Agnostics assert they do not know (and/or cannot know) whether or not a deity exists. Atheists, on the other hand, assert that no deity exists at all.
What benefit do you find in holding one position over the other?
2006-11-08 13:33:34 · 20 answers · asked by NHBaritone 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I think being agnostic is the way to go, because you arent disputing the possibility of something, you are just saying you arent sure. And lets face it, no matter how much faith you have no one really knows whats out there until we die, so being agnostic is the way to go.
2006-11-08 13:35:48 · answer #1 · answered by Jess 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Well, being a christian (bring on the bad ratings) I find it easier to debate with agnostic than atheists. Atheists are as sure that there is no God as I'm sure that there is one, and we both basically get nowhere. Im not going to convince them that there is a God, they're not going to convince me that there isnt a God. Agnostics dont really have an opinion and are more open to debate and accept my ideas
2006-11-08 21:42:14 · answer #2 · answered by Dani 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If beliefs were only about the benefits, I'd believe I was going to live as long as I want with nothing but joy ahead of me. But that's naive and I know it. So to answer the question, there really is no advantage in holding either belief.
2006-11-08 21:49:00 · answer #3 · answered by Phil 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think they're pretty much the same. Atheists and agnostics are looking for proof, neither one has found it. From what I've seen, both groups are still searching.
2006-11-08 21:40:30 · answer #4 · answered by Let Me Think 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Agnostics don't have to make a decision. I guess they see that as a benefit. Also, some people will get really mad at you if you tell them you're an atheist, so sometimes it's just socially easier to call yourself an agnostic.
2006-11-08 21:36:04 · answer #5 · answered by Amy F 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
People don't hate and fear agnostics quite as much as they hate atheists.
I am an atheist in the sense that I don't believe in God, which is different from saying that there is no God. I agree with another poster, who says that atheism is more honest. You know if you believe in God or not.
2006-11-08 21:36:10 · answer #6 · answered by Kathryn™ 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
An agnostic has an advantage over an atheist in the fact that IF something should exist, he will be able to accept it. Being more open minded. The atheist, however, might be in for one hell of a shock.
2006-11-08 21:37:33 · answer #7 · answered by GORDO BLAKHART 3 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Agnostics don't know if God exists but refuse to deny the possibility.
Atheists don't believe in anything and hold true to their "faith" - often times as we've seen on here time and again, as mean spirited as the born again Christians.
Personally, I think the whole battle is stupid. If you believe fine, if not fine. Just keep it to yourself.
2006-11-08 21:37:16 · answer #8 · answered by lilly 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Agnosticism and atheism are NOT mutually exclusive.
Agnostic - a (without) - gnosis (knowledge). If you are an agnostic, you do not know or understand god.
Atheist - a (without) - theism (belief in god). If you are an atheist, you do not believe in a god.
One can be an agnostic atheist (I do not believe in god, but I have no way of knowing for certain). One can be an agnostic theist (I believe in god, but I have no way of knowing or understanding him). One could be a gnostic atheist (I do not believe in god and I know for certain), or one could be a gnostic believer (I believe in god and I know him).
Agnosticism is not a position. It is an adjective describing one's position.
2006-11-08 21:42:48 · answer #9 · answered by abulafia24 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Honesty
2006-11-08 21:34:58 · answer #10 · answered by dogpatch USA 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋