Agnostic Christian
While the separate terms agnostic and Christian have a well-defined context in Western history, philosophy, and theology, the concept of “Agnostic Christian” is a relatively new idea. This expression juxtaposes two seemingly contradictory ideas, but with an ironic force that is intended to focus attention, in a critically postmodern way, on each term in a play of meaning and thought.
Agnostic Christian, as a concept, conjures up the ideas of doubt and unsettledness and positions them against a context of faith from within a Christian framework. Even though a recent Internet search of “Agnostic Christian” turned up over 3.3 million hits, a search for a final or fixed definition was not immediately forthcoming. This unsettledness of meaning speaks to the “nature” and power of this term. As such, this entry is not meant to finally define the idea of an Agnostic Christian, but to open up a consideration of its rhetorical power and begin a conversation on the concept.
Having said that, however, some basic observations still can be made about the term’s use and the positions of those using it – or its variation, “Christian Agnostic.” Recent research on the Internet shows some trends. People calling themselves Agnostic Christians or using the expression to describe a faith position share some common sentiments. While this list is not exhaustive, some or all items may apply to those using the term Agnostic Christian, or to thinkers sharing similar insights:
1. A reaction against many claims by religious fundamentalists regarding knowledge of a fixed or final “Truth.”
2. A belief that religious values and human experience should inform each other and progress together. The Agnostic Christian thinker is wary of the strict fundamentalists who force experience into an ideology or system – who force “life” to fit theology.
3. A respect for and tolerance of a variety of faith traditions and philosophical positions.
4. A suspension of belief that the human mind can know, beyond doubt, that there is One final and fixed Truth in the universe. This position is independent of whether a fixed Truth exists or not, but rather a comment on our ability to know if such a truth exists beyond doubt. A more formal expression is “epistemological humility.”
5. A general liberal position on social, cultural, political, and religious issues.
6. A sincere belief that the Christian tradition has value and benefit, but that a critical look at the history of Christianity is needed to move forward. The violence and gray areas of the faith should not be glossed over and various traditions within Christianity need to admit past sins and myriad transgressions, such as abuses during the Crusades and Reformation.
7. A position that truth, or God, is in process and not fixed in time. That is, truth is not settled, like an eternal law, but progresses as our consciousnesses progress. Truth, or God, grows with the cosmos.
8. A focus on Christ’s humanity, and all this implies, is important. Some traditions focus more on salvation theology and the Godliness of Christ, but the Agnostic Christian will talk a lot about the humanity of Christ.
9. A desire to reconnect with Christ’s known teachings about compassion and love while doubting a faith in fixed dogma.
10. A respect for the power of doubt and its proper place in one’s personal faith journey.
Some Agnostic Christians are more extreme, or aggressively and philosophically critical than others. Along with the above seven positions, a few others could be added that mark off the more extreme cases:
A. A belief that there is a difference between “God” and God. That is, that what we say about the God of literature/the Bible could be quite different than what we may or may not be able to say about a transcendent Being, if one exists. While not using the term Agnostic Christian, Jack Miles’ scholarship in God: A Biography and Christ: A Crisis in the Life of God, is helpful here. Miles reads the Bible as literature and God and Jesus as characters therein. This critical consideration is quite apart from whether or not a transcendent Being exists objectively or as a matter of faith.
B. A belief that the God of the Bible is perhaps fallen, or imperfect, and, via Christ, knows sin in a most existential way – from the inside out.
C. A postmodern sense of “carnival,” or extreme play, about what is traditionally thought of as Christianity. The use of critical irony is a mark of this type of Agnostic Christian.
In closing, the postmodern aspects of the concept of an Agnostic Christian are the ironic and edgy play of the terms themselves, the critical take on whether we can finally know Truth, and a respect for a variety of traditions and faith positions.
See also Wikipedia’s entry on “agnostic theism.”
Agnostic christian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I used Wikipedia... shoot me if any true scientist of knowledge desires. It was quicker...
I was confronted about this play on words... I don't like Christians in an Agnostic forum "trying to convert" doubters. On the other hand if an unstable Agnostic or Aetheist there be then they shouldn't be labeling themselves as such until they confront ABSOLUTELY their inner turmoil about the mindphuk on the subject they received as a child.
Christians if you don't like Jesus in an absolute form stay away from church chalked full of "straight arrows" ready to take your money and if you are a free thinking Christian that believes that Jesus and God are the "straight shooters" call yourself something other than Agnostic.
While I am not offended I think most true Agnostics do believe that if you are in a direct religious or lack of a religious (Atheism) platform. You should have faith in your belief and leave those more happy in looking for the real Truth of the Universe ( the Agnostic if they are so inclined) and move on. Agnosticism is a Philosophy not a Belief. Kinda like Jews are a religion and NOT a race!
What do ya think? Anything to detract or add?