[generalbrando]

I haven't read this whole thread, forgive me if there's repetition.

Personally I have never fully adopted any one faith. I use the label agnostic. Agnostic seems to have gray area, but basically what it means in my case is that I have no convictions. I don't believe there is a God and I don't believe there is not a God (hence, I'm not atheist). The only real point I want to make for others to think about is this: it is true that we cannot absolutely prove the existence of God. It is a belief. However, to say that He does not exist is equally unscientific as saying He does exist. We have cannot absolutely prove that He does not exist.

Please don't take my view to be that all scientists should be agnostic. I use 'scientific' only in the root meaning that science means knowledge. I'm saying we lack the real knowledge to justity saying He doesn't exist, so to be athiest on the basis that we don't have evidence for His existence is a contradiction in my mind. I'm not saying atheists are wrong. I'm justing saying that they also believe in something, as was pointed out near the beginning of the thread.

As always, I mean no offense and I respect others' beliefs or lack there of.