I asked this a few minutes ago, the majority of the answers I got were preachy. And I was even told I didn't ask a question. So I'm going to try this again ...
Christians deny the existence of every God except the one they worship. Many pagans don't acknowledge the Christian God or Satan (even though they are often accused of worshipping him). There are many people of all religious walks that don't believe in the Loch Ness Monster, fairies, trolls, etc.
The point is, to believe in one being does not mean you must accept *ALL* beings. So why do many people feel that agnostics are ambivalent towards EVERYTHING?
Believing in a God doesn't automatically mean an acceptance of all things supernatural. So why would agnosticism suggest this?
2007-10-18 05:18:52 · 15 answers · asked by ??????? 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Oh, and please don't use this question as an opportunity to preach to me. If you want to preach to me, do it by email, but I'm asking you nicely not to spam my question with it ...
2007-10-18 05:21:10 · update #1
great gazoo -- I understand your point. However, do you assume that all Christians, Jews, Muslims, Pagans, Wiccans, etc, etc believe in Bigfoot, fairies, and banshees also?
2007-10-18 05:26:32 · update #2
Eleventy -- I agree completely with what you're saying. That's exactly how I feel.
2007-10-18 05:28:47 · update #3
I agree with Wes on religion, but I would consider myself as a default agnostic, based on the fact that I do not think man has the capacity to even begin to scratch the surface of our own existence. I do not believe we are to be the pinnacle of existence for all of time, and even entertain the idea we are not right now. Because of this, I cannot say any religion or religious belief is right or wrong. Now, personally, I'm also a bit of a skeptic of just about everything (imagine Descartes if he never got past his second meditation), so there is a real conflict within me sometimes. The scared little kid in me wants there to be a God with a plan and all that jazz, and the rational being within me can't buy into any of that.
The only true answer I buy is if I ever get an answer, time will be what brings it to me, so I'm not going to devote my life to a single religion, nor am I going to be so self righteous to tell others that theirs is wrong. They will know as I will in time, and no amount of debate or arguing will change that.
I will debate theories from the basis of logic though, and after seeing Ron Jeremy, I believe more in trolls than I do in God. Keep on keepin' on, Hedgehog.
2007-10-18 05:32:50 · answer #1 · answered by Drew 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why are you open on the existence of god when (I suspect) you are definite on the existence of dragons, mermaids, unicorns or solar orbiting teapots?
It just seems inconsistent to me as I see the same amount of evidence to support all of the above.
BTW if you actually believe in a god then you are not agnostic, you are a theist, possibly a deist.
Edit:
To answer for GG if I may. No Most Christians do not believe in those things. We know this because they tell us. But that is the point. They are inconsistent. Their god is 'real' despite a total lack of evidence (for some in spite of the actual evidence!) but Bigfoot, Nessie, etc. are not real because of the total lack of evidence.
Edit 2:
To say that God is love, or God is matter is just semantics. It really is meaningless. Why not say that matter is matter and love is love? To me this is just a way to avoid saying that there is no god. Why not say "god is pizza" or "god is bunny droppings" ? It makes as much sense.
2007-10-18 05:27:24 · answer #2 · answered by Simon T 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Great point.
The problem with Faith in one religion over another is that it requires the believer to deny all other possibilities.
Agnosticism does open you up to all things, unless you have faith that some of them are 'truer' than others.
An agnostic will claim they have no sure knowledge of the existence of God, by using a lack of evidence as reason. But the same reasoning, can be applied to all myths, and should be, unless you have compelling evidence for one belief system over another.
As an atheist, I believe they are all myths, because they all have the same traits, (requirements of faith, and no tangible evidence). I apply the same reasoning to the belief in Leprechauns as I do to the belief in Gods.
Everyone should do the same, but don't due to emotions.
2007-10-18 05:28:55 · answer #3 · answered by ɹɐǝɟsuɐs Blessed Cheese Maker 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It comes from the fact that agnostics, traditionally, are seen as questioning the existence of God, and by that I mean any God, not just in the Judeo-Christian view.
So if you believe in Allah, for example, you're not agnostic, you're Muslim. You have made a choice. If you reject all of it, you're an athiest. But most religions require, as a central part of their faith, that you believe in one god. Their god. If you believe in any others then you are not truly a believer in their god.
2007-10-18 05:25:21 · answer #4 · answered by Bookworm 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think we are all these depending on the entity being discussed.
If we're talking about a god who pulls the Sun across the sky with his chariot, I'm a strong atheist. If God is defined as a general life force that permeates the universe, I'm agnostic. If we equate God with love, or energy, or nature I'm a believer.
2007-10-18 05:22:57 · answer #5 · answered by Eleventy 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
I suspect that there is not a personal creator god. I don't know whether there might be some spiritual component to human existence.
I am content with not having an absolute answer, and am enjoying the search.
2007-10-18 05:28:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't know, but I guess that it's probably the same reason they think there are no atheists who believe in astrology....it's might be a statistics thing, they've only met ambivalent agnostics, so they assume all are?
2007-10-18 05:24:21 · answer #7 · answered by LabGrrl 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
A person who is an agnostic questions beliefs and facts that have not been proven.
An agnostic leaves his/her options open and approaches things with an open mind, listening to anothers point of view to add to his/her existing knowledge in order to reach a conclusion that he/she is comfortable with.
2007-10-18 06:05:17 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that people assume that just because you believe in god/gods or the possibility of god/gods that you necessarily believe in the tooth faerie or anything like that. When those sorts of comparisons are used, they are simply drawing a parallel between the ridiculousness of believing in faeries and believing in god. To me, someone believing in god is like an adult believing in santa claus - but I don't think that person actually believes in santa.
I hope I understood your question correctly.
2007-10-18 05:25:28 · answer #9 · answered by Nea 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well the evidence for faeries and leprechauns is exactly the same as any god you want to pick. So...if you apply the same logic that makes you a fence sitter about one god to everything else, consistency would demand that you are a fence sitter about that to.
2007-10-18 05:23:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋