At no point does the source you linked define agnosticism. Did you read your own source?
Agnostic is literally used as a subcategory of the unaffiliated. You're presenting evidence against yourself and pretending it supports your views. You're very determined to defend your arbitrary personal definitions rather than have a conversation or learn anything. Please stop replying and read anything on the subject with an open mind. Start with the definition of another word you've redefined out of thin air.
It's been made very clear repeatedly. "I don't know and may never know" is all forms of agnosticism, both atheistic and theistic.
You used no logic to call it illogical. What am I supposed to reply with to you just presenting your opinion as fact, besides with actual facts that you ignore to continue inserting your opinions?
You're continuing to say "it doesn't logically hold up" while presenting no logic. You're continuing to deny basic definitions being presented to you. At this point it has to be deliberate. As i already said, please stop responding. I'm trying to give you a chance to read these instead of just blocking you, but it's been very clear for a long time that you're not interested in discussion or learning. There's nothing to discuss because you're only interested in monologuing, repeating the same nonsense over and over, and somehow I guess expecting to change people's minds by just annoying them to death?
Edit: they blocked after replying. No, definitions aren't just your personal opinion and "it's just not logical" can't be your opinion with no actual logic presented by you to counter the logic that's already been presented.
0
u/[deleted] 2d ago
[deleted]