Agnostic vs Atheist

The clip is probably the biggest pile of horse **** i have ever seen, but worth a laugh, although it is a bit long you can quickly skip through it when you get your sound back, I thought that was what you where referring too, was just making sure no reading this thread would think i was serious

Guys, go to this address, watch and laugh hard.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5479410612081345878

tell me what you think of this.

The clip certainly illustrates the arrogant, willfull ignorance of certain proponents of the proposition foundational thereto.

Yeah, he talks like that--and if you get him in a diner with a pot of coffee, he will do it for hours on end.

Pretty much. Sorta with a little drawl, mosta the time. Is there someting in particular that gives you pause, or might your curiosity be unlocalized?

Never had any problem in that regard ... any time I feel a bit inconvenienced within that context, a trip to McDonalds works things out reliably, smoothly and efficiently.

Atheism positively affirms that there is no God. But can the atheist be certain of this claim? You see, to know that a transcendent God does not exist would require a perfect knowledge of all things (omniscience). To attain this knowledge you would have to have simultaneous access to all parts of the universe (omnipresence). Therefore, as an atheist, to be certain of this claim you would have to possess Godlike characteristics. Obviously, mankind's limited nature precludes these special abilities. The atheist's dogmatic claim is therefore clearly unjustifiable. The atheist is attempting to prove a universal negative. In terms of logic this is called a logical fallacy." (quoted from The Free Mind: The Newsletter and Forum of the University of Minnesota Atheists and Humanists 2(7), May/June 1996.)

Came accross this, any thoughts people ?

Quote:

Atheism positively affirms that there is no God. But can the atheist be certain of this claim? You see, to know that a transcendent God does not exist would require a perfect knowledge of all things (omniscience). To attain this knowledge you would have to have simultaneous access to all parts of the universe (omnipresence). Therefore, as an atheist, to be certain of this claim you would have to possess Godlike characteristics. Obviously, mankind's limited nature precludes these special abilities. The atheist's dogmatic claim is therefore clearly unjustifiable. The atheist is attempting to prove a universal negative. In terms of logic this is called a logical fallacy." (quoted from The Free Mind: The Newsletter and Forum of the University of Minnesota Atheists and Humanists 2(7), May/June 1996.)

Source : http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismmyths/a/omniscience.htm

BDV wrote:

Came accross this, any thoughts people ?

Quote:

Atheism positively affirms that there is no God. But can the atheist be certain of this claim? You see, to know that a transcendent God does not exist would require a perfect knowledge of all things (omniscience). To attain this knowledge you would have to have simultaneous access to all parts of the universe (omnipresence). Therefore, as an atheist, to be certain of this claim you would have to possess Godlike characteristics. Obviously, mankind's limited nature precludes these special abilities. The atheist's dogmatic claim is therefore clearly unjustifiable. The atheist is attempting to prove a universal negative. In terms of logic this is called a logical fallacy." (quoted from The Free Mind: The Newsletter and Forum of the University of Minnesota Atheists and Humanists 2(7), May/June 1996.)

Source : http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismmyths/a/omniscience.htm

Frank? Is that you?

BDV,

Presumably every Christian applies their own godlike abilty to declare that Shiva, Vishnu, and Ganesh do not exist?

So being a Christian is actually a logical fallacy? No Christian really exists?