Then are we all agnostics since no one knows for sure?

OK; you're an agnostic by the definition I use. An agnostic, in my usage, is someone who does not know whether or not God exists. If he doesn't know whether God exists, it is not possible for him to believe in God, nor is it possible for him to believe that God does not exist. An atheist believes that God does not exist, so this is as much an assertion of faith as that of one who believes that God does exist. The positions of both the atheist and the believer are informed by their faith, not by science.

"the honest stance of the agnostic"
I use the word atheist to describe this not knowing because agnostic can mean the assertion that the question is unknowable.

I don't believe in God as I don't believe the FSM, although I can't prove a negative.

I've heard this sometimes called "weak" atheism, i.e. I'm just not asserting anything about God.

When someone else makes the choice for you (ISIS, for example) you are a martyr. You are not sacrificing yourself. Someone else is sacrificing you.

Which is the honest stance of the agnostic. I agree: I do not know, and through science, can never know, because God is not physical and cannot be seen, heard, felt, or measured by science. There is nothing science can ever say about God. The only knowledge I can ever have about God (in the sense knowledge is used in your post) is that he exists through logical necessity. Who/what created the universe must exist, or the universe could not exist. Any other knowledge I believe that I have about God comes only through faith.

The actions urged on the Christian by Christian teaching as found in the Bible are not "general," but "specific." My enemy is an individual who would do me harm. By caring about my enemy, I may come to understand him sufficiently to be able to deflect the harm without harming the enemy.

I understand the points you are making. However, the believing Christian would never sacrifice what he perceives as a greater good for a lesser good. He may have a faulty understanding of what is greater and what is lesser (from your viewpoint), but that is another issue from his motivation. The primary duty of a Christian (according to nearly 1500 years of philosophical theology is to seek and achieve his own happiness. He does that first by seeking God, who is believed to contain all happiness, and then to spread that happiness through himself to others, because his own happiness will increase by doing so.

Only if they're not fairy tales that you're rewriting with an objectivist flair in the form of children's books.

Had to come up for air.

That would have made sense too :)

LOL no shit. Make popcorn :)

Hear hear!

Thanks... gold coin? I'd be happy with checkered flag. :) excellent comment by the way.

Awe thanks :) if you ever need it again just come and grab it off the porch. I keep.it next to the step ladder.

Here's your flag back - 🏁

Thanks.

Very well said!

And in the extreme case, masochists love to suffer.

It's good to have you back. Do we get a gold coin for commenting at the same time? ;)

Why didn't he just tell them sacrifice was silly and accomplished nothing, rather than guilting his son into getting nailed to a cross in the name of absolving people for forever from their sins...by being sacrificed, when sacrifice wasn't necessary... wait.. oh good lord, I need to review what you just said, I'm gettin' all confused and stuff.
" God did not demand sacrifice. God made that plain by sacrificing Himself, so that man would not need to sacrifice."
He didn't demand it, but he did it to himself to prove that man didn't need to do it.
Oh for Christ's sake, make some sense already.

More rhetorical questions: (using my best 'Harry Stamper' voice)...you mean to tell me that just because Man had popularized the idea of sacrifice, that the best the omniscient, the omnipresent, the omnipotent being could come up with...the Best was to follow the latest trends and [copy] their bad idea by pretending to sacrifice his immortal son? Omni-creative?

Ranter, I'm sure there are superficial things upon which we would agree, but not on these fundamental ideas. Like oil and water, no matter how much you think you mix them, closer inspection shows they don't blend well. You are persistent, but sometimes it's the nature of things—to get stuck between reality and a 'hard case'.

Yep.

Mmmmmm no ya don't.

It does turn into a vat of vomit here and there. Bad mental digestion will do that. My condolences, kh.

Plus ten, Zen. Best summation ever of a rational philosophy of life.