Why Agnostic?

[Ryft]

Perhaps I haven't explained myself clearly.

1) Person X has attribute Y.
2) Attribute Y is impossible / has been disproved.
3) Therefore Person X cannot have attribute Y, and the description of Person X in (1) is false.

Ergo, the Person X described in (1) does not exist.

Except that a six-day creation event is not an attribute of God. Nobody describes a six-day creation event as something that God is (attribute), but rather as something God did (action). As I originally argued (Msg. #140), it simply does not follow that God is completely different from the one portrayed if you show some action of God did not take place; "it is some specific action of God's that would be completely different from the one portrayed, not his nature or very existence; i.e., acts of God (e.g., six-day creation) are separate from attributes of God (e.g., omnipotence)."

1. Person S has attribute P.
2. Action X has been disproved.
3. Therefore...