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.


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 !!!!! 😂😂😂😂😂

Thank you for pointing out grammatical flaws. English is my third language and trying to grasp the concept of its sentence structure nearly drove me bats. . I’ll except your strike against me for my flaws but, let me add, I’m much much more then my mistakes.

@Debbera Well then I know where you're coming from ( figure of speech ). English is my third language too and I have always been grateful and happy with everyone that have had the honesty to point my shortcomings along the way. That's how we learn !! Cheers.

Is there not a group for Grammarians. lol

@ColdFax I wouldn't it?

@ColdFax Yep, we're called Grammar Nazis. We're all over the internet.

@zblaze Fucking Right!

@Debbera you win 🙂

@bbyrd009 What did she win??

@kodimerlyn Thank you, once again, that's how we learn

@zblaze um, self- respect maybe?


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.


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.

Come on KK, now you're going to have to explain what a Gnostic Atheist

@zblaze No. No, I don't.
If anyone wants to know what that is, they can damn well google that shit.

@KKGator I did. This was the response; "Gnostic means “with knowledge”, that you claim to know something. Atheist means “without god”, that you don't believe in any god. ... However you can combine them to gnostic atheist. Then it means that you don't believe in any god and claim to know that there is no god."

Tough claim to support.

@zblaze Not really. There is absolutely no credible, verifiable evidence, to prove that ANY gods are real, or have ever existed in reality.
So, saying there aren't any isn't really that tough a claim to make.
There is no "there" there.

@KKGator Any claim is easy to make KK. That isn't the point. It is a tough claim to support, verify, prove. It is a claim that you have knowledge[Not Belief] of the non existence of a god; "I've never been agnostic. I've always known it was ALL bullshit."
You've always been an Agnostic, you've never had 'knowledge' that a god does not exist. You might think one doesn't, and obviously lack a belief in a god, but if you had knowledge you would be able to show it, and can't.
The position of a Gnostic Atheist is an 'appeal to ignorance' — the claim that whatever has not been proved true must be false, and vice versa. This impatience with ambiguity can be criticized in the phrase: {"absence of evidence is not evidence of absence":.

@zblaze Please do not tell me what I am. Arguing semantics means nothing to me. If I ever meet a god, I'll change my mind. Right after I get a brain scan.
Until then, I know there aren't any gods.
All religion is bullshit based on nothing more than myth and crowd control.

You are free to call it whatever you please. This is as far as I'm going in this "debate".


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.)


@Amisja Siri wasn't clever enough for that response.

@Amisja I asked Alexa the same question and she said 42 so it must be right.

@Amisja I thought it was white rats? HHGTTU?


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.

MrDMC Level 7 June 28, 2019

Little do you know that the principle you espouse is completely Scriptural, if decidedly not Christian? Manna is not called "what is it?" for nothing, eh? The tree of knowledge of good and evil, hello?

@bbyrd009 Well, he does identify as spiritual.....

@zblaze ha. "Eating from the tree of knowledge..." is strictly for those who say they know, talk like they know, right? "He who says he knows does not yet know as he ought." i mean "become like a little child?" ha

@zblaze "I said 'you are elohim.' " you, iow. No old white guy with a beard iow.


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.


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.


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.

Dogs be praised


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.

I should be called Intelligent Magic.

"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." ah, how else might you punish the parents for their retarded actions that caused the cancer in the first place then? And ps "benevolent" is not nowhere in there wadr k, God plainly has Israelites under siege eating their own children?


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.


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

You are correct and to my brain, reality shows no indication of god(s).


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..

Don't screw with the Easter Bunny. Warning you!


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.

William Blake made a spiritual map about 200 years ago. First you go into Bowlahoola, then Allamanda and then onto the looms of Cathedron. With help from the Daughters of Beulah, you can raise yourself back into Eden where Eternity lives.


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.

Exactly. Non of it makes sense. Fairy tales, passed down and re-translated over the generations.


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



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.

Totally agree


I'm always thinking in terms of the old guy with the beard.

I don't rule out the idea of god in the religions of the East.


Please tell your husband his God has crapped all over his 4th amendment.


The google shits significantly censor the truth. google owns youtube. way many truth tellers have been deplatformed. As well on pinterest, vimeo, reddit, twittee,...

Google and facebook track EVERYTHING about you.

I use fire fox, and duck duck go for search. They do not track anything about you.

Jacar Level 8 June 27, 2019

I don't believe in God but believe in


When I say I'm agnostic I'm saying that I don't know if there's a god or gods, or magic spirits or anything that explains the unknown. I don't substitute any religion for the unknown. I am comfortable with the unknown. The known world gives me plenty to contemplate.


IF you believe that an all powerful being that created the universe chose an obscure middle eastern tribe to be his chosen people and helped them to defeat their enemies and populate lands promised to them then you are delusional.
Read the pentateuch with an open mind and it is apparent that this polytheistic tribe gradually adopted monotheism to aid their acquisitive behaviour,. so why be agnostic unless of course if you believe that some of the Hindu,Norse,Roman,Greek, other gods may exist.


Some of us just don’t care if there is or isn’t
I’m 99.99% there isn’t
But I couldn’t give a shit if there was


IF,,,,there was a "god" then he is doing a crappy job. I am experiencing heart failure. Will have my chest cut open, because "god" made a mistake.

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.