Agnostic comes from the Greek meaning "Not Know." It is the decision that whatever is being considered is something one can't know. Yann Martel wrote about having a problem with those who remain agnostic in his novel Life of Pi,
I'll be honest about it. It is not atheists who get stuck in my craw, but agnostics. Doubt is useful for a while. We must all pass through the garden of Gethsemane. If Christ played with doubt, so must we. If Christ spent an anguished night in prayer, if He burst out from the Cross, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" then surely we are also permitted to doubt. But we must move on. To choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation.The French philosopher (and atheist) Jean Paul Sartre taught that to do nothing is itself a choice. And so remaining agnostic, continually saying that one can not know whether there is a God is to effectively be an atheist.
Jesus comes into our lives as a point of decision. Was he God made man? If this is possible, it is a fact about which any person has a stake in not remaining neutral. But not to decide Jesus is the Son of God is the same as deciding he is not. If the early church got it right and Jesus of Nazareth was and is the Son of God, then there is an obligation in terms of how we live our lives. Right?
What did it take for you to believe in the truth claims of Christianity? If you don't yet, what would it take?
Is this something about which one can or should remain neutral? Can one be Agnostic without effectively being an atheist? Does the difference matter?
The Rev. Frank Logue, Pastor