Not only does God have incoherent, contradictory attributes but HIs supposed ones as Primary Cause, Miracle Monger,etc. don't pan out, then their lack adds to His being vacous- meaningful like the unicorn, but meaningless as having substance.
What do you think?
Ignosticism is different from agnosticism. It's an early 20th century term, I think, that basically states that God has to be properly defined before we can debate existence. If God is defined as something not falsifiable, the debate essentially can't bear fruit.
Well, something like that. I'd bet wikipedia can clear it all up.
Supernaturalists must find evidence for His attributes rather than merely list them!- and show them cohenent and non0contradictory. Anon, I'll adduce the evidence against those two matters.