Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position

[Rahn127]

Bel, there is a box in front of you, sealed from every side.

Can you give me a definition of what is inside the box ?

YES or NO 

simple question

Can you give me a definition of what is inside the box ?

What is the purpose of this thought experiment? I don't see how it has anything to do with the subject.

Yesterday I gave you three traditional definitions of God. Each of them was arrived at by looking at the world in front of us and using reason to think about things. 

If you don't agree with that reasonings' conclusions that's fine; a lot of people don't agree with it. But pretending there's some sort of secret box thing going on is not relevant.

I'll take that as a NO, you can't define what is in the box.
Do you know why you can't define it ?

Because a definition is a description of what something is, what it does, how it behaves, a list of properties or attributes, etc.

And you can't define something without first knowing what it is.

Your definitions of a god are hollow and empty and meaningless because you can't give a definition until you demonstrate that the the thing you are defining actually exists in the first place.

You can't define an unknown.
A god is an unknown value.

I contend the value is zero until such a time anyone can demonstrate that it's value is more than nothing.