Did Jesus Exist?

[G.T.]

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.

I argue against false inference ~ which is what each and every thing you presented can be boiled down to.

If you were honest, youd know why those arent proof and youd still be searching, like an honest agnostic

Those are "proof," to you, which says to any knowledge seeker that youre a really basic bitch.

 

[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.

Oops, was already answered.

If it was I missed it.

Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?

The ones that do are letting the cat out of the bag that they aren't agnostic.

 

[G.T.]

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.

You extrapolate that the universe has a purpose and that they point to it.

Thats an opinion, that is not fact n'or proof of anything its simply how you personally create correlations and couldnt possibly imagine other scenarios

 

[ding]

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.

I argue against false inference ~ which is what each and every thing you presented can be boiled down to.

If you were honest, youd know why those arent proof and youd still be searching, like an honest agnostic

Those are "proof," to you, which says to any knowledge seeker that youre a really basic bitch.

Your off hand dismissal is telling as well. It's all you do.

 

[DrLove]

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

OR why an Agnostic is an Atheist.
Idiot .. unworthy of debate

 

[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.

If it was I missed it.

Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?

The ones that do are letting the cat out of the bag that they aren't agnostic.

Arguments against the presented cases for god are not arguments against god.

You dont understand why?

I know!

 

[G.T.]

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.

I argue against false inference ~ which is what each and every thing you presented can be boiled down to.

If you were honest, youd know why those arent proof and youd still be searching, like an honest agnostic

Those are "proof," to you, which says to any knowledge seeker that youre a really basic bitch.

Your off hand dismissal is telling as well. It's all you do.

To you its all I do, because youre dogmatic and irrational.

 

[ding]

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.

You ectrapolate that the universe has a purpose and that they point to it.

Thats an opinion, that is not fact n'or proof of anything its simply how you personally create correlations and couldnt possibly imagine other scenarios

Everything has a purpose, GT. The purpose of the universe is to expand and cool and evolve. The pinnacle of that evolution is consciousness (aka intelligence).

 

[ding]

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.

I argue against false inference ~ which is what each and every thing you presented can be boiled down to.

If you were honest, youd know why those arent proof and youd still be searching, like an honest agnostic

Those are "proof," to you, which says to any knowledge seeker that youre a really basic bitch.

Your off hand dismissal is telling as well. It's all you do.

To you its all I do, because youre dogmatic and irrational.

I see people who consistently avoid investigations because they have pre-judged the outcome as being the irrational ones, GT.

 

[G.T.]

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.

You ectrapolate that the universe has a purpose and that they point to it.

Thats an opinion, that is not fact n'or proof of anything its simply how you personally create correlations and couldnt possibly imagine other scenarios

Everything has a purpose, GT. The purpose of the universe is to expand and cool and evolve. The pinnacle of that evolution is consciousness (aka intelligence).

I dont care about your summations, dude. I just like your continuous display of miscomprehension of everything said that's unaligned with your world view. Its a service to any hoping to learn anything.

 

[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.

Oops, was already answered.

If it was I missed it.

Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?

The ones that do are letting the cat out of the bag that they aren't agnostic.

Arguments against the presented cases for god are not arguments against god.

You dont understand why?

I know!

Of course they are. Even more so when the argument is dismissed without investigation, GT. And that's what you always do because you can't argue the case on merit.

 

[G.T.]

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.

I argue against false inference ~ which is what each and every thing you presented can be boiled down to.

If you were honest, youd know why those arent proof and youd still be searching, like an honest agnostic

Those are "proof," to you, which says to any knowledge seeker that youre a really basic bitch.

Your off hand dismissal is telling as well. It's all you do.

To you its all I do, because youre dogmatic and irrational.

I see people who consistently avoid investigations because they have pre-judged the outcome as being the irrational ones, GT.

Cool!

 

[ding]

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.

You ectrapolate that the universe has a purpose and that they point to it.

Thats an opinion, that is not fact n'or proof of anything its simply how you personally create correlations and couldnt possibly imagine other scenarios

Everything has a purpose, GT. The purpose of the universe is to expand and cool and evolve. The pinnacle of that evolution is consciousness (aka intelligence).

I dont care about your summations, dude. I just like your continuous display of miscomprehension of everything said that's unaligned with your world view. Its a service to any hoping to learn anything.

I don't think that is working for you, bro. I think it is backfiring on you. Your mistake to make.

 

[Michelle420]

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?

No.

 

[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.

If it was I missed it.

Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?

The ones that do are letting the cat out of the bag that they aren't agnostic.

Arguments against the presented cases for god are not arguments against god.

You dont understand why?

I know!

Of course they are. Even more so when the argument is dismissed without investigation, GT. And that's what you always do because you can't argue the case on merit.

The case of agnosticism is argued by pointing out the fact that the cases for and against god are inconclusive.

Ive done both, here and in real life.

 

[ding]

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.

I argue against false inference ~ which is what each and every thing you presented can be boiled down to.

If you were honest, youd know why those arent proof and youd still be searching, like an honest agnostic

Those are "proof," to you, which says to any knowledge seeker that youre a really basic bitch.

Your off hand dismissal is telling as well. It's all you do.

To you its all I do, because youre dogmatic and irrational.

I see people who consistently avoid investigations because they have pre-judged the outcome as being the irrational ones, GT.

Cool!

That would be you, bro.

 

[G.T.]

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.

You ectrapolate that the universe has a purpose and that they point to it.

Thats an opinion, that is not fact n'or proof of anything its simply how you personally create correlations and couldnt possibly imagine other scenarios

Everything has a purpose, GT. The purpose of the universe is to expand and cool and evolve. The pinnacle of that evolution is consciousness (aka intelligence).

I dont care about your summations, dude. I just like your continuous display of miscomprehension of everything said that's unaligned with your world view. Its a service to any hoping to learn anything.

I don't think that is working for you, bro. I think it is backfiring on you. Your mistake to make.

Your thoughts are irrelevant to what is and isnt.

 

[ding]

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

Oops, was already answered.

If it was I missed it.

Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?

The ones that do are letting the cat out of the bag that they aren't agnostic.

Arguments against the presented cases for god are not arguments against god.

You dont understand why?

I know!

Of course they are. Even more so when the argument is dismissed without investigation, GT. And that's what you always do because you can't argue the case on merit.

The case of agnosticism is argued by pointing out the fact that the cases for and against god are inconclusive.

Ive done both, here and in real life.

Dude, you don't argue they are inconclusive. You dismiss the case for God off hand.

 

[ding]

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.

You ectrapolate that the universe has a purpose and that they point to it.

Thats an opinion, that is not fact n'or proof of anything its simply how you personally create correlations and couldnt possibly imagine other scenarios

Everything has a purpose, GT. The purpose of the universe is to expand and cool and evolve. The pinnacle of that evolution is consciousness (aka intelligence).

I dont care about your summations, dude. I just like your continuous display of miscomprehension of everything said that's unaligned with your world view. Its a service to any hoping to learn anything.

I don't think that is working for you, bro. I think it is backfiring on you. Your mistake to make.

Your thoughts are irrelevant to what is and isnt.

Only time will tell that, GT.

I'm pretty happy how this has gone.

 

[ding]

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

OR why an Agnostic is an Atheist.
Idiot .. unworthy of debate

You never answered my question. Do agnostics argue against the existence of God?

I can see why you think I am unworthy of debate. I ask you questions you can't answer.