So that's it for the election.

[mgellan]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed

So what? So someone named Jesus existed, doesn't demonstrate that a single word in the Bible is true... in fact some of it is true, but that doesn't infer that a single supernatural claim made in the book is true. You can't get to a claim of the truth of an entire book by claiming one of the characters was based on a real life figure any more than you can claim because New York City exists, so must Spiderman.

Regards,
Mg

[Ravager]

Spider-Man. Show some god damned respect for Christ's sake.

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by mgellan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Belief in God is a cultural thing generally propogated to kids by parents. A mind virus, if you will. The fact that some smart people (eg you forgot Newton, Leonardo, etc.) does not provide positive proof of the existence of God, it just means smart people can as readily compartmentalize bat-shit crazy ideas as not so smart people. People that believe in God in the face of absolutely zero evidence have simply stuck their belief in the "believe without evidence" bucket even if the same people thing belief in UFOs, Bigfoot and Santa Clause are stupid.

Read "The Believing Brain" By Michael Shermer, "Demon Haunted World" by Carl Sagan and similar books if you want to see what the other side is saying. If not, try to snatch a breath occasionally while your head is shoved up your ass.

Regards,
Mg

See, this is the problem with atheism. You have some retard on a gaming forum that can't get through a paragraph without a typo trying to explain that Newton, Da Vinci, and a good number of the greatest thinkers in the history of mankind are "bat-shit crazy" with their heads shoved up their ass, all the while explaining that a guy who was a door-to-door evangelist 30 years ago has all the answers.

Yes, Michael Shermer was a door to door, born again evangelist until ~1980. He went from one of the retards knocking on your door to tell you about the glory of Jesus to the founder of Skeptic magazine in 12 years. And he's your first reference? Really?

Yeah, that's totally the guy to set Isaac Newton straight.

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by mgellan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So what? So someone named Jesus existed, doesn't demonstrate that a single word in the Bible is true... in fact some of it is true, but that doesn't infer that a single supernatural claim made in the book is true. You can't get to a claim of the truth of an entire book by claiming one of the characters was based on a real life figure any more than you can claim because New York City exists, so must Spiderman.

Regards,
Mg

Nobody is talking about the Bible. Alawen denied the historical existence of Jesus. He was incorrect.

[Hailto]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157817/el...ma-romney.aspx

[Frieza_Prexus]

Just had to re-read the Drudge report headline like 4 times. For a moment there, I thought the electoral dick-waving was about to become quite literal.

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You really make me wanna work, doncha? lol.

Well...read THIS first.

Then, read THIS.

Hope that clears it up for ya.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well what i garnered from the first article was that Congress as set up by the constitution is inherently broken, allowing for members to vote based on party lines and for re-election purposes.

The second article does not infringe on the right to bear arms. The 2nd amendment does not say you have the right to bear arms "in secret".

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Lol. You are ignorant. This isn't a matter of shrouds and superstition. It was 2000 years ago -- they didn't have an obituaries section in the local magazine. You have a half a dozen sources from within 50-100 years of Jesus' life speaking about him as a historical figure and confirming some of the same basic facts of his life and death -- including non-Christian scholars. There's more proof that Jesus existed than there is proof that Shakespeare actually wrote the work credited to him, and Shakespeare isn't even 500 years old yet. And for the record, secular scholars widely agree that Jesus did exist (and that Shakespeare wrote the works credited to him).

This is a direct line from Wikipedia: Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed,[5][6][7][8] and biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[9][10][11]

You're holding Jesus' existence to a standard that is completely out of touch with the context of the period. What would it take to convince you he existed? A photograph? Almost everything we know about antiquity is based on third person accounts from people that weren't alive when the supposed events took place. For Jesus, there are a plethora of references to him from a variety of sources, including highly reliable non-Christian authors that wrote in the immediate historical aftermath (less than 100 years) after his death.

Unless you also refute basically everything researchers have concluded regarding antiquity, including the very existence of certain famous authors, poets, and emperors, there is more than enough evidence to conclusively say that Jesus did live.

There is also alot of "proof by your description" that claims Mohammad existed and was the final prophet of god and that jesus was not the son.

?Derp

[Nirgon]

Originally Posted by Alarti0001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This just in people who receive food stamps also work hard! They just work hard making minimum wage, cleaning toilets and shit, and not sitting behind a computer screen.

Let's talk about how hard you have to try in school (at something applicable no less) to get there.

Some people just pay for their decisions down the road. I'm totally fine with that.

[Alawen]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Lol. You are ignorant. This isn't a matter of shrouds and superstition. It was 2000 years ago -- they didn't have an obituaries section in the local magazine. You have a half a dozen sources from within 50-100 years of Jesus' life speaking about him as a historical figure and confirming some of the same basic facts of his life and death -- including non-Christian scholars. There's more proof that Jesus existed than there is proof that Shakespeare actually wrote the work credited to him, and Shakespeare isn't even 500 years old yet. And for the record, secular scholars widely agree that Jesus did exist (and that Shakespeare wrote the works credited to him).

This is a direct line from Wikipedia: Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed,[5][6][7][8] and biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[9][10][11]

You're holding Jesus' existence to a standard that is completely out of touch with the context of the period. What would it take to convince you he existed? A photograph? Almost everything we know about antiquity is based on third person accounts from people that weren't alive when the supposed events took place. For Jesus, there are a plethora of references to him from a variety of sources, including highly reliable non-Christian authors that wrote in the immediate historical aftermath (less than 100 years) after his death.

Unless you also refute basically everything researchers have concluded regarding antiquity, including the very existence of certain famous authors, poets, and emperors, there is more than enough evidence to conclusively say that Jesus did live.

Your pejorative aside, I'm at least knowledgeable enough to understand what a primary source is. You might want to read them before quoting them as fact. Citation number six is Robert M. Price, who also doubts the existence of a historical Christ.

One of us is definitely talking out his ass and resorting to Wiki and vague references to geniuses who believe in God to back up his point. This is the most disappointing series of posts I've ever seen from you. If I had to guess, I'd say you are so emotionally attached to the existence of God that you don't want these topics discussed.