Kemara Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 4 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: almost no one was teaching Agnosticism in 6th century BC when Taoism was created. So? Did people practice a philosophy that could have been described by the word Agnostic before the word was first publicly coined? 7 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: If agnostic philosophy was relevant, then what took them so long to make a word for it? What has relevance got to do with whether or not a philosophy that could have been described by the word Agnostic was practiced before the word was first publicly coined? 7 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Did it have a different name or what? Against all the odds I think you may be getting somewhere. 7 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: More than 1,000 years for someone to make a word for that philosophy? Give me a break! What does the length of time it took for someone to first publicly coin the word have to do with whether or not a philosophy that could be described by the word Agnostic was practiced or not? 7 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: The definition of Agnosticism is - "A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God." You have already been advised that this definition is too narrow. You were provided with a link to Britannica which gave a more comprehensive definition. According to you in a previous discussion Britannica was an ultimate source of truth so why are you ignoring this holy book now? 20 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Tell me, who was teaching that in 600 BC? Give me some evidence that a significant number of people were teaching that? What does the number of people who taught a philosophy that could be described by the word Agnostic have to do with whether it was practiced or not? 20 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Funny how you come after me. I am no longer going to allow you to create a straw-man of me. I don't need to create straw men when you are around because you create a massive surplus of them all by yourself. 20 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Now Back off! Get a life! Please consult the holy book of Britannica for the definition of irony. So, there were no Christians until the events of Paul and Barnabas at Antioch were recorded and coined publicly for the first time? No opinion on my Mt. Everest question?
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 10, 2016 Author Posted March 10, 2016 (edited) 36 minutes ago, Kemara said: So? Did people practice a philosophy that could have been described by the word Agnostic before the word was first publicly coined? Not as early as 600 BC, when Taoism was created. If you disagree, present the evidence instead of bombing me with questions again. 36 minutes ago, Kemara said: What has relevance got to do with whether or not a philosophy that could have been described by the word Agnostic was practiced before the word was first publicly coined? Don´t start bombing me again with silly questions that you can answer yourself. By relevant I mean a group of people was teaching it. 36 minutes ago, Kemara said: What does the length of time it took for someone to first publicly coin the word have to do with whether or not a philosophy that could be described by the word Agnostic was practiced or not? Not worth a response, just think. 36 minutes ago, Kemara said: You have already been advised that this definition is too narrow. You were provided with a link to Britannica which gave a more comprehensive definition. According to you in a previous discussion Britannica was an ultimate source of truth so why are you ignoring this holy book now? "the doctrine that humans cannot know of the existence of anything beyond the phenomena of their experience" - BRITANNICA Narrow nothing, it is very clear. So show me evidence that people were teaching that doctrine in 600 BC when Taoism was created. Enough, I won't bother answering your flood of questions again. You give me evidence, or I will ignore you. Edited March 10, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
flameburns623 Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 (edited) "Confucius was a humanist and an agnostic." Hu Shih, Chinese philosopher and biographer. From Wikiquotes. "In fact, Buddhism is generally considered to be not atheistic but agnostic, in that, the Buddha himself did not deny the existence of God. The Indian teacher and social reformer teacher called Sakyamuni Buddha is reported to have either kept silent when asked whether God existed, or in other cases to have said that his Noble Eightfold path led to enlightenment and deathless peace, and did not require faith or belief in a divine being or supreme creator." Lama Surya Dahl. From a Beliefnet article on Buddhism. Several agnostics note that they embrace Taoism and the Tao te Ching as an agnostic system of thought (although corrupted over time in the popular mind as a system of Chinese magic). But I can find no direct quote calling Lao Tzu an agnostic. One googlebook biographer may have done so but I cannot find a direct quote. I will keep looking. EDIT. Hinduism is also said to have an entire tradition of thought that is nontheistic and/or agnostic. No names or personages associated with this. Eastern philosophy in general, however, usually has much less interest or concern about gods or sprits or the supernatural. There is some focus on an afterlife, but even this is not expressed in clear or definite terms, except in the most popularized interpretations. Edited March 10, 2016 by flameburns623
Kemara Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 24 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Not as early as 600 BC, when Taoism was created. If you disagree, present the evidence instead of bombing me with questions again. You are not very good as this discussion thing are you? You certainly don't understand the widely understood etiquette that it is the person who is making the claim that must provide the evidence. Please show me where I made any claim relating to Taoism. If you were capable of keeping up with the discussion you would have noticed that I wasn't directly questioning any of your claims (that, ironically, you provide absolutely no evidence for) I was actually discussing your reasoning...or in this case, the complete absence of reasoning. Here are my exact words, read them slowly, let them sink in, be at one with the words..."By your reasoning....". Do you get it now Skeptic? I was questioning the illogical nature of your reasoning not making a claim. While questioning your reasoning I gave you an example that your reasoning supported, namely, that Christianity could not have existed until the word "Christian" was first publicly coined. You failed entirely to address this point. 31 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Don´t start bombing me again with silly questions that you can answer yourself. By relevant I mean a group of people was teaching it. So your statement, "If agnostic philosophy was relevant, then what took them so long to make a word for it?" actually referred to a group of people - in other words relevance was determined by a group of people teaching agnosticism. Well excuse me, I must be a little slow on the uptake tonight, but if this is true then why did you follow that statement with this, "Tell me, who was teaching that in 600 BC? Give me some evidence that a significant number of people were teaching that?" Why did you feel the need to say the same thing twice? Was the point twice as relevant as all the others? Finally on this point, why does a group of people teaching it necessarily make it relevant or not? 39 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Not worth a response, just think. Well I did think about it and simply couldn't understand the relevance of your point. Your reasoning on this issue was a complete mystery to me, hence my question. I am still at a loss as to what the length of time it took for someone to first publicly coin the word has to do with whether or not a philosophy that could be described by the word Agnostic was practiced or not. I just cant think why that is relevant to the issue, mainly because it simply isn't. 41 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: "the doctrine that humans cannot know of the existence of anything beyond the phenomena of their experience" - BRITANNICA Narrow nothing, it is very clear. Your holy book of Britannica says quite a bit more than that and you know it...or maybe you don't, maybe you just ignored the holy book because it exposed the narrowness of your definition and your completely inappropriate use of the word in the context of this thread. Further, you didn't even attempt to address flameburns623 regarding the narrowness of your definition or the other excellent points that were raised....I mean heck Skeptic you didn't even pay flame the courtesy of going off onto completely irrelevant and illogical tangents, changing the subject and throwing in red herrings and strawmen before finally shifting the goal posts. How incredibly rude. 46 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: So show me evidence that people were teaching that doctrine in 600 BC when Taoism was created. I never made this claim. You are the one who is making claims and providing no evidence. Please consult the holy book of Britannica for the definition of hypocrisy. So, there were no Christians until the events of Paul and Barnabas at Antioch were recorded and coined publicly for the first time? No opinion on my Mt. Everest question?
Freedom Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 On 3/4/2016 at 9:50 AM, TheSkepticChristian said: Many kings, presidents, and dictators that believed in God or Atheism killed millions (genocide). I just wonder, has there ever been an agnostic that killed millions (genocide)? Or non-political violence started by agnostics (group)? Or simply unfair executions made by agnostics (group)? Atheism is simply not accepting anything without proof. Everybody is an atheist. I do not believe in Zeus, nor in the trinity. Mass murder is not, from what I understand, ever motivated by believing there is no God. One might ask if agnostics make better gardeners than atheists. 1
Kenngo1969 Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 On 3/4/2016 at 0:50 PM, TheSkepticChristian said: [After TheSkepticChristian asked for world leaders who are/were agnostic] I asked three questions. I will be happy if you answer at least one. Bill Gates (leader) is agnostic. Silly us! We thought you were talking about political leaders! Boy, I wish we were all brilliant enough to keep up with your stellar reasoning! Alas ... 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 10, 2016 Author Posted March 10, 2016 (edited) 5 hours ago, Kemara said: You are not very good as this discussion thing are you? You certainly don't understand the widely understood etiquette that it is the person who is making the claim that must provide the evidence. Please show me where I made any claim relating to Taoism. No dude, the burden of proof falls on you because you can't prove a negative. That is shifting the burden of proof. The conversation you interrupted was about Taoism, keep up with the conversations you are interrupting. Again, is there any evidence that a group of people practicing Taoism or Confucius were teaching agnosticism as defined by the Oxford dictionary? or any large group in 600 BC? "I am still at a loss as to what the length of time it took for someone to first publicly coin the word has to do with whether or not a philosophy that could be described by the word Agnostic" Answer my question, if a lot of people were teaching the Agnostic doctrine, then what took them so long to name it? or their enemies to name their doctrine? It just doesn't make sense, so it means it was not taught by a large group of people in 600 BC. or perhaps it was taught by no one. It only took some years for others to call them Christians Acts 11:26. 5 hours ago, Kemara said: Your holy book of Britannica says quite a bit more than that and you know it... You are saying so much that it is impossible to have a decent conversation with you. Instead of asking me like 100 irrelevant questions, why don't you summarize what Britannica is saying? Yes, I take Britannica seriously, you don't. Edited March 10, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 10, 2016 Author Posted March 10, 2016 6 hours ago, flameburns623 said: "Confucius was a humanist and an agnostic." Hu Shih, Chinese philosopher and biographer. From Wikiquotes. "In fact, Buddhism is generally considered to be not atheistic but agnostic, in that, the Buddha himself did not deny the existence of God. The Indian teacher and social reformer teacher called Sakyamuni Buddha is reported to have either kept silent when asked whether God existed, or in other cases to have said that his Noble Eightfold path led to enlightenment and deathless peace, and did not require faith or belief in a divine being or supreme creator." Lama Surya Dahl. From a Beliefnet article on Buddhism. Several agnostics note that they embrace Taoism and the Tao te Ching as an agnostic system of thought (although corrupted over time in the popular mind as a system of Chinese magic). But I can find no direct quote calling Lao Tzu an agnostic. One googlebook biographer may have done so but I cannot find a direct quote. I will keep looking. EDIT. Hinduism is also said to have an entire tradition of thought that is nontheistic and/or agnostic. No names or personages associated with this. Eastern philosophy in general, however, usually has much less interest or concern about gods or sprits or the supernatural. There is some focus on an afterlife, but even this is not expressed in clear or definite terms, except in the most popularized interpretations. Okay, but did they believe in Agnosticism as defined by the Oxford dictionary?
thesometimesaint Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 Does something exist before we coin a word for it?
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 10, 2016 Author Posted March 10, 2016 (edited) 52 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Does something exist before we coin a word for it? Give me an example of a doctrine (philosophical) existing for 2,000 years without having a name. flameburns623 said that Taosism believers were agnostic, I want evidence for that, as defined by the Oxford dictionary. Edited March 10, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
thesometimesaint Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 Were there Christians before the term was coined?
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 10, 2016 Author Posted March 10, 2016 (edited) 33 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Were there Christians before the term was coined? Yes, but for 2,000 years without having a name? Again, tell me of a philosophical doctrine that existed for 2,000 years without having a name. flameburns623 says ancient Taoism was agnostic, I want evidence for that, as defined by the Oxford dictionary. Edited March 10, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
USU78 Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 2 hours ago, thesometimesaint said: Does something exist before we coin a word for it? Genesis 2:18-20: Quote And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. So it would appear.
thesometimesaint Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 30 minutes ago, USU78 said: Genesis 2:18-20: So it would appear. Agreed.
Kemara Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: No dude, the burden of proof falls on you because you can't prove a negative. That is shifting the burden of proof. That doesn't make sense. What claim have I made that requires proof? I have made no claim, I am discussing the illogical nature of your reasoning. You have erected a straw man. 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: The conversation you interrupted was about Taoism, keep up with the conversations you are interrupting. I joined in a discussion on a discussion board, I wasn't aware I needed a specific invitation from you. I introduced the topic discussing the illogical nature of your reasoning, I made no claim about Taoism. 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Again, is there any evidence that a group of people practicing Taoism or Confucius were teaching agnosticism as defined by the Oxford dictionary? or any large group in 600 BC? Why does there have to be, I made no such claim. I was discussing the complete absence of reasoning from your argument. 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Answer my question, if a lot of people were teaching the Agnostic doctrine, then what took them so long to name it? or their enemies to name their doctrine? It just doesn't make sense, so it means it was not taught by a large group of people in 600 BC. or perhaps it was taught by no one. How many people were teaching agnosticism before Huxley coined the phrase in 1869? Lets speculate for a second that Huxley coined the phrase on a Wednesday. Does that mean that no such philosophical practice that could have been described with the word Agnostic existed before this day? Are you saying that Huxley was an agnostic on Wednesday but not on Tuesday? 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: It only took some years for others to call them Christians Acts 11:26. So? What has the number of years got to do with anything? Christianity existed before the word Christians was first publicly coined. Just like agnosticism existed before the word Agnosticism was publicly coined. The number of years it took to label the two practices had absolutely nothing to do with wether the practices existed. 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: You are saying so much that it is impossible to have a decent conversation with you. I am saying so much because your reasoning is full of so many holes. 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Instead of asking me like 100 irrelevant questions, why don't you summarize what Britannica is saying? A summary was already provided for you by flameburn623, namely that your definition is too narrow, but I will provide just a little anyway: "The ancestry of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc;" 3 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Yes, I take Britannica seriously, you don't. Is that evidenced by you refusing to acknowledge what the holy book of Britannica says on the subject? If we take the definition that you are demanding must be used (the very narrow definition provided by Oxford) it could be argued that not even Huxley was an agnostic. Huxley believed that a thinker must frankly and honestly recognize and accept the limits of his knowledge. This is very sage and applicable advice for you Skeptic.
USU78 Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 56 minutes ago, Kemara said: That doesn't make sense. What claim have I made that requires proof? I have made no claim, I am discussing the illogical nature of your reasoning. You have erected a straw man. I joined in a discussion on a discussion board, I wasn't aware I needed a specific invitation from you. I introduced the topic discussing the illogical nature of your reasoning, I made no claim about Taoism. Why does there have to be, I made no such claim. I was discussing the complete absence of reasoning from your argument. How many people were teaching agnosticism before Huxley coined the phrase in 1869? Lets speculate for a second that Huxley coined the phrase on a Wednesday. Does that mean that no such philosophical practice that could have been described with the word Agnostic existed before this day? Are you saying that Huxley was an agnostic on Wednesday but not on Tuesday? So? What has the number of years got to do with anything? Christianity existed before the word Christians was first publicly coined. Just like agnosticism existed before the word Agnosticism was publicly coined. The number of years it took to label the two practices had absolutely nothing to do with wether the practices existed. I am saying so much because your reasoning is full of so many holes. A summary was already provided for you by flameburn623, namely that your definition is too narrow, but I will provide just a little anyway: "The ancestry of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc;" Is that evidenced by you refusing to acknowledge what the holy book of Britannica says on the subject? If we take the definition that you are demanding must be used (the very narrow definition provided by Oxford) it could be argued that not even Huxley was an agnostic. Huxley believed that a thinker must frankly and honestly recognize and accept the limits of his knowledge. This is very sage and applicable advice for you Skeptic. Methinks your lector needs to read up on the subject matter. I would recommend The Tao of Pooh: http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/tao-of-pooh-benjamin-hoff/1102157065 1
Kemara Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 3 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Again, tell me of a philosophical doctrine that existed for 2,000 years without having a name. Agnosticism. The holy book of Britannica states, "The ancestry of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc." Now I am really confused. How could agnosticism be traced back to the 5th century when the word Agnostic was not even publicly coined until the 19th century? My brain is exploding. 1
Russell C McGregor Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 5 minutes ago, Kemara said: Agnosticism. The holy book of Britannica states, "The ancestry of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc." Now I am really confused. How could agnosticism be traced back to the 5th century when the word Agnostic was not even publicly coined until the 19th century? My brain is exploding. Alas poor Kemara. I feel so sorry for you. But don't worry. Skeptic will immediately move the goal posts (which he has mounted on castors to avoid them sinking into the ground) and that will clear everything up. 3
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 14, 2016 Author Posted March 14, 2016 (edited) On 3/9/2016 at 2:24 PM, Kemara said: Agnosticism. The holy book of Britannica states, "The ancestry of modern secular and atheist agnosticism may be traced back to the Sophists and to Socrates in the 5th century bc." Now I am really confused. How could agnosticism be traced back to the 5th century when the word Agnostic was not even publicly coined until the 19th century? My brain is exploding. Read that sentence again, it says "the ancestry". The ancestry of Agnosticism is NOT agnosticism. Just like the Homo Erectus is not a modern human. Now you give me evidence that Agnosticism as defined by Oxford or Britannica existed in the 5th century BC On 3/9/2016 at 2:30 PM, Russell C McGregor said: Alas poor Kemara. I feel so sorry for you. But don't worry. Skeptic will immediately move the goal posts (which he has mounted on castors to avoid them sinking into the ground) and that will clear everything up. You guys try so hard of painting me like that, why not answer my questions? Edited March 14, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
Kemara Posted March 14, 2016 Posted March 14, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Now you give me evidence that Agnosticism as defined by Oxford or Britannica existed in the 5th century BC Why? Your position that agnosticism did not exist before the word was first publicly coined by Huxley in 1869 has been refuted. You have admitted on this thread that Christianity existed before the word Christian was publicly coined. As such you acknowledge that a philosophical practice can exist before its name is first publicly coined. Case closed, end of story, thank you for coming. However, if you really want to push the point - from Wiki: Quote Thomas Henry Huxley...coined the word "agnostic" in 1869. Earlier thinkers, however, had written works that promoted agnostic points of view, such as Sanjaya Belatthaputta, a 5th-century BCE Indian philosopher...and Protagoras, a 5th-century BCE Greek philosopher... Now let me ask you a question. Was Thomas Henry Huxley the first agnostic? 1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Just like the Homo Erectus is not a modern human So what is your point? We are discussing the origins of agnosticism; we are discussing when the philosophical idea that could be described by the word Agnostic was first recognised and/or practiced and/or taught. The holy book of Britannica, which you seem to be apostatising from despite your worship of it, has clearly stated that a practice that could have been described by the word Agnostic existed in the 5th century. Case closed, end of story, thank you for coming. 1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said: You guys try so hard of painting me like that, why not answer my questions? All your questions have been answered. Your position has been refuted. I will state however that it can be very difficult keeping up with your questions because they keep changing so often. No one can be blamed for not being able to match the speed at which you shift your castor mounted goal posts. Need I remind you that you have publicly and brazenly refused to answer questions even after you gave me your word that you would? Shall I make a list of all the questions on this thread that you have not even attempted to answer? Edited March 14, 2016 by Kemara 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 14, 2016 Author Posted March 14, 2016 (edited) 42 minutes ago, Kemara said: Why? Your position that agnosticism did not exist before the word was first publicly coined by Huxley in 1869 has been refuted. How about you try to understand my position? That is not what I said. I said that agnosticism as defined by the Oxford dictionary probably didn't exists 3,000 years ago. I am having a conversation with someone else about that before you interrupted. Get out of my threads. A conversation with you is no good. 42 minutes ago, Kemara said: However, if you really want to push the point - from Wiki: I don't take you and the Wiki seriously. 42 minutes ago, Kemara said: So what is your point? We are discussing the origins of agnosticism; we are discussing when the philosophical idea that could be described by the word Agnostic was first recognised and/or practiced and/or taught. The holy book of Britannica, which you seem to be apostatising from despite your worship of it, has clearly stated that a practice that could have been described by the word Agnostic existed in the 5th century. Case closed, end of story, thank you for coming. Impossible to have a conversation with you. Britannica is not saying modern Agnosticism (as defined by the dictionary) existed in the 5th century BC. Tell me how? What was Sanjaya Belatthaputta teaching? Now get out of my threads. Edited March 14, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
thesometimesaint Posted March 14, 2016 Posted March 14, 2016 IOW My mind is made up, and no amount of facts will change it. 1
Kemara Posted March 14, 2016 Posted March 14, 2016 1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said: How about you try to understand my position? That is not what I said. I said that agnosticism as defined by the Oxford dictionary probably didn't exists 3,000 years ago. Your original position, before the goal posts started to move, was that agnosticism did not and could not have existed until 1869 when the term Agnostic was first publicly coined. Not until your position started to unravel before your eyes did you start adding qualifiers such as "probably". 1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said: I am having a conversation with someone else about that before you interrupted. Just in case you are unaware, because this is the second time that you have brought up this point on this thread, this is a discussion board, nobody has to wait for an invitation to join in the discussion. 1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said: A conversation with you is no good. I can understand why you would not like a conversation with someone who exposes your arguments for the illogical nonsense and refutes your positions time and time again. 1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said: I don't take you and the Wiki seriously Are you seriously refusing to accept that philosophers, such as Belatthaputta and Protagoras who both lived during the 5th-century, produced written works promoting agnostic views? 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Impossible to have a conversation with you. Yes, it is impossible for anybody whose arguments are illogical nonsense to have a conversation with me. That is why you find it so incredibly difficult. 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Britannica is not saying modern Agnosticism (as defined by the dictionary) existed in the 5th century BC. Tell me how? Your holy book of Britannica refutes your position that agnosticism could not and did not exist before the term Agnostic was first publicly coined in 1869. It is simply an added bonus that your holy book refutes yet another one of your positions by pointing out that a philosophy that could be described as agnosticism existed in the 5th century. 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: What was Sanjaya Belatthaputta teaching? Exactly what the referenced quote said, agnostic points of view. 2 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Now get out of my threads. No. Was Thomas Henry Huxley the first agnostic? Yes or no? Was a philosophy that can be identified and described with the word Agnosticism being practiced and taught in the 5th century? Yes or no? No response to my question regarding Mt Everest? 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted March 15, 2016 Author Posted March 15, 2016 (edited) 9 hours ago, Kemara said: Your original position, before the goal posts started to move, was that agnosticism did not and could not have existed until 1869 when the term Agnostic was first publicly coined. Not until your position started to unravel before your eyes did you start adding qualifiers such as "probably". Quote me, when did I say that? I said that Agnostic doctrine probably didn't exists 3,000 years ago, to point that Taoism followers were not Agnostic. Edited March 15, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
Kemara Posted March 15, 2016 Posted March 15, 2016 1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Quote me, when did I say that? Why do i have to keep repeating myself, you are a waste of time I am asking for evidence, and I am asking for specifics. Did they teach that "nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena"? Yes or No? and were Belatthaputta and Protagoras following the Taoism faith? What do they have anything to do with the topic that you interrupted? You love wasting time don't you? Are you seriously refusing to accept that philosophers, such as Belatthaputta and Protagoras who both lived during the 5th-century, produced written works promoting agnostic views? Was Thomas Henry Huxley the first agnostic? Yes or no? Was a philosophy that can be identified and described with the word Agnosticism being practiced and taught in the 5th century? Yes or no? No response to my question regarding Mt Everest?
Recommended Posts