Did Jesus Exist?

[ding]

I'm not upset because I don't have a preference for an outcome. I am calling like I see it. I think I have made a pretty good case that you don't have any affirmative arguments for your beliefs. You aren't practicing critical think, you are practicing the deceitful practice of critical theory.

You claim to be agnostic but only argue against the existence of God. That's not agnostic. If you want to think it is, great, more power to you. It doesn't change the fact that you are a practicing atheist arguing against the beliefs of others without ever having any affirmative beliefs of your own.

You dont understand what agnostic means.

Heres how I know:

An agnostic "doesnt know" if a god exists or not.

That means, the religions as presented.....thus far..


and evidence for god....as presented....thus far...

have been inadequate.


If they were adequate, that person is not an agnostic.

Maybe thats not enough to help you understand what agnostic means....

Ill go further....


an agnostic doesnt know how the universe was created, because they dont find the current evidence in either direction.....atheist or theist.......adequate.

Therefore, "i dont know" is the current state of honesty.


You, in your misunderstanding of what agnostic means....

are asking for an agnostic's positive case of how the universe was created



an agnostic, by definition, DOESNT KNOW.


This is why I dont have discussions with you.


You are dogmatic.


You take dogmatic catch phrases, "cultural marxism," "critical theory," "militant atheistm," and all the other blah blah garbage and slap them on the labels for the box full of "doesnt agree with ding" and you call it a day....in place of actually discussing and scrutinizing actual ideas....and logically doing so..

no, instead youd rather strawman your goofy dogmatic catch phrases.

its meaningless.

Suggestion to the blindly accepting Thumpers in this thread who do not understand agnosticism.

G.T. is above your pay grade - move along now

It was never more clear than asking an "agnostic" to present their..."positive" case for how existence came to be.

What the fakk? lol

But you are so good at selectively presenting negative cases, GT. And you are 100% consistent in that you only criticize from an atheist's perspective.

Your positions and behaviors prove it.

Or do agnostics only entertain the idea that there is no Creator?

theres no way to prove the negative case, ding ~ so, theres really nothing to have to dispute in terms of any case being presented.

How do you know it is a negative case if you are agnostic, GT?

 

[ding]

Suggestion to the blindly accepting Thumpers in this thread who do not understand agnosticism.

G.T. is above your pay grade - move along now

It was never more clear than asking an "agnostic" to present their..."positive" case for how existence came to be.

What the fakk? lol

But you are so good at selectively presenting negative cases, GT. And you are 100% consistent in that you only criticize from an atheist's perspective.

Your positions and behaviors prove it.

Or do agnostics only entertain the idea that there is no Creator?

theres no way to prove the negative case, ding ~ so, theres really nothing to have to dispute in terms of any case being presented.

So you are saying an agnostic can only argue against a belief in God?

Do you admit that you have never mad an argument for the existence of God?

Do you admit that you have only made arguments against the existence of God?

Didn't you let the cat out of the bag that you are not agnostic when you said you can't make an argument for a negative, GT?

Sounds like you know, bro.

i think that what you extrapolated from that comment points to your axe to grind, which is why youre not worthy of my time

Why don't you just admit that you don't believe there is a God, GT?

You already have all the arguments against the beliefs of others.

 

[skye]

HE did and HE does.

 

[G.T.]

You dont understand what agnostic means.

Heres how I know:

An agnostic "doesnt know" if a god exists or not.

That means, the religions as presented.....thus far..


and evidence for god....as presented....thus far...

have been inadequate.


If they were adequate, that person is not an agnostic.

Maybe thats not enough to help you understand what agnostic means....

Ill go further....


an agnostic doesnt know how the universe was created, because they dont find the current evidence in either direction.....atheist or theist.......adequate.

Therefore, "i dont know" is the current state of honesty.


You, in your misunderstanding of what agnostic means....

are asking for an agnostic's positive case of how the universe was created



an agnostic, by definition, DOESNT KNOW.


This is why I dont have discussions with you.


You are dogmatic.


You take dogmatic catch phrases, "cultural marxism," "critical theory," "militant atheistm," and all the other blah blah garbage and slap them on the labels for the box full of "doesnt agree with ding" and you call it a day....in place of actually discussing and scrutinizing actual ideas....and logically doing so..

no, instead youd rather strawman your goofy dogmatic catch phrases.

its meaningless.

Suggestion to the blindly accepting Thumpers in this thread who do not understand agnosticism.

G.T. is above your pay grade - move along now

It was never more clear than asking an "agnostic" to present their..."positive" case for how existence came to be.

What the fakk? lol

But you are so good at selectively presenting negative cases, GT. And you are 100% consistent in that you only criticize from an atheist's perspective.

Your positions and behaviors prove it.

Or do agnostics only entertain the idea that there is no Creator?

theres no way to prove the negative case, ding ~ so, theres really nothing to have to dispute in terms of any case being presented.

How do you know it is a negative case if you are agnostic, GT?

an atheist is the one who makes the negative case...


and since they cant do it...

THATS why you dont see me arguing with atheists.


the negative case cant even be presented



as far as why youve never seen me argue for the positive...


if i felt there was a good aegument for the positive...i wouldnt be agnostic


you have comprehension problems.


read things 3x next time before responding

 

[ding]

Most historians would say that Jesus existed.

That's some agnostic worldview you have there, amigo.

Agnosticism doesnt refer to a specific religion's specific prophets or stories, amigo.

Im agnostic as to how existence came to be.

Im "anti" the man made religions on account of their utter fucking ridiculousness.

Do you understand the difference? I can give analogies if thats unclear.

That makes you an atheist. Agnostics, of which I count myself, merely acknowledge that there is neither proof for, nor against, the existence of a God.

I dont think theres proof for or against god.

That's not how you argue, GT.

You do realize that everything which happened since space and time is proof, right?

If there is a creator then what He created can be used as tangible evidence to learn things about the Creator. There's a ton of data that can be examined. The fact that you reject that data shows that you are biased and have made up your mind.

 

[ding]

Suggestion to the blindly accepting Thumpers in this thread who do not understand agnosticism.

G.T. is above your pay grade - move along now

It was never more clear than asking an "agnostic" to present their..."positive" case for how existence came to be.

What the fakk? lol

But you are so good at selectively presenting negative cases, GT. And you are 100% consistent in that you only criticize from an atheist's perspective.

Your positions and behaviors prove it.

Or do agnostics only entertain the idea that there is no Creator?

theres no way to prove the negative case, ding ~ so, theres really nothing to have to dispute in terms of any case being presented.

How do you know it is a negative case if you are agnostic, GT?

an atheist is the one who makes the negative case...


and since they cant do it...

THATS why you dont see me arguing with atheists.


the negative case cant even be presented



as far as why youve never seen me argue for the positive...


if i felt there was a good aegument for the positive...i wouldnt be agnostic


you have comprehension problems.


read things 3x next time before responding

Sure it can. Start with the universe had a beginning and go from there. It's not that hard. Tell me how everything unfolded without the aid of a Creator.

Tell me how faith in God doesn't lead to virtue.

Explain to me why nature has a preference for life to survive.

Explain to me how a first cause is not needed.

Explain to me how we do not live in a deterministic universe with cause and effect.

Explain to me how consciousness is not the most complex thing the universe has produced.

Explain to me how life was not built into the laws of nature.

These are all things that you can do to make an affirmative case.

 

[DrLove]

Why don't you just admit that you don't believe there is a God, GT?

You already have all the arguments against the beliefs of others.

Why would G.T. need to admit a belief or lack of belief in something that is an esoteric intangible?
Agnostics simply say that they DON'T KNOW.
And neither do you.

 

[G.T.]

That's some agnostic worldview you have there, amigo.

Agnosticism doesnt refer to a specific religion's specific prophets or stories, amigo.

Im agnostic as to how existence came to be.

Im "anti" the man made religions on account of their utter fucking ridiculousness.

Do you understand the difference? I can give analogies if thats unclear.

That makes you an atheist. Agnostics, of which I count myself, merely acknowledge that there is neither proof for, nor against, the existence of a God.

I dont think theres proof for or against god.

That's not how you argue, GT.

You do realize that everything which happened since space and time is proof, right?

If there is a creator then what He created can be used as tangible evidence to learn things about the Creator. There's a ton of data that can be examined. The fact that you reject that data shows that you are biased and have made up your mind.

You arent worthy of these discussions. Youre inherently dishonest, you constantly assume things that arent there, you argue using dogma instead of whats presented to you... you feel free to go ahead and argue against your malformed assumptions...you have terrible comprehension issues....you have no grasp of what agnosticism entails as evidenced by complaining theyve not "presented a case"...and you dont know the difference between fact and assertion.

or...evidence vs proof ~ for that matter.

 

[ding]

Why don't you just admit that you don't believe there is a God, GT?

You already have all the arguments against the beliefs of others.

Why would G.T. need to admit a belief or lack of belief in something that is an esoteric intangible?
Agnostics simply say that they DON'T KNOW.
And neither do you.

Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?

 

[G.T.]

Why don't you just admit that you don't believe there is a God, GT?

You already have all the arguments against the beliefs of others.

Why would G.T. need to admit a belief or lack of belief in something that is an esoteric intangible?
Agnostics simply say that they DON'T KNOW.
And neither do you.

its really that basic

 

[G.T.]

Why don't you just admit that you don't believe there is a God, GT?

You already have all the arguments against the beliefs of others.

Why would G.T. need to admit a belief or lack of belief in something that is an esoteric intangible?
Agnostics simply say that they DON'T KNOW.
And neither do you.

Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?

Arguments against god is not what youre responding to.

You responding to arguments against the evidence presented.

Calling it arguments against god in general...


and running off at the mouth based on your malformed idea

 

[ding]

That's some agnostic worldview you have there, amigo.

Agnosticism doesnt refer to a specific religion's specific prophets or stories, amigo.

Im agnostic as to how existence came to be.

Im "anti" the man made religions on account of their utter fucking ridiculousness.

Do you understand the difference? I can give analogies if thats unclear.

That makes you an atheist. Agnostics, of which I count myself, merely acknowledge that there is neither proof for, nor against, the existence of a God.

I dont think theres proof for or against god.

That's not how you argue, GT.

You do realize that everything which happened since space and time is proof, right?

If there is a creator then what He created can be used as tangible evidence to learn things about the Creator. There's a ton of data that can be examined. The fact that you reject that data shows that you are biased and have made up your mind.

You arent worthy of these discussions. Youre inherently dishonest, you constantly assume things that arent there, you argue using dogma instead of whats presented to you... you feel free to go ahead and argue against your malformed assumptions...you have terrible comprehension issues....you have no grasp of what agnosticism entails as evidenced by complaining theyve not "presented a case"...and you dont know the difference between fact and assertion.

or...evidence vs proof ~ for that matter.

I just gave you like eight things you can do to make an affirmative case and you are calling me dishonest?

I just showed how you only argue against the existence of God and never argue for the existence of God and you are calling me dishonest?

Give me a break GT. I bet you surf more atheist sites than you do porn.

 

[ding]

Why don't you just admit that you don't believe there is a God, GT?

You already have all the arguments against the beliefs of others.

Why would G.T. need to admit a belief or lack of belief in something that is an esoteric intangible?
Agnostics simply say that they DON'T KNOW.
And neither do you.

Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?

Arguments against god is not what youre responding to.

You responding to arguments against the evidence presented.

Calling it arguments against god in general...


and running off at the mouth based on your malformed idea

The only one with malformed arguments is you, bro. You couldn't string together a coherent paragraph if your life depended upon it.

 

[ding]

Why don't you just admit that you don't believe there is a God, GT?

You already have all the arguments against the beliefs of others.

Why would G.T. need to admit a belief or lack of belief in something that is an esoteric intangible?
Agnostics simply say that they DON'T KNOW.
And neither do you.

its really that basic

Yes, that you are a practicing atheist. 100%.

 

[G.T.]

It was never more clear than asking an "agnostic" to present their..."positive" case for how existence came to be.

What the fakk? lol

But you are so good at selectively presenting negative cases, GT. And you are 100% consistent in that you only criticize from an atheist's perspective.

Your positions and behaviors prove it.

Or do agnostics only entertain the idea that there is no Creator?

theres no way to prove the negative case, ding ~ so, theres really nothing to have to dispute in terms of any case being presented.

How do you know it is a negative case if you are agnostic, GT?

an atheist is the one who makes the negative case...


and since they cant do it...

THATS why you dont see me arguing with atheists.


the negative case cant even be presented



as far as why youve never seen me argue for the positive...


if i felt there was a good aegument for the positive...i wouldnt be agnostic


you have comprehension problems.


read things 3x next time before responding

Sure it can. Start with the universe had a beginning and go from there. It's not that hard. Tell me how everything unfolded without the aid of a Creator.

Tell me how faith in God doesn't lead to virtue.

Explain to me why nature has a preference for life to survive.

Explain to me how a first cause is not needed.

Explain to me how we do not live in a deterministic universe with cause and effect.

Explain to me how consciousness is not the most complex thing the universe has produced.

Explain to me how life was not built into the laws of nature.

These are all things that you can do to make an affirmative case.

No, see those are assertions and also arguments from ignorance, i.e. "if you cant explain these things without god. it proves god. nevermind it might just mean any number of other explanations because....dinglogic!"

 

[ding]

Why don't you just admit that you don't believe there is a God, GT? You already have all the arguments against the beliefs of others.

Why would G.T. need to admit a belief or lack of belief in something that is an esoteric intangible? Agnostics simply say that they DON'T KNOW. And neither do you.

Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?

I don't expect either of you to answer this. It kind of blows your arguments out of the water.

 

[G.T.]

Why don't you just admit that you don't believe there is a God, GT?

You already have all the arguments against the beliefs of others.

Why would G.T. need to admit a belief or lack of belief in something that is an esoteric intangible?
Agnostics simply say that they DON'T KNOW.
And neither do you.

its really that basic

Yes, that you are a practicing atheist. 100%.

That's false, and you couldn't possibly make the case. You grow more irate and volatile by the minute when folks dont agree with your assertions, which is why you even had to say as much.

Axe to grind.

 

[G.T.]

Why don't you just admit that you don't believe there is a God, GT?

You already have all the arguments against the beliefs of others.

Why would G.T. need to admit a belief or lack of belief in something that is an esoteric intangible?
Agnostics simply say that they DON'T KNOW.
And neither do you.

Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?

Arguments against god is not what youre responding to.

You responding to arguments against the evidence presented.

Calling it arguments against god in general...


and running off at the mouth based on your malformed idea

The only one with malformed arguments is you, bro. You couldn't string together a coherent paragraph if your life depended upon it.

Yeah, good for your opinion, guy on the internet who thinks he can prove the existence of god

 

[G.T.]

Why don't you just admit that you don't believe there is a God, GT? You already have all the arguments against the beliefs of others.

Why would G.T. need to admit a belief or lack of belief in something that is an esoteric intangible? Agnostics simply say that they DON'T KNOW. And neither do you.

Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?

I don't expect either of you to answer this. It kind of blows your arguments out of the water.

Oops, was already answered.

 

[ding]

But you are so good at selectively presenting negative cases, GT. And you are 100% consistent in that you only criticize from an atheist's perspective.

Your positions and behaviors prove it.

Or do agnostics only entertain the idea that there is no Creator?

theres no way to prove the negative case, ding ~ so, theres really nothing to have to dispute in terms of any case being presented.

How do you know it is a negative case if you are agnostic, GT?

an atheist is the one who makes the negative case...


and since they cant do it...

THATS why you dont see me arguing with atheists.


the negative case cant even be presented



as far as why youve never seen me argue for the positive...


if i felt there was a good aegument for the positive...i wouldnt be agnostic


you have comprehension problems.


read things 3x next time before responding

Sure it can. Start with the universe had a beginning and go from there. It's not that hard. Tell me how everything unfolded without the aid of a Creator.

Tell me how faith in God doesn't lead to virtue.

Explain to me why nature has a preference for life to survive.

Explain to me how a first cause is not needed.

Explain to me how we do not live in a deterministic universe with cause and effect.

Explain to me how consciousness is not the most complex thing the universe has produced.

Explain to me how life was not built into the laws of nature.

These are all things that you can do to make an affirmative case.

No, see those are assertions and also arguments from ignorance, i.e. "if you cant explain these things without god. it proves god. nevermind it might just mean any number of other explanations because....dinglogic!"

No, they show a pattern of development that points to the purpose of the universe. But you aren't interested i that. You have already made an excuse why you don't need to do it. Thus keeping your atheist beliefs intact.