Greetings

SirArthur · 08-29-2007, 06:58 PM

I'm a 29 y.o. Portuguese long term agnostic theist based on Christianity.
I understand Christianity as the whole group of Christians; Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox, Evangelists, etc. Since I base my judgment on the behavior of that religion practicer's and not on their dogmatic and theological content.

I'd been lucky enough to born in a hybrid Protestant (Methodist)/Catholic family and by so dodge the tradition of baptism of babies.

Here goes one of my essays on Agnosticism posted into European Union forum under the title "Relief of an Agnostic" which may help on understanding my view over Agnosticism:

Quote:

Despite it's semantic, without knowledge, Agnosticism doesn't stand for ignorance, but the acknowledgment that we are yet unable to say on sure and without any dogmatic shadow whether God exists or not.
It comes then that an Agnostic normally knows even more religions than religious people. On the seek for any answer is normal that an Agnostic studies many of the religions available, unlikely religious people whom normally relies on a single book that they dogmatically accept as true.

Agnosticism relies than, and due to impossibility to exactly know that God exists, on moral conduct according to the major religion of their area, thus not strictly, once many dogmas overcome the rational thinking and therefore can't be simply accepted by Agnostics. Means an Agnostic from Christian origin will act more or less according to Christian moral rules and one from Muslim origin will act close to according to Muslim tradition.

Can then agnostics attack religion?

From the theological view, no. Since an Agnostic assumes that he doesn't know is God exists or not and therefore can't say that one religion's God does exist or not. But from the rational view, surely. Comes then that the ultimate tool to judge religions for an Agnostic to be the social results of the religion and not what they pray to.
For me, as a common western, turns out inadmissible things such as Sharia, since those laws are far beyond the acceptance of rationality and aims nothing but for a dogmatic load of "BS". They're simply unwise, sectarian, sexist, outdated and founded on absolutely nothing but on the speech and actions of one guy who claimed to speak with God (thus no proof of such he can present).

Are Agnostics Atheists or similar to?

Agnosticism is one state in the middle but nobody can stay exactly on the middle, we always tend to one side. On the case of agnostics there're some tending to believe there's a God, and therefore more theistic, others tend to believe there's none. Despite however where they stand they are aware that there's no proof at all about the existence or non existence of God and that assumes they TEND to one side DO NOT BELIEVE on that side.
On my case I'm an Agnostic tending to Christianity and to believe there's a God, but I try to leave a good buffer on that.
As to recall from this point however, Agnostics ultimately and despite to where they tend to, ARE NOT Atheists and can't be insert in the number of those. An Atheist BELIEVE there's no God and assumes such dogmatically.

Can Agnostics go to Church, Mosque, Temple, etc?

Yes. One point on assuming the doubt is to seek the truth. An Agnostic must gather as much knowledge he can on religion. Even on those that aren't of his own origin. Turns out a bit strange to accept a doubt as a dogma.

Can Agnostics pray?

Up to each one. One more theist most likely do pray, one more atheist probably don't.

Is there or was any Agnostic state?

Lay and Secular states may be consider the closer thing to Agnostic states. Strictly Agnostics is however impossible since Agnosticism lacks any doctrine that can be followed.

**The An-Jel** · 08-29-2007, 11:30 PM

Welcome to the Forum SirArthur.

Nice Piece!

El_Mariachi64 · 08-30-2007, 12:36 PM

Yeah, cool essay...

But where are you getting that there are more Deist Agnostics and Atheists Agnostics around? sources? I think that's a pretty baseless claim, seeing as how nobody really knows how many agnostics there are in the first place.

(btw - I would have thought it would be the other way around)

Other than that, good job.

SirArthur · 08-30-2007, 02:03 PM

Can you quote where do I say such thing?

El_Mariachi64 · 08-30-2007, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirArthur

On the case of agnostics there're some tending to believe there's a God, and therefore more theists, others tend to believe there's none.

The "more theists" part. I think I know what you mean. I think you meant to say "more theistic" , not "theists." I think the way its worded you seem to imply the number of theists, not that those tending to believe in a God were theistic.

I see what you meant, so my bad.

But you might think about revising that.

SirArthur · 08-30-2007, 02:52 PM

Corrected.