Agnostic:
One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.
One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.
Word History: An agnostic does not deny the existence of God and heaven but holds that one cannot know for certain whether or not they exist. The term agnostic was fittingly coined by the 19th-century British scientist Thomas H. Huxley, who believed that only material phenomena were objects of exact knowledge. He made up the word from the prefix a-, meaning "without, not," as in amoral, and the noun Gnostic. Gnostic is related to the Greek word gnÅsis, "knowledge," which was used by early Christian writers to mean "higher, esoteric knowledge of spiritual things"; hence, Gnostic referred to those with such knowledge. In coining the term agnostic, Huxley was considering as "Gnostic's" a group of his fellow intellectuals—"ists," as he called them—who had eagerly embraced various doctrines or theories that explained the world to their satisfaction. Because he was a "man without a rag of a label to cover himself with," Huxley coined the term agnostic for himself, its first published use being in 1870.
-American Heritage Dictionary
In my many extensive discussions with Jon, some our hot topics include religion and politics. Not surprisingly, given the state of our union and upcoming election, the conversations have increased of late.
In an effort to blow off steam, he joined a discussion group online for agnostics. He himself is a Unitarian universalist with socialist background and is a self proclaimed agnostic. He jokingly says things like "I don't have to believe in God because She believes in me" It's meant to be cute and usually stops ridicule and persecution in it's tracks. He had extensive religious education in his congregation ( which he still attends) and was basically told, "we've provided you the education,now you need to decide what it is you want to do with it."
I am an Episcopalian convert from Methodist. Born and raised in an interesting religious fashion, my mom was Lutheran by proximity - meaning, my grandmother had no specific denomination and my grandfather was Catholic. The only church that was within walking distance to their home that was NOT catholic ( the ONLY religious qualification my grandfather had incidentally) was Evangelical Lutheran. Hence my mom and Aunts were raised Lutheran. It wasn't strict and to be fair to the family - it's more the pomp and circumstance of the service and the sense of community that brought them there than it was the religion itself.
My dad was Methodist. Very religious family. Very protestant. Bible study, church school, Bible sewing circle etc. He actually toyed with becoming a minister in the latter part of his life.
I grew up learning about prayer and faith from my dad. It was very important to him, his relationship with God. He stopped the relationship when my parents divorced. He blamed God and ignored the relationship and presence. After his marriage to my step mom, he converted to Episcopal and rediscovered that relationship and nurtured it till the day he died.
I pray every day as if God were in the room with me and we were having a conversation. But I spend a lot of time as well, questioning existence. Is he really there? Is he a he? Is Jesus his actual son? Is it even likely that Mary was a virgin? These are questions that I ask myself often. I find that from a logical perspective, these questions have no answer that is readily available. Certainly not one based on facts.... just on faith. Which brings me to a bigger question. But First, more rationalizing....
The bible, is a set of stories and messages. Parables and Gospels and the like, My problem with the Bible is that in it's current form, it was assembled centuries later and was edited by Constantin and his cronies. We all know that history is written by the winners right? Edited? Does that mean there are stories and Gospels that didn't make the cut?
So, I set out in search of these things. I read The Gospel according to Judas and Thomas and Mary. I watched programs on the history channel, I researched on line. I spent time in the library. I attended other Church's and faiths.
The point being that I WANT to believe that God is who I think He/she is. I WANT to believe in these parables and Gospels. I just know that if I am to be the person that I am, I need to continually question until I find the answers that are satisfactory to my soul. But not just my soul. They also need to satisfy my intellect.
On that subject, I will say I have a fairly high IQ. It's not a superior intellect to be certain and it's not terribly extraordinary. What I bring to the table is my extensive patience to research and look for answers that are consistent with the nature of the question on the table. I am not satisfied with commentary like "Because that's how it's always been done" though there are instances where that is accurate and does suffice it should not ever be the starting point.
I can't say that I don't have faith. I won't tell you that I don't believe. I will tell you that in the definition of Agnostic in it's classic sense as quoted above, I fit that definition.
However - there are many kinds. Jon would be a Militant Agnostic. He is prepared to defend his choices and beliefs as well those of his loved ones to the mat. He looks for proof and meaning. He is a bit of a bull in china shop at times and detests proselytising in any form. He looks for the fight to prove his right to be that Agnostic in a country where "under God" was added to our non religious precious government documents in the 1950's. He believes that everyone should have the right to pray or NOT to pray. He believes in respect for all religious beliefs or NON beliefs.
That's just him being militant and I love that about him. We need rattlers and shakers. I am not that person. I am the person who does the research and hands the factoids to the militant to use in their battles.
So here's my main point. My main reasons are really quite personalized to me. The reality is that I do not trust that many people to start with. People are fallible. I love my family and my friends with every fiber of being, but occasionally they let me down. Worse yet - I let THEM down at times as well. Given that little piece of humanity, how on earth am I expected to believe in something unseen, and unproven?
My Mom is a little agnostic herself. She raised us to be good people, with good values, to be altruistic, help others, not to break laws, to be respectful of others, and to be tolerant and accepting of everyone's differences.
Being an Episcopal Agnostic means one thing to me. That I worship in the episcopal religion as my choice because I feel comfortable there. Also I worship there because I believe that in order to gain the answers I seek, one cannot sit on the sidelines and complain, ridicule or criticize. You have to be in it to win it. You have to participate in order to gain understanding, answers or... dare I say it? Faith.
I don't know if I can find the answers. I don't know if they do or do not exist. What I do know is that I will persevere in my own way. If I need help along the way, I ask for it. I discuss these things with my priest often and I sift through them regularly.
Being an Agnostic isn't really a bad thing. It means asking questions and seeking answers. You can believe that a God exists and by being agnostic, seeking the means to prove that to YOURSELF. However that proof comes to fruition. The beauty of this is, what is proof to one, is blasphemy to another.
That's what makes the freedom of religion that our country was founded on so prescient. It's a cornerstone and a foundation of our country that needs to be protected.
I'm not a political person, I happily leave that to Jon. He's political enough for the both of us. But I can and will say that we need to be a little bit more defined in our separation of church and state. And make sure that those things that are in the "grey" area are handled to a reasonable and lawful conclusion.
At the same time, I really want people to understand the use of the word "tolerance". Tolerance is defined by the Random House Dictionary as:
1. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry.
I am, at times, concerned that we, as a country, don't show enough of this.
So I leave you with this. Asking questions isn't bad. It's smart. Educated people who ask questions can also be people of faith. Tolerance is the act of allowing people to ask questions of their governing and religious choices. Being educated, I finally discovered this about myself and I felt a little strange at first and Jon, knowing how that would be, talked me down a bit. Once I got comfortable with it, we were able to really talk about how we felt from a religious standpoint. A very meaningful and pivotal point for us.
Agnostics are not bad people - just folks looking for answers or better yet - looking for that one thing that will enable them to have faith that there is a God.
