Agnosticism vs Atheism and Religions

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by mhss1992

I have read that before, thanks.

Anyway, I actually even thought of this myself: as science proves certain things, the concept of "God" evolves and becomes harder to kill.
Something on the lines of:
A: God made this nest.
B: Actually, this nest was made by this bird.
A: God made this bird.
B: This bird became what it is due to evolution.
A: God made evolution!
And so on...

You're assuming that you can induce that this thing would happen ad infinitum, because it has happened many times in the past, even if they're just differenct theories with the same name. Though I actually believe that there's a much bigger barrier when it comes to the definition of the laws of physics themselves, it can also be said that this is like putting the goalposts as far as possible. So this is a fair point.

I'm not assuming it would happen ad infinitum. I am saying that given what we know, we're showing that when it comes to the global scope of our existence, we're finding that more and more (and by this, I mean everything to date) is explainable with our natural laws and science, and we push God further and further out of the picture. Therefore "God" becomes less and less likely. That's all it is -- a lowering a probability. Nowadays, that probability is so absurdly low that it's honestly not worth considering anymore until proven otherwise. That's where my stance derives from.

I am not denying the possibility that that chain would stop at some point. But what does it really mean to "consider it as a possibility"? How are you going to treat this "possibility"? We both have said outright that we don't deny this possibility. But what then? Where do we differ, specifically? Are you saying that God is simply more probable than I am suggesting despite the evidence?

Originally Posted by mhss1992

This is exactly why I hate dogmas. But if that's not a personal concern, I don't know what else is.

Yes, dogmatic justifications can be very dangerous, which is why I think it's always a good idea to make reasoned decisions based off *evidence* that is true for me, true for you, and true for anyone else making the observation.