Perhaps I should revise my opening statement this way: it isn’t that there’s more diversity on this forum. Diversity was always here. It’s the absence of the debate between Christians and others about the existence of God, that marks the difference. And Ierrellus posited a reason for that absence. However, few Christian debaters emphasized their experience of God as Ier suggested. The debates were mostly about the dogmatic orthodox definition of God which I dare say is beyond the possibility of human experience.
Coincidentally, there is been a recent resurgence of the experience of “God” through the use of psychedelic drugs. A recent Scientific American article noted that psychedelic often induce mystical experience as defined by psychologist William James in it in the Varieties of Religious Experience. Such experiences include feelings of unity sacredness, ineffability, peace, and joy. Many encounter a loving Divinity and lose their fear of death. However, the article notes not all mystical experiences yield such consoling revelations. Some mystics perceive absolute reality is terrifyingly alien and uncaring. James called these visions “melancholic” or “diabolical” and they seem to correspond to what psychedelic users sometimes called “bad trips”.
In any case, the analysis of mystical experience was not the general or typical topic of discussion on this forum 10 years ago. On the question of which is easier, it seems to me that rigorous agnosticism is no easier than rigorous religion. Faith implies doubt and vice versa. An intellectually honest, self-aware person is going to struggle with this, either way.