Hi

[Succubus]

I identify myself as an agnostic because I honestly don't know if I can believe in God or not. I'm a follower of an Indian mystic named Osho, and he was an atheist (as his book "The God Conspiracy" makes abundantly clear, although his earlier books seem to indicate that he was originally an agnostic (from a Jain background), who gradually evolved into an atheist).

Hi wheatpenny!

Welcome to the forum even though you preceded me!

I often hear people define ''agnostic'' as a middle position between theism and atheism, undecided and sitting on the fence as it were. I usually respond by saying that you either have a belief or you lack it; there is no middle ground. I am inclined to point out something  you might find familiar, that ''agnostic'' isn't about belief or lack thereof, it is about epistemological honesty in reference to the possibility of our limited human mind in the here and now to have the power to know everything. It is one thing to lack a belief in gods, while it is quite another to claim as a matter of fact that no gods exist. That becomes even more of an epistemological problem when we acknowledge that the word 'god' can mean something far beyond our current representations and usages.

What caught my eye in your introduction was the phrase ''if I CAN believe in God or not.'', particularly in regard to the word can. I was curious as to whether you were referring to belief or knowledge.

Perhaps I have posted this in the wrong time and space as this is a thread for introductions. Perhaps you will clarify that phrase at some point. Thank you and see you around!

Excellent post Vanessa and welcome to the forums. I never could understand the agnostics position, as you say belief is binary, you either believe in god or you don't. There is no third option.