Is this correct? Intuitively I feel there's something wrong with it, but I can't figure it out.
I wouldn't put atheism and theism inside agnosticism. I'm not sure these terms are clear enough to properly make into a good venn diagram.
Also, as for the thread in general, even though most people buckle down under pressure, and admit some skepticism into their belief of God's existence or non-existence, I don't think most people truly take agnosticism seriously. It's more a secondary trait, than being fully agnostic. It's not simply saying that you don't know for sure if what you believe is true, it's acknowledging the own belief or what you think to be true, as well as acknowledging the possible truth of beliefs which you don't hold up. If I never said it before, I'll say it now, the Cosmomological Proof is rational, logical and seems highly probable, but it hinges upon premises being true, and we can never know for sure if those premises are true.
*edit*
To be clear, the above isn't about anyone in this thread, or anyone who claims to be this or that. Simply that while it's true most people will admit ignorance, I don't think that makes most people agnostic.
Omega:
You just aren't fully understanding the opposing Physical argument for how
this universe came into existence. You are right that physics doesn't give us final answers as to the nature of existence, but you ignore what science does tell us, and why the scientific method was formulated in the first place. Quantum mechanics
can explain the existence of
our universe, the only problem being that it does so by expanding all that "is" to something larger than what we can experience, ever could experience, and is no more problematic than any theory regarding God's existence, and his role in all of this.
You've brought up math before, and I gather it holds some importance to you regarding reality: well, math can be used to postulate some rather weird possibilities. I believe the math holds up that gravity may not be a true property of
our universe, but a property leaking over into our universe, and is the reason why gravity is so weak. I mean, I don't propose to you that this is true (and although theoretically falsifiable, I don't see how it's practically so, so it may not even be science property), but what does it mean that math can be used to present such possibilities?
I say it means we just had to admit that we have no fucking idea what's going on.