God??, pfff... who gives a hoot.... Grammar on the other hand.... "who say their agnostic" (their, strike one), "when you say your an agnostic" (your, strike two)..... Uuufff.. almost out !!!!!

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.

Welcome to the asylum. Enjoy your stay.

I'm an atheist and anti-theist.
I don't believe in gods, or "holy" books, or any religion, whatsoever.

I've never been agnostic. I've always known it was ALL bullshit.

I had a student in class once tell me that Siri knew everything.

I asked him to ask Siri what the meaning of life is.

Siri got confused and never answered. The whole class erupted in laughter.

(I just googled it, and google sent me to the wiki entry describing what the question "what is the meaning of life?" entails. Wow. That's really life-changing, google.)

Thank you for an interesting post. First of all, I probably would argue with your husband about Google. But then that is not the gist of your post.

I have considered myself Agnostic most of my life. I do believe that the term is Greek for, "no knowledge." So an agnostic is drawing no conclusions because she or he does not believe that human kind knows enough to do so. Science disproves the creation story in Genesis. But you do not have to believe in Genesis to believe in a being with all of the omnies, (omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence.) In fact, some physicists make God a scientific theory.

Then there are those that bring up the suffering in the world as if it says that there is no God. But then, that does not deny the omnies.

So there you have it. We are using our limited rationale to determine the unlimited. But Indian Philosopher, Deepak Chopra, says that we can use the intellect to go beyond the intellect, (from an old DVD, "God and Buddha a dialogue." ) So I guess we will keep trying. I do not think that we will ever figure it out. But maybe that would take the fun away anyway.

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.

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.

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.

Children born with cancer, destined to live a few weeks before dying a painful death, are proof enough for me that there is no all seeing, all powerful, benevolent God. If such a being exists, they are two of those three things, at best.

While I see things like Flat Earthism and Young Earth Creationism as demonstrably nonsense, I don't think anyone is in a position to say outright that an intelligence didn't have a hand in creating the universe and life within it. This is as undisprovable as it is unprovable (yes, I know about Russell's teapot and burden of proof.) At least until that being makes themselves properly known.

Maybe some intelligence did create the universe and life within it. Maybe it has created many universes in the pursuit of creating the perfect one. Maybe we are on a shelf somewhere, along with billions of other neglected failed experiments. "Oh bugger! I've created wasps again! Better start over." That would certainly explain why God doesn't seem to care about human suffering, in this universe, at least.

But on balance of probability, I am almost certain that there is no God, and never was. So my agnosticism works on the basis of it being highly improbable (but not impossible) that there is intelligent design behind life. As for the Bible: I believe anyone who has had direct communication with God was most likely of questionable sanity or hallucinating at the time. So the book is entirely man made. It is not the word of God, regardless of whether God is real or not.

Trust in Dog! Praise the pooch. For he/she will protect you in times of need.
Never heard of a dog that lies. Other than in the yard.

I don’t believe in god because there is no evidence of one.

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

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.

I do not believe in gods of any kind nor do I have a need to create a god. And I don't use labels either. I just don't believe in illogical things that don't make sense at all.

I downloaded Google's son Google maps into my heart and now I know where I'm going at all times.. He said I am the life, the truth and the way no man gets to his destination without me.

Never really had a reason to not believe in God other than I just never believed in God. Nothing pushed me away from God as the belief never sank in. Just sounded too much like a fictional tale that people tried telling me was real, like Santa and the Easter Bunny. Plus, the stories in the bible sounded way too similar to the ravings of my schizophrenic mother..

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.

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

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

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

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

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 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.