What do you think?
Rate this book
Are You 100% Sure You Want To Be an Agnostic?
You’re not sure what you think about God. You’re not an atheist – you’re not that confident of his non-existence. You’re not a Christian or a Muslim, though you’ve got nothing against either of them. You prefer to identify as a humble agnostic. Some would say you’re sitting on the fence, but why not? It’s a comfortable enough place to be. Why can’t we all just admit we don’t know?
Yet sometimes you do have questions. Where did we come from? What happens when we die? Can anyone make sense of all the suffering in the world? What’s it all for? You wouldn’t mind answers to some of them, as long as no one tried to brainwash you. You’re not 100% sure that you enjoy not being sure.
Yet sometimes you do have questions. Where did we come from? What happens when we die? Can anyone make sense of all the suffering in the world? What’s it all for? You wouldn’t mind answers to some of them, as long as no one tried to brainwash you. You’re not 100% sure that you enjoy not being sure.
128 pages, Paperback
Published March 1, 2022
2 people are currently reading
55 people want to read
About the author
Andrew Sach
18 books7 followersAndrew Sach is on the leadership team at St. Helen's Bishopsgate. He was previously a scientist before training at Oak Hill Theological College.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
October 3, 2022
A great read that I would recommend to all those who would call themselves agnostic or refer to themselves as “sitting on the fence”. I was struck by one line in particular “If we don’t decide, time decides for us.”
June 24, 2023
A great read, although I’m biased towards the Christian world view. Authors use basic logic and a down to earth approach to prompt readers to think about the consequences of not having a saving faith in Jesus. For anyone seeking food for thought on that age old question ‘Why should I believe in God?’ An easy read, without spilling into a huge philosophical or theological discussion.
July 28, 2022
(4.6) I think this is a brilliant book for what it does and would be happy to give it to any agnostic or indeed atheist friend.
It sets out the different kind of agnostics there are and then doesn’t allow them to sit on the fence, emphasising both the rationality of belief in the Christian message and the seriousness of never seeking to really know.
The authors carry out this task with great winsomeness and humour, all without letting the unbeliever off the hook. Despite the message being challenging, you can feel the sense of warmth and love the writers have for the seeking reader.
The book is also exactly as long as it needs to be which is always a bonus.
It sets out the different kind of agnostics there are and then doesn’t allow them to sit on the fence, emphasising both the rationality of belief in the Christian message and the seriousness of never seeking to really know.
The authors carry out this task with great winsomeness and humour, all without letting the unbeliever off the hook. Despite the message being challenging, you can feel the sense of warmth and love the writers have for the seeking reader.
The book is also exactly as long as it needs to be which is always a bonus.
July 9, 2024
I read this book because a believer, who is a good friend, asked me to. I am a pretty "militant agnostic" and a philosophy teacher, so take this review with that in mind.
I was really between 1 and 2 stars, but I guess this book might be interesting for someone who has not thought too deeply about religious choices before. However, the book is so full of logical errors and half truths at best, I'd be very worried if this was the last book you chose to read on the subject.
One point they accurately make is that to "not choose" is a "choice"--which is of course a basic economic principle and most clearly articulated by Sartre in the 20th century. So by making that choice of "not choosing" you are taking a big gamble. This is really a rehashing of Pascal's wager which says, you might as well believe because if you do and your wrong, what's the big deal? If you don't and your wrong, oh boy. Of course this presupposes the nature of god, right? Maybe god is saying, I gave no one any real evidence, so any idiot who claims certainty in my existence is going to hell? Maybe? Maybe god wants different people to believe different things? Maybe god didn't tell you ALL of his/her plan in the Bible? Maybe...
Another example, the authors claim that to be an agnostic who says there is no compelling evidence in god is "arrogant and irrational" because you are claiming that you've looked EVERYWHERE and still have found it. Clearly no one has looked EVERYWHERE and therefore you are arrogant for saying so. Of course, this applies to Christians too. Have you looked at EVERY other religion and looked at all the evidence? Of course not, so when you say there is "one true god" I guess that is irrational and arrogant? No of course not, because then they have a chapter on what is "enough" evidence, which of course only applies to their beliefs.
Then the number of "facts" that they take from the Bible as true is laughable. They quote the book of John as if it was written by someone named "John" who had known and seen Jesus. I taught the philosophy class with a co-teacher with a master's degree in theology from Villanova who would regularly point out that it is common knowledge that John was probably written around the year 100. Even the earliest gospel was probably not written until 40-50 AD. This is particularly funny, because they dismiss the other gospels, like Thomas or Mary, because they were written so far "after the fact".
If you'd like a view of what scholars say about this type of thing this a great 40 minute podcast with a scholar of religion from UNC Chapple Hill on the fact that Jesus never said he was god (https://www.npr.org/2014/04/07/300246...). Interestingly, his colleagues who are believers don't dispute his facts and the facts don't diminish their belief, so obviously there must be reasons for belief that go beyond the simplistic claims in this text (the one I'm reviewing).
And for those who find comfort and happiness in belief, I'm happy for you. I don't begrudge that at all.
I was really between 1 and 2 stars, but I guess this book might be interesting for someone who has not thought too deeply about religious choices before. However, the book is so full of logical errors and half truths at best, I'd be very worried if this was the last book you chose to read on the subject.
One point they accurately make is that to "not choose" is a "choice"--which is of course a basic economic principle and most clearly articulated by Sartre in the 20th century. So by making that choice of "not choosing" you are taking a big gamble. This is really a rehashing of Pascal's wager which says, you might as well believe because if you do and your wrong, what's the big deal? If you don't and your wrong, oh boy. Of course this presupposes the nature of god, right? Maybe god is saying, I gave no one any real evidence, so any idiot who claims certainty in my existence is going to hell? Maybe? Maybe god wants different people to believe different things? Maybe god didn't tell you ALL of his/her plan in the Bible? Maybe...
Another example, the authors claim that to be an agnostic who says there is no compelling evidence in god is "arrogant and irrational" because you are claiming that you've looked EVERYWHERE and still have found it. Clearly no one has looked EVERYWHERE and therefore you are arrogant for saying so. Of course, this applies to Christians too. Have you looked at EVERY other religion and looked at all the evidence? Of course not, so when you say there is "one true god" I guess that is irrational and arrogant? No of course not, because then they have a chapter on what is "enough" evidence, which of course only applies to their beliefs.
Then the number of "facts" that they take from the Bible as true is laughable. They quote the book of John as if it was written by someone named "John" who had known and seen Jesus. I taught the philosophy class with a co-teacher with a master's degree in theology from Villanova who would regularly point out that it is common knowledge that John was probably written around the year 100. Even the earliest gospel was probably not written until 40-50 AD. This is particularly funny, because they dismiss the other gospels, like Thomas or Mary, because they were written so far "after the fact".
If you'd like a view of what scholars say about this type of thing this a great 40 minute podcast with a scholar of religion from UNC Chapple Hill on the fact that Jesus never said he was god (https://www.npr.org/2014/04/07/300246...). Interestingly, his colleagues who are believers don't dispute his facts and the facts don't diminish their belief, so obviously there must be reasons for belief that go beyond the simplistic claims in this text (the one I'm reviewing).
And for those who find comfort and happiness in belief, I'm happy for you. I don't begrudge that at all.
July 17, 2025
This book was lent to me a Christian friend, who knows I’m agnostic and presumably wants me to become a Christian. She’s a wonderful person and my negative review is by no means a reflection on her, or indeed any other Christian.
Having said that, I think it’s very telling that the positive reviews for this book are by those who already Christian. This book seems designed to be sold to those who are converted, in order to gift it their non-believer friends.
The arguments presented are, to be frank, really badly constructed. In fact the most useful thing about this book is that it’s a case study of how to alienate those who disagree with your viewpoint. It’s a real “how not to argue” situation. I’ve summarised the key points in a helpful list
1. Don’t assume your reader’s viewpoint and make straw man arguments (for example, the book assumes that the reader doesn’t accept the historically evidenced existence of Jesus. It also assumed that the reader doesn’t understand why people would die for a cause. I think the writers - ex agnostics themselves - have just projected their past selves onto the hypothetical reader. Most hilariously, it assumes that you’re scared of being naked. Sorry fellas, but I ain’t you.)
2. Think through your analogies. This book is full of false equivalences. It trivialises vast and complicated issues that your reader may genuinely *want* to try and be invested in. (For example, heaven is not a train station (which, btw, is my new prog rock band, come see us live))
3. Don’t call your reader “irrational” and “arrogant” or “smug,” just because their viewpoint doesn’t align with yours. It doesn’t make them want to listen to you, because it makes you appear smug (which, ironically, is an accusation that the book levels against agnostics).
4. Don’t explicitly call your arguments logical and brag about how much evidence you’re about to present, and then not really present any evidence.
5. Don’t go off on weird rants about why the Da Vinci Code is bad…
6. Don’t imply to your reader that they’ll burn in hell if they don’t accept your argument, when you’ve failed to make them accept your hypothesis that such an afterlife exists
Having said that, I think it’s very telling that the positive reviews for this book are by those who already Christian. This book seems designed to be sold to those who are converted, in order to gift it their non-believer friends.
The arguments presented are, to be frank, really badly constructed. In fact the most useful thing about this book is that it’s a case study of how to alienate those who disagree with your viewpoint. It’s a real “how not to argue” situation. I’ve summarised the key points in a helpful list
1. Don’t assume your reader’s viewpoint and make straw man arguments (for example, the book assumes that the reader doesn’t accept the historically evidenced existence of Jesus. It also assumed that the reader doesn’t understand why people would die for a cause. I think the writers - ex agnostics themselves - have just projected their past selves onto the hypothetical reader. Most hilariously, it assumes that you’re scared of being naked. Sorry fellas, but I ain’t you.)
2. Think through your analogies. This book is full of false equivalences. It trivialises vast and complicated issues that your reader may genuinely *want* to try and be invested in. (For example, heaven is not a train station (which, btw, is my new prog rock band, come see us live))
3. Don’t call your reader “irrational” and “arrogant” or “smug,” just because their viewpoint doesn’t align with yours. It doesn’t make them want to listen to you, because it makes you appear smug (which, ironically, is an accusation that the book levels against agnostics).
4. Don’t explicitly call your arguments logical and brag about how much evidence you’re about to present, and then not really present any evidence.
5. Don’t go off on weird rants about why the Da Vinci Code is bad…
6. Don’t imply to your reader that they’ll burn in hell if they don’t accept your argument, when you’ve failed to make them accept your hypothesis that such an afterlife exists
February 2, 2022
Disclaimer: I am friends with one of the Authors of this book
This is a short book which sets out different types of agnostic:
1. Those who don't know if Christianity is true because they've never explored it
2. Those who think it is simply not possible to know
3. Those who don't want to know in case it turns out Christianity is true and they are prevented from doing 'fun stuff'
The book is short (112 pages excluding references) and doesn't aim to provide a comprehensive overview of why God exists / Christianity is true. Rather the authors explain some of the evidence for Christianity and then set out some logical thought processes which aim to spark people's curiosity so that
- type 1 are persuaded to investigate Christianity's claims;
- type 2 are persuaded that they may find enough evidence that makes it possible to form a view; and
- type 3 are persuaded that if they do investigate it, and it turns out to be true, they will have a deep(er) and (more) enriching life
I am biased but I found it an enjoyable and thought provoking book without being 'heavy'. There's a number of points in there that agnostics may take issue with and wish to debate. I think that's the intention! The authors would be only too happy to engage in conversation with people on these points (and/or point people in the direction of others who would happily discuss them)
This is a short book which sets out different types of agnostic:
1. Those who don't know if Christianity is true because they've never explored it
2. Those who think it is simply not possible to know
3. Those who don't want to know in case it turns out Christianity is true and they are prevented from doing 'fun stuff'
The book is short (112 pages excluding references) and doesn't aim to provide a comprehensive overview of why God exists / Christianity is true. Rather the authors explain some of the evidence for Christianity and then set out some logical thought processes which aim to spark people's curiosity so that
- type 1 are persuaded to investigate Christianity's claims;
- type 2 are persuaded that they may find enough evidence that makes it possible to form a view; and
- type 3 are persuaded that if they do investigate it, and it turns out to be true, they will have a deep(er) and (more) enriching life
I am biased but I found it an enjoyable and thought provoking book without being 'heavy'. There's a number of points in there that agnostics may take issue with and wish to debate. I think that's the intention! The authors would be only too happy to engage in conversation with people on these points (and/or point people in the direction of others who would happily discuss them)
October 31, 2025
3.5/5 ⭐️
are you sure you want to be agnostic:
- good short read if arent willing to read and work through case for christ - it did well in offering very logical and scientific way of dealing with the facts and reality of christianity
- definitely not a read and convert kind of book, its more of a read and get myself curious, its a good intro book to dive into more concrete ideas (given its so short, this is quite a given)
- easy read with good anecdotes!
- notable section: the hypothesis breakdowns - quite a good way to expose certain biases about christianity people might have, and worked well to push people to a decision, esp those who might be thinking about pursuing christianity but are procrastinating or dont see it as very important
overall good read would recco to friends! might not recco to friends who are not as open bc ifl they might not appreciate it
are you sure you want to be agnostic:
- good short read if arent willing to read and work through case for christ - it did well in offering very logical and scientific way of dealing with the facts and reality of christianity
- definitely not a read and convert kind of book, its more of a read and get myself curious, its a good intro book to dive into more concrete ideas (given its so short, this is quite a given)
- easy read with good anecdotes!
- notable section: the hypothesis breakdowns - quite a good way to expose certain biases about christianity people might have, and worked well to push people to a decision, esp those who might be thinking about pursuing christianity but are procrastinating or dont see it as very important
overall good read would recco to friends! might not recco to friends who are not as open bc ifl they might not appreciate it
February 17, 2023
An interesting book that takes a look at those who 'sit on the fence' when it comes to religion.
There is much to ponder, for those who may finally wish to sit in the middle road, or finally decide what way they will lead their life.
A worthy addition to your library IF you don't have religious preferences. (OR, you may nearly be decided as to what you will do with your life. This should help you make that choice.)
I read what I would like to when I hear about them ... or in the case of this book, it was sitting before me when I was in a shop looking for something new to read some day.
There is much to ponder, for those who may finally wish to sit in the middle road, or finally decide what way they will lead their life.
A worthy addition to your library IF you don't have religious preferences. (OR, you may nearly be decided as to what you will do with your life. This should help you make that choice.)
I read what I would like to when I hear about them ... or in the case of this book, it was sitting before me when I was in a shop looking for something new to read some day.
March 18, 2022
If you got a bad medical diagnosis, what would you do?
Being indecisive and seeking second, third, fourth opinions is basically labeling the diagnosis as false. Live agnostically at your peril. And especially when the evidence is so clear.
This short book is a great, rational walk through what agnosticism is at its logical conclusion and presents a clear case for Jesus as the truth we all need.
Being indecisive and seeking second, third, fourth opinions is basically labeling the diagnosis as false. Live agnostically at your peril. And especially when the evidence is so clear.
This short book is a great, rational walk through what agnosticism is at its logical conclusion and presents a clear case for Jesus as the truth we all need.
December 22, 2024
Rather more witty than expected, and commendably brief (though this has a knock-on effect on the object itself: when you have a small book you can’t fit many words on each line, so occasionally it makes for a slightly unusual reading experience). Some very sensible observations and provocative prods.
Agnosticism might feel wise (not to mention more well-mannered than atheism or enthusiastic religious faith) in the moment, but in the end…
Agnosticism might feel wise (not to mention more well-mannered than atheism or enthusiastic religious faith) in the moment, but in the end…
October 19, 2025
Engaging and relatable, puts into perspective ideas that can otherwise appear vague and difficult to navigate, and encourages the reader to self-reflect about the point and form of their scepticism. Very obviously, neither a theological nor apologetic piece of literature, it shouldn't be the last thing you read and would not convince people to be Christian - I feel it is more of a poking stick in the side to maybe seriously explore their options before dismissing them negligently.
May 4, 2022
A good book that helps people who just don't know what they believe about God to think through some of the ways they may be thinking illogically. Full of helpful illustrations and very readable. My one gripe is that on a few occassions the authors presume the readers have background knowledge of the Bible - which their intended readership won't necessarily have.
September 7, 2023
A surprising reflective and aware book that shares a point of view for Christianity I hadn't contended with prior. It is a book that, while doesn't address many points of contention among the religious and secular, it doesn't need to. It gives a nice argument for why we need to think critically about the importance of our moral quandaries and choose a path to walk... before it's too late.
April 14, 2025
Who likens remaining agnostic to not wanting to seek answers on a medical diagnosis?? So if you don’t seek out your faith, you could potentially die?? The likening of Jesus to a doctor and not accepting Christianity to be “dangerous” are ideas that are irreconcilable to me. If anyone asks me why I became atheist, this is exactly the book that made me become so.
Read
July 24, 2025This book was given to me and I read the title and thought no I’m not 100% sure about anything (which is why I’m agnostic???)
But I’ll do as told and read the book that delves deeper into Christian history
But I’ll do as told and read the book that delves deeper into Christian history
August 13, 2025
Succinct and logical. Rather than providing answers to questions it provides frameworks for questions. I think this is a book I will find most helpful to frame questions _as they crop up_, as opposed to being the stand-alone driver of mental reorganization
February 17, 2022
A Christian apologetics book written for the agnostic. It is worth giving to someone to read to get them thinking about the gospel.
June 23, 2022
Playful and challenging in equal measure! Very good.
October 29, 2022
A very good little book
March 7, 2023
Quirky
July 25, 2023
Very compelling and very well-written with great humour thrown throughout. It’s an exceptional book to gift to friends or people in your life who are on the fence!
March 13, 2024
Compelling arguments, worth considering
Read
September 13, 2024given by tracey read in the airport cuz waiting damn long
hmmm
hmmm
April 5, 2025
an amazing book, i used to be agnostic, now im sure im an atheist - fuck this book
September 18, 2022
A very accessibly and warmly-written little book that casts looks to cast doubt on one's agnosticim. More intellectual types will desire a more rigorous book on evidence for the truth of Christianity and particularly Jesus's resurrection. But that is not the aim of this books. Still don't know how quickly I'd wholeheartedly give it to an agnostic friend, but maybe I need to reread it.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews