Are you an atheist? (2 Viewers)

[Bladerunner]

1. If Jesus had existed, then there is evidence
somewhere.
2. There is no evidence of Jesus Anywhere.
3. Therefore, Jesus never existed.

"Modus Tollens"

http://killingjesusthebook.com/


Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

All in all,

In my opinion as long as creationists use this moral :



(Relevant due to Alisa's first post)

Then we can never put our argument across without all of our plausible evidence being thrown away.

got any of those perceived contradictions???????


Blade

 

[Galaxiom]

No it is only history. There is no religion in the book. All accounts of the man named Jesus have been verified through historic records. I hope you are not saying these historical records are false or mislead someone who reads them.

So there was a man named "Jesus"? One of them might even have been crucified.

But is there anything at all about a man named Jesus who could perform miracles (something surely worthy of mention)? Or anyone who could perform miracles?

No. Jesus Christ has no mention anywhere until about 80 AD. The claims of miracles arrive even later.

 

[Bladerunner]

No I have not read it but I am aware of the complete lack of credible historical evidence. It will have everything to do with religion and I am certainly no going to waste money buying it.

I have asked you to provide an example of its "evidence" for the existence of Jesus. Choose the one you think is best.

So what if it has been brought down for thousands of years? Scribes copying BS is still BS. It doesn't prove it is true. In fact it is the refusal to reconsider any point in the light of new evidence that makes religions such a ridiculous anachronism.

Sure, lets start at the beginning. Genesis has plants, including fruiting trees created on the third day, the Sun on the fourth while birds and fish were created on the fifth day. I should not need to explain why plants could not have lived without the Sun.

Moreover, flowering plants are a relatively recent evolutionary divergence. The first fish predate them by hundreds of millions of years.

What parts of Genesis are we talking about here. Genesis I or Genesis II or both?

Chapter one is Chronological and Chapter 2 is from mans perspective.

The fruiting trees and the flowering plants are totally biologically different and were created at different times.

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

So there was a man named "Jesus"? One of them might even have been crucified.

But is there anything at all about a man named Jesus who could perform miracles (something surely worthy of mention)? Or anyone who could perform miracles?

No. Jesus Christ has no mention anywhere until about 80 AD. The claims of miracles arrive even later.

OK, now we have established a man named Jesus lived at the same time period the Bible says he did, was hated and feared by the roman church ( the Bible says this a s well)and was therefore crucified because of the Church . Is this right??????? if so, then the Bible which is religious contains all the stories of the the miracles he performed and I would consider them to be true.

Jesus died somewhere around 33-36 AD. There are twenty-seven books in the New Testament (all put together around 300AD) most all of them written around 50-60 AD. Now thirty years is a long time to write a book but even today with all of our technology, it takes several years to write one.

New Material:
Published on October, 4, 2014, the article about Jesus’ miracles is entitled, “Newly-Found Document Holds Eyewitness Account of Jesus Performing Miracle.” The article then goes on to explain that a modern historian made a remarkable discovery while searching through the archives of the Vatican.

“An Italian expert studying a first century document written by the Roman historian Marcus Velleius Paterculus that was recently discovered in the archives of the Vatican, found what is presumed to be the first eyewitness account ever recorded of a miracle of Jesus Christ. The author describes a scene that he allegedly witnessed, in which a prophet and teacher that he names Iēsous de Nazarenus, resuscitated a stillborn boy and handed him back to his mother…. Upon entering town, Jesus would have visited the house of a woman named Elisheba, who had just given birth to a stillborn child. Jesus picked up the dead child and uttered a prayer in Aramaic to the heavens, which unfortunately the author describes as ‘immensus’, meaning incomprehensible. To the crowd’s surprise and amazement, the baby came back to life almost immediately, crying and squirming like a healthy newborn.”
​

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1523891/je...rcus-velleius-paterculus/#t3T3oWR4WyeHxuHK.99

Blade

 

[ConnorGiles]

got any of those perceived contradictions???????


Blade

I would only have to scroll back a few pages maybe not even that.

You are guilty of the quote I mentioned, Evidence is Evidence. Evidence is needed to prove fact.

You proclaim facts without evidence which disproves your fact as an opinion.

 

[ConnorGiles]

http://killingjesusthebook.com/


Blade

I wouldn't count on a book wrote by Roman Catholics who were brought up in religious schools to be a non-bias source. I would like to hear these facts via someone without the religious bias.

I'm not saying "A" Jesus never lived. I'm sure he did. But the Jesus to which you refer. Highly doubtful.

Absence of Evidence is not Evidence, Evidence of Absence sadly for you "IS" Evidence.

 

[ConnorGiles]

I received a Top Secret (TS/SCI, technically) clearance from the US government a few years back for my job.

So yes, you could say a competent investigator has gone through my background with a fine-toothed comb.

Which is moot. If you want to find evidence of me killing someone, it's up to you to find it.

Interestingly, in this exchange, I am the atheist (there's not a single piece of evidence), while you have taken the role of the theist (just because there's no evidence whatsoever, it doesn't mean you're not a spree-killer! Maybe you just need a better investigator!). I find that rather amusing.

No skeletons in Frothy's closet!

 

[Galaxiom]

“Newly-Found Document Holds Eyewitness Account of Jesus Performing Miracle.” The article then goes on to explain that a modern historian made a remarkable discovery while searching through the archives of the Vatican.

“An Italian expert studying a first century document written by the Roman historian Marcus Velleius Paterculus that was recently discovered in the archives of the Vatican, found what is presumed to be the first eyewitness account ever recorded of a miracle of Jesus Christ.

Blah blah blah. Presumed is the key word. There is no provenience for the document. It just mysteriously appears in the Vatican.

Fakes abound. The Shroud of Turin, The Tomb of Jesus' brother, etc etc etc.

 

[ConnorGiles]

OK, now we have established a man named Jesus lived at the same time period the Bible says he did, was hated and feared by the roman church ( the Bible says this a s well)and was therefore crucified because of the Church . Is this right??????? if so, then the Bible which is religious contains all the stories of the the miracles he performed and I would consider them to be true.

My,My you would hold that book so close it would cloud your judgement.

My name is Edward and I live in a big house with an almost empty room (Only filled with a wardrobe) during the war, I have 1 brother and 2 sisters. By your logic since I covered most of the points, Narnia would be on the other side of the Wardrobe.

Jesus died somewhere around 33-36 AD. There are twenty-seven books in the New Testament (all put together around 300AD) most all of them written around 50-60 AD. Now thirty years is a long time to write a book but even today with all of our technology, it takes several years to write one.

To be honest, Wives tales last that long - Just as chinese whispers change via every person it surpasses. I could safely say that the story was over exagerated somewhere along the lines. 30 years is a long time.

Unless this "Evidence" can be backed up and vouched for via other documents then what tears it away from being another wives tale?

Did the child's mother ever vouch for this?

You see Bladerunner, I'm afraid the distinct lack of credible evidence really doesn't even push a remotely persuasive case to me.

 

[ConnorGiles]

Blah blah blah. Presumed is the key word. There is no provenience for the document. It just mysteriously appears in the Vatican.

Fakes abound. The Shroud of Turin, The Tomb of Jesus' brother, etc etc etc.

Should we slip some of our own documents into Vatican, Your hand-picked choice

I will be visiting there in 2 weeks time

 

[Galaxiom]

What parts of Genesis are we talking about here. Genesis I or Genesis II or both?

Chapter one is Chronological and Chapter 2 is from mans perspective.

Oh come on Blade. You are supposed to the the one who knows the Bible. I'll give you hint. I mentioned the third day, fourth day and fifth day. Does that sound "chronological" or "man's perspective"?

Why does it matter anyway? All you are doing is trying to avoid the question by distraction.

Please begin by explaining how it would be that the plants were created before the Sun.

The fruiting trees and the flowering plants are totally biologically different and were created at different times.

Too bad you didn't take more notice of Biology than Bible Studies. (Though I am not sure you paid much attention there either.)

"Flowering plants" is the common terminology for plants known as Angiosperms. If you observe fruiting trees you will see that the fruits are invariably preceded by flowers.

Anyway, if you had read Genesis 1:12 you would know that all plants were created on the third day. The day before the Sun, Moon and stars were created.

Funny how atheists know more of the Bible than most of the religious.

 

[Galaxiom]

my name is edward and i live in a big house with an almost empty room (only filled with a wardrobe) during the war, i have 1 brother and 2 sisters. By your logic since i covered most of the points, narnia would be on the other side of the wardrobe.

:d :d :d :d :d :d :d :d

Oh well it looks like there are still problems with Chrome and the board.

They were laugh icons.

colon & capital D but they turned to lower case on posting. At least the carriage returns are back on IE11.

 

[AnthonyGerrard]

I received a Top Secret (TS/SCI, technically) clearance from the US government a few years back for my job.

So yes, you could say a competent investigator has gone through my background with a fine-toothed comb.

Which is moot. If you want to find evidence of me killing someone, it's up to you to find it.

Interestingly, in this exchange, I am the atheist (there's not a single piece of evidence), while you have taken the role of the theist (just because there's no evidence whatsoever, it doesn't mean you're not a spree-killer! Maybe you just need a better investigator!). I find that rather amusing.

Precisely - and you used a absence of evidence argument to support your "theist" side. Rather than a evidence of absence.


I'm out now - theist or atheists all over the world are using their time far more sensibly than we are here argueing the toss over semantics on the tinterweb.

 

[ConnorGiles]

:d :d :d :d :d :d :d :d

Oh well it looks like there are still problems with Chrome and the board.

They were laugh icons.

colon & capital D but they turned to lower case on posting. At least the carriage returns are back on IE11.

How dare you use that browsers name here "IE" *Hisses".

 

[Frothingslosh]

Precisely - and you used a absence of evidence argument to support your "theist" side. Rather than a evidence of absence.

My entire point there was that absence of evidence can be used to prove that something doesn't exist. It's how we know there are no unicorns (despite what the bible says), fire-breathing dragons, or purple hairy lightning bolts - there is no evidence of any of them ever having existed.

 

[Bladerunner]

I would only have to scroll back a few pages maybe not even that.

You are guilty of the quote I mentioned, Evidence is Evidence. Evidence is needed to prove fact.

You proclaim facts without evidence which disproves your fact as an opinion.

yeah I heard you rhetoric and what I heard is: If there is no positive proof beyond a doubt for or against a subject then by the very laws of nature it has to be false.

Did I get this right...........

Blade

 

[ConnorGiles]

Until proven otherwise,

That's how Evidence of Absence and Propositional Logic works.

 

[Bladerunner]

I wouldn't count on a book wrote by Roman Catholics who were brought up in religious schools to be a non-bias source. I would like to hear these facts via someone without the religious bias.

I'm not saying "A" Jesus never lived. I'm sure he did. But the Jesus to which you refer. Highly doubtful.

Absence of Evidence is not Evidence, Evidence of Absence sadly for you "IS" Evidence.

and we just got through and proved the book (Bible) was retransscribed to a level of integrity that if done today without a computer and word processor would be hard to match. Out of 800 dead sea scrolls there were 200 of which contained religious books of the past and these match word for word (-17 words) what is kept (where-ever they keep them) for prosperity. I guess you do not believe these are credible either?

Is this guy not credible? I mean the discoverer. You trust Steven Hawkins---yes when he tells you the THEORY of evolution, relativity, etc. and the physics it brought with it. p.s. a THEORY is not proven either and is just one step above a Hypothesis.

Yet, here you go and discredit a piece that was found, published and to my knowledge was not discredited by anyone other that those that say the same as you do.

It is sad!

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

I wouldn't count on a book wrote by Roman Catholics who were brought up in religious schools to be a non-bias source. I would like to hear these facts via someone without the religious bias.

I'm not saying "A" Jesus never lived. I'm sure he did. But the Jesus to which you refer. Highly doubtful.

Absence of Evidence is not Evidence, Evidence of Absence sadly for you "IS" Evidence.

Evidence of Absence: What is this mumbo-jumbo piece of crapola. What does it even mean ........You would make a good politician my friend.


"I'm not saying "A" Jesus never lived. I'm sure he did. But the Jesus to which you refer. Highly doubtful. ".............If you read the book yuo will discover that it is this Jesus that went through the same obstacles as the Jesus in the Bible did and that this Jesus did indeed have a multitude of followers. In fact, he is the most celebrated man in the history of mankind.

Keep in mind before these previous post, Jesus did not exist in your eyes and probably still does not.

Come-on put 2 and 2 together. you do it all the time in the scientific ring.

I have given you article after article and for one reason or another it has not been good enough. It reminds me of a sci-fi thriller where a computer (far advanced to ours) would not accept anything from the outside that might suggest that it had made even the tiniest mistake, finally had to turn the damn thing off before it killed everybody. As with you and the other DEFOUT Atheist, no article nor anybody regardless of their knowledge, learned capabilites nor the statute among their piers, etc. is going to be good enough for you to have even the tiniest doubt concerning your Idealology concerning religion and the Christian faith. I say Christian because the two others were written well after 300 AD and conveniently included copies of the original five books, only rewritten to the advantage of their religion. A topic for later post.



Blade