what exactly go the agnostics believe and why?
958335
Agnostics look around and see that little in life appears fair. Why would a God, who can do anything, create a world where a child can die because of some stupid adult made a mistake and caused the child to be killed. Something stupid like an airplane crash can distroy's the child's life, a stray bullet or any number of other things can steal the childs life. Why create a world like the one we live in if you were a God and knew all, loved all or even cared a wit about all. It makes no sense.\nOk, now, there is more to the story. I am not an agnostic because I was just incomplete with looking at the world in such a hopeless manner. Also, history shows that men and women through the ages have looked to and believed in Gods or God to give their lives meaning, purpose and hope in times of great sorrow. What is good enough for the history of mankind is good enough for the student of mankind.\nBelief I have come to understand is at least in part an act of will power. We believe is like, it seems like it is so, so I am going to believe it, even though I do not know it. However, this also is less than comforting.\nFaith however is a different thing all together. Faith is a form of knowing. Faith is a way of knowing that which you can not prove or believe unconditionally. Faith requires only a metaphorical leap off the face of a cliff. The rewards are worth it even though there is no proof. \nThe rewards are in the act of having faith. Somehow with faith, you know that life makes sense in some way or fashion that is beyond our everyday understanding.\nFaith allows the innocent child who was killed to live again to get a second chance, or to survive in some form that denies the final victory to hopelessness.\nFaith is a way to eternal life.\nThe agnostic is just not their yet, but he or she will get as many chances as is needed to get the job done. And also, we all take a very long time to see the light, and could be as long as a hundred life times to get there, some people are really stubborn.
724287
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_theism
884494
I think you may have your terms a little off.  \n\nAn agnostic is someone who feels that the belief in a diety cannot be proven therefore his or her own belief is one of ambivalence. They don't necessarily have faith, but they don't necessarily deny God's existence either.  They are simply saying they don't know.  \n\nA person who has a belief in a diety, but feeling the existence of that diety, or it's characteristics is unknowable would be a mystic.
413424
The terms come from Greek.\nGnosticism is a historical term for various mystical initiatory religions, sects and knowledge schools which were most active in the first few centuries. These systems typically recommend the pursuit of mysticism or "special knowledge" (gnosis) as the central goal of life. \n\nthe "a-" prefix in Greek means the negative/un-/not \n\nA-gnostics were opposed to this...as such that includes Christianity.\n\nTheists, believers in a god (not necessarily the Christian God), have only this in common.  \n\nA-theists, only reject the one proposition, ie that God exists.  Atheists aren't all necessarily rational, ethical, logical, or anything else. \n\nGeneralizations and assumptions about all theists are just as invalid and unwarranted as generalizations and assumptions about all atheists.
671496
Strongly deny the existence of god. \nBelieve there are no supernatural things like supernatural miracles.\ngo to beliefnet.com\nit shows what different 'religions' believe.\nincluding atheist.
361055
The term derives from two Greek words  "a" and "gnosis" which translate as "the opposite/against/un-/non-" and "to know" respectively.\n\nGnostics in the bible were ones who sought, not to know science) but to know as much as they could about God.\n\nLiterally then, an a-gnostic is one who, unlike an a-theist (who is against God), is one who wishes not to know anything about God.  However, in popular definition an agnostic who does not know what to believe about God.
742688
You are right, you are confused about atheists, you also have a very funny idea about what belief entails... \n\nAtheists have belief in evidenced things with proof, however blind faith of the religious kind requires no proof or evidence that is why it is called faith, if there was evidence for God it wouldn't require faith to believe in God. \n\nOne of the problems with blind faith is that you can believe almost anything through it, God, The Celestial Teapot, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, Vanilla Flavoured Fairies or anything that cannot be proved or disproved, this invalidates blind faith as a tool of knowledge.\n\nThe onus is always on the person or organisation making a claim to provide proof or evidence for it. When there is no way to test the truth of the claim because of a lack of proof or evidence it is called unfalsifiable.\n\nI have no beliefs about God I simply do not share the theists belief in the existence of God/Gods, I have no reason to think that a God exists and it is not hypocritical for me as an atheist to say so. Hope this explains it a bit better for you.
95723
Agnosticism is a doubt that there is enough evidence to prove the existence of god one way or the other.  There are both atheistic and theistic agnostics.  The atheistic agnostics believe there is no conclusive evidence, but lean towards atheist conclusions; theistic agnostics also do not think there is conclusive evidence, but lean towards there being a god, just an unknowable one.  A common criticism of agnosticism in general is that by avoiding a choice, you are still choosing, in effect choosing atheism.
1007652
Here is the definition of agnostic.\nag·nos·tic  (g-nstk)\nn.\n1. \na. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.\nb. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.\n2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.\nadj.\n1. Relating to or being an agnostic.\n2. Doubtful or noncommittal: "Though I am agnostic on what terms to use, I have no doubt that human infants come with an enormous 'acquisitiveness' for discovering patterns" William H. Calvin.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n[a-1 + Gnostic.]\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\nag·nosti·cal·ly adv.\nWord 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 gnsis, "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 "Gnostics" a group of his fellow intellectuals"ists," as he called themwho 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.\n\nhttp://www.thefreedictionary.com/agnostic\n\nI consider myself agnostic..the short definition is "I don't know"\nagnostic=I don't know\nI am not comfortable laying claim to atheism nor do I plan to join a church.\n\nSo your definition is incorrect.\nnice try at backdoor proselytizing though.
711247
I think they're referring to agnostic theists, those who think there is no way to know absolutely if there is a god, but believe in one anyway.\n\nAccording to Theism, the opinion that gods or deities exist, and Agnosticism is that existence unknown or inherently unknowable. Belief is defined as a conviction of the truth of a proposition without its verification. Agnosticism does not violate this, and this definition of theism does not violate agnosticism.\n\nThey can act upon their belief as though it is true but again, without verification.  They believe while admitting that it cannot be absolutely PROVEN that what they believe in is true.  Hey, I never said it was logical.\n\nBelief: to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so.  I pulled that directly from the dictionary.  So you're right in that they might as well be called theists since theists would possess the same belief... but to get unnecessarily technical, most theists would insist that they DO have "absolute proof", so those who admit to being without "absolute proof" or at least incapable of attaining such would be "agnostic" in that regard.
324226
they probably have atheist and agnostic mixed up
1075879
Agnostic believes that there is not enough evidence to either  support or deny the existence of a diety. An athiest means that they do not believe in the diety of the community God.  This typically refers to the JCIG (Judaic Christian Islamic God) or any diety in general.
362108
This is why I am agnostic.  There were just too many unanswered questions for me.  And there was a lot of hypocracy, especially in my congregation.  What's the point of *saying* you believe something when you actually don't?
233073
Agnostic, I imagine.  Although what you're explaining could be Judaism as well...
706504
I agree... what is it they believe and what possible good reason could they have for believing?  And why would they stick with it for so long?   Good question... no answer.
737213
Atheist versus agnostic?\n\nFrom the American Heritage Dictionary:\n\nAgnos·tic - One who believes that there can be no proof of the existence of God but does not deny the possibility that God exists.\n\nAtheism 1.a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods. 2. Godlessness; immorality.\n\nIn other words,\nthe agnostic doubts that God exists but leaves the finding of God open as a possibility ("gnosis" knowing, seeing; "a" not)\n\nThe atheist denies that God exists ("a" not; "theo" God).\n\nThis raises the question, "How could we prove God?" \n\nGod has no image, says the Bible. That is, with scientific means as practiced nowadays in a materialistic way, we will not be able to prove God!\n\nHowever, advanced logic may lead us to realize that their must a God, Creator of all things and in all things, as the Bible states.\n\nGood question. Thanks.\nCordially, India.Magica
686916
Every other answer so far is wrong.  To answer this question you have to know the source:\n\nThe term 'agnostic' was coined by Thomas Huxley and it refers quite simply to a person who holds the view that it is wrong to assert the truth of a proposition without logically satisfactory evidence. \n\nSo, an agnostic would say that it's wrong to say "God exists" or "No gods exist" without the argument or evidence to back it up.  Moreover, the agnostic would say that it's immoral for a person to tell someone else that they *ought* to believe in the existence of a god or gods without providing logically satisfactory evidence.\n\nA 'theist' is defined as someone who believes in the existence of a god or gods, so an atheist is anyone who is not a theist.\n\nNote that you can be agnostic and also an atheist, or agnostic and a theist, or not agnostic and an atheist, or not agnostic and a theist.\n\nHope this helps...  :-)