For me, I'm agnostic about Jesus, mostly because I simply don't care. Whether this person described as Jesus Christ was real or not, I don't care. He was described as a rebel, and likely was just one of many prophets speaking out about a better way.

Since the time he was supposedly here on earth and died, there have been many thinkers, many discoveries, many sharings of other mythologies and religions, while we also seek the scientific truth about things for which nobody knew 2000+ years ago.

If the "good lord" gave us brains and common sense, and an ability to learn from history and our own experiences, then it follows that we should use our sensibilities, should we not?

I'm agnostic as to any supernatural deity, perhaps holding out hope that there is a natural reason for all these things we wonder about so wistfully.

What would Jesus do? If I were Jesus, and I realized my "Father God" was forsaking me, on the cross and I died anyway, I'd hope that humanity would have made a lot more progress regarding how to treat one another in 2000 years before my promised return.

Perhaps this "second coming" should have been promised to happen when we actually figure it out and get it right, not when things go so wrong that there is an apocalypse. I don't know, but I think something got lost in the translation somewhere. I just don't see a lot of good coming from the way the Christian followers are going forth, with all the judgment, hatred and misogyny in his name.

I know there are groups trying to re-brand Jesus, but how about we just use our own human reasoning, compassion and mercy toward others? That's why I don't devote my life toward worshiping Jesus Christ. Give me something new to believe in, maybe, but until then, I'll rely on my own sense of humanity best I can.

agnostic basically means 'undecided' or 'unsure''...what exactly would one discuss about that?

I don't discuss it because I am atheist. If you find out how and when we got our current buybull books you will understand why. Gods and scriptures are man made. Die hards just in to say that you have not "tried out" all of the other religions. This is total insanity in my opinion.

Is agnosticism something that everyone could reasonably affirm? No.

Are there examples from other fields that are deserving of agnosticism? Yes. Cosmology is an example.

Is uncertainty a default position on matters for judgment? No.

What evidence do you require to decide one way or the other? The question makes at least one unjustified assumption, and so is unanswerable.

Why don't you believe in Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ? I am not sufficiently non compos mentis to have beliefs. I have an evidence-based world view.

Additionally, nobody has ever produced any falsifiable evidence to support the existence claim of any god.

Moreover, it is trivial to show that the God of the Bible cannot exist. The same goes for the God of the Torah.

NEXT!

On matters of knowledge, yes, agnosticism or don't know, is indeed the default in all things, not just matters of god. ( As I type, I am holding a coffee mug. Do you know if it has a picture of a cat or a rabbit on it ? Honesty would require you to say. "No." The agnostic position is nearly always the honest one. ) It is not always a different position from atheism, since agnostic refers to knowledge, and atheism to belief. So that it is possible to be an, agnostic atheist, sometimes called a "soft atheist", as I think most sceptics are. While a "hard" or none agnostic atheist would generally be one who affirms belief that there is certainly no god. Despite what many religious apologists claim, hard atheism is not the default position, or even perhaps, the most common among atheists.

However it should be noted that "atheist" means anti-theist, and is strictly a position therefore on only a theist god. So that it would be possible to have a "deist atheist" a "spiritual atheist" etc. and indeed deism is probably in many ways a sub-set of atheism.

As to why, I for one do not believe in Jesus Christ. Then you would have to tell me which Jesus Christ you are referring to, since even the four earliest sources we have about him, the Gospels, do not agree on his nature, and we have no real knowledge about the origins of those books, other than that they were almost certainly not written by the people whose names appear on them.

And at this distance, given the lack of any other evidence, I have seen good cases made for Jesus being, a set of earlier myths reiterated, a work of pure fiction, an real person with both fictional and mythic attributes added, a literal son of god, a prophet wrongly made a son of god, a work of pro-Roman political propaganda, an earlier work of fiction rewritten, and several other possibles. All believers made good cases for their favorite idea, but since all the cases were based on evidence free speculation and interpretation, it is I think sensible to be agnostic about him too.

Your last sentence says it all. "Lord and Saviour" are biased, unsubstantiated claims which promote the myth.
It is similar to the statement "The truths of the bible". Both are supposed to be accepted without quibbles.

With zero evidence, it is easy to make a call and decide. Termed atheism.
There are no "belief" matters for judgement (because the standard applied ie "god books" are bollocks ).
Don't believe JC the same reason don't believe in the 5000 odd other gods........................as well as unicorns.