there is a god, then it is not one who cares about mankind. Therefore, it doesn't deserve any type of recognition anyway.

But yeah, the whole proof thing and that there are so many questions left unanswered is why I am more of an Atheist.


The only thing I'm agnostic about is the creation of the Universe. Furthermore, I don't ascribe the binary thinking of god or no god that you mention in your post. There are other possible options.

Some god or gods exist or no gods exist. This is binary because it represents all the sets. Its a claim and the direct negation. That makes it a dichotomy. Logically speaking there is no third option.

You're seriously going to have to share these other options with us. No God but mystical beings? Superhumans? I can't really imagine what would be considered in-between.


There is absolutely no evidence for a god or gods. Oh and btw google is not a university😃


I am an Atheist. The idea of a "god" is ludicrous. Obvious superstitious, pre-science invention of humans to explain what then was inexplicable.



This page might answer some of your questions. []

zblaze Level 7 June 28, 2019

I am of Freethought, a Freethinker if you will. I'm thinking that is most true of most


That's atheism. Agnosticism simply means an individual KNOWS he doesn't know if god exists, or not.
Atheists are always saying there's no evidence there IS a god, but agnostics answer, there's no evidence there ISN'T.

Nope, that's how believers answer. Agnostics say they have no knowledge about the existence of a god, mostly because there is no evidence available.

"there's no evidence there ISN'T." is a negative claim, and easily refuted.

Every testable claim by believers has been tested and function no better than chance or placebo. That is a mountain of evidence that no gods exist. Its not conclusive or exhaustive but it is evidence.

@zblaze How it that "easily refuted?" There IS no evidence there isn't a god. You can't refute it.

@Storm1752 Sure can, it is a negative claim. Absence of evidence is NOT evidence of Absence.

A negative claim is an 'appeal to ignorance' — the claim that whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa (e.g., There is no compelling evidence that UFOs are not visiting the Earth; therefore UFOs exist — and there is intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe. Or: There may be seventy kazillion other worlds, but not one is known to have the moral advancement of the Earth, so we’re still central to the Universe.) This impatience with ambiguity can be criticized in the phrase: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

@zblaze I didn't say it was evidence. But atheists think the absence of evidence in favor is evidence against. You can't have it both ways.

@Stuttrboy Could you give me an example of that "mountain of evidence" that no gods exist. Just one, is all I'm asking for.

@Storm1752 No, no they don't. If some do, it is an appeal to the ignorance of whomever they're talking to. Vice verasa does not mean having it both ways.

@zblaze To me it's a non-issue, okay? I don't think there's any such thing as a "personal god." That's ridiculous. And the textbook take of a "deist" who thinks there's one who set everything in motion and went AWOL is too. I have no concept of god. None. It's silly to argue over something like this. But people do. They certainly do. But leave me out of it. Just don't try to tell me there IS no god. You have no evidence.


If there was an all powerful god that required worship he certainly would be powerful enough to make himself known. The question then would be what created the creator. Evolution explains our existence. These three premises are why Atheism is the best default position.


I am an atheist because I have not seen evidence that supports the god(s) hypothesis, i.e. that they are real. I am an agnostic because I am not 100% sure that I am correct. Could there be some race of beings out there, somewhere in the universe that have evolved to a point that they would fit our description of a god? I'm not sure if we can ever clearly say "no." We can only claim that "we haven't found any evidence to support that statement yet." The evidence I have seen boils down to "I don't understand, therefore god," some sort of philosophical exercise that doesn't inform observable reality, or "I just feel that it's real" which is no evidence, only the same intuition that leads people to think a bowling ball will fall to the earth faster than a tennis ball when dropped under the same conditions.


I am atheist because I see NO evidence that any gods exist. All the "evidence" shown me by believers turns out to be flawed when I look into it. This puts "God" on a par with fairies, hobbits and ewoks.

Ding ding ding!!! To both posters! I was thinking all of this!

Definately on board with this reasoning;
Any other approach seems to split hairs,
with no grounding in reality.


Very rarely? There are two dozen such posts generated here daily.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:366689
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.