Re: Do you ever doubt God's existence?

[Mars_ax]

Charlie, my argument is, there's virtually no secular historical evidence confirming that the jesus depicted in the "gospels" and/or New Testament is anything other than a fabricated character in a religious text/novel. Frankly, I couldn't give a fuck less, what christians, muslims, jews, or anyone else chooses to believe, I don't buy any of that bullshit.

What kind of evidence would convince you though?

It's an historical fact that enough people believed not only that Jesus did exist, but that they also saw him killed and then raised again. So strong was their belief in having witnessed this they happily went to their deaths, being stoned, crucifed, ripped apart by horses and suffering other unimaginable tortures, in order to proclaim the truth of Jesus' death and resurrection.

The fact that the Christian church exists IS proof that Jesus existed. If he didn't, why did his followers all die for this belief?

It's a truly baffling anti religious mindset that tries to deny something that clearly happened as the historical ramifications were immense.

It's as absurd as suggesting William the Conqueror never existed and trying to explain the Battle of Hastings without him.

You simply cannot reasonably argue the birth of the church, under the most intense persecution and in the most violent manner, without accepting they had a founder.

It's pretty obvious that you've bought it all hook, line and sinker Bilbo.

It's also obvious that you're oblivious to the fact that there's not the slightest bit of physical evidence to support a historical Jesus.

I hope this helps.

Bought what hook, line and sinker? I've said nothing about the divinity of Christ here, His mission, the accuracy of the Gospels. I'm just using simple logic to prove that He must have existed.

Please give me a single example in human history of a movement that is grounded in actual history not having a founder.

Don't you find it a bit odd that "the founder" of Christianity never actually wrote anything himself? And don't you find it a bit suspicious that virtually nothing was written about the alleged Jesus during his lifetime? Here's a dude who's alleged to have spoke to multitudes of followers all over the "holyland", but no contemporary author writes a fucking word about him? Give a break man...

Oh, and Bilbo, please tell me who all these "eyewitnesses" are, fictitious characters in the gospels?

PS. Clue: an eyewitness is someone who witnesses an event, et al, it becomes "hearsay" when someone else writes about what an "eyewitness" has alleged to have seen (but didn't write about themselves) 50 to 100 years later.

[Kev]

Charlie, my argument is, there's virtually no secular historical evidence confirming that the jesus depicted in the "gospels" and/or New Testament is anything other than a fabricated character in a religious text/novel. Frankly, I couldn't give a fuck less, what christians, muslims, jews, or anyone else chooses to believe, I don't buy any of that bullshit.

What kind of evidence would convince you though?

It's an historical fact that enough people believed not only that Jesus did exist, but that they also saw him killed and then raised again. So strong was their belief in having witnessed this they happily went to their deaths, being stoned, crucifed, ripped apart by horses and suffering other unimaginable tortures, in order to proclaim the truth of Jesus' death and resurrection.

The fact that the Christian church exists IS proof that Jesus existed. If he didn't, why did his followers all die for this belief?

It's a truly baffling anti religious mindset that tries to deny something that clearly happened as the historical ramifications were immense.

It's as absurd as suggesting William the Conqueror never existed and trying to explain the Battle of Hastings without him.

You simply cannot reasonably argue the birth of the church, under the most intense persecution and in the most violent manner, without accepting they had a founder.

It's pretty obvious that you've bought it all hook, line and sinker Bilbo.

It's also obvious that you're oblivious to the fact that there's not the slightest bit of physical evidence to support a historical Jesus.

I hope this helps.

Bought what hook, line and sinker? I've said nothing about the divinity of Christ here, His mission, the accuracy of the Gospels. I'm just using simple logic to prove that He must have existed.

Please give me a single example in human history of a movement that is grounded in actual history not having a founder.

Don't you find it a bit odd that "the founder" of Christianity never actually wrote anything himself? And don't you find it a bit suspicious that virtually nothing was written about the alleged Jesus during his lifetime? Here's a dude who's speaking to the multitudes all over the holyland, but no contemporary author writes a fucking word about him? Give a break man...
Oh, and Bilbo, please tell me who all these "eyewitnesses" are, fictitious characters in the gospels?

Why is it odd that there were no writings? He wasn't a nobleman of aristocratic birth. He didn't hold a high office during his earthly life, he was a travelling preacher and healer of the sick. The imperial powers and those of importance would have largely disregarded him during his life. He mixed with the downtrodden, coomon folk, the kinds that don't generally leave much in the way of historical record.

What do you think of the writings of Socrates? He musn't have existed either seeing as nithing remains and we only have the records of his followers.

What about Pythagorus?

It's very common in the ancient world for there to be no information and writings from a great historical figure. Their work is remembered and passed down by their followers and later historians.

This doesn't mean it's not authentic. They are still the product of the world they lived in, and cannot simply be invented.

If, as you suggest Jesus didn't exist then why did people believe he did 40 years later? How did his followers, or whoever wanted to create this ruse manage to invent a figure who performed miracles throughout Israel with thousands of witnesses, and place him 40 years previously when there would still be people alive from that time to challenge it?

If you have any understanding at all of Jewish history, you would know that they take their history very very seriously indeed. At that time all the Jewish people could trace their ancestory back to one of the twelve tribes, they were meticulous. You could no more invent an historical figure back then than you could now.

Imagine somebody trying to invent a great figure now from 1970 and giving them a back story and claiming a huge national impact. How could it happen?

Jesus' sayings and teachings were passed on orally, just as virtually all sayings and the like were back then. It was an ancient, rural community, they had no ipads, internet, typwriters,or even paper. There was no printing press. Writings were written down on massive scrolls and parchments, an expensive and arduous undertaken.

The fact that his story was deemed so important tthat it was written down (and not by one person but many seperately) attests to the impact that the man had.

To say that because he left no written evidence therefore he didn't exist is simply an idiotic conclusion. You might just as well say the same about a tyrannosaur.

[Kev]

Charlie, my argument is, there's virtually no secular historical evidence confirming that the jesus depicted in the "gospels" and/or New Testament is anything other than a fabricated character in a religious text/novel. Frankly, I couldn't give a fuck less, what christians, muslims, jews, or anyone else chooses to believe, I don't buy any of that bullshit.

What kind of evidence would convince you though?

It's an historical fact that enough people believed not only that Jesus did exist, but that they also saw him killed and then raised again. So strong was their belief in having witnessed this they happily went to their deaths, being stoned, crucifed, ripped apart by horses and suffering other unimaginable tortures, in order to proclaim the truth of Jesus' death and resurrection.

The fact that the Christian church exists IS proof that Jesus existed. If he didn't, why did his followers all die for this belief?

It's a truly baffling anti religious mindset that tries to deny something that clearly happened as the historical ramifications were immense.

It's as absurd as suggesting William the Conqueror never existed and trying to explain the Battle of Hastings without him.

You simply cannot reasonably argue the birth of the church, under the most intense persecution and in the most violent manner, without accepting they had a founder.

It's pretty obvious that you've bought it all hook, line and sinker Bilbo.

It's also obvious that you're oblivious to the fact that there's not the slightest bit of physical evidence to support a historical Jesus.

I hope this helps.

Bought what hook, line and sinker? I've said nothing about the divinity of Christ here, His mission, the accuracy of the Gospels. I'm just using simple logic to prove that He must have existed.

Please give me a single example in human history of a movement that is grounded in actual history not having a founder.

Don't you find it a bit odd that "the founder" of Christianity never actually wrote anything himself? And don't you find it a bit suspicious that virtually nothing was written about the alleged Jesus during his lifetime? Here's a dude who's alleged to have spoke to multitudes of followers all over the "holyland", but no contemporary author writes a fucking word about him? Give a break man...

Oh, and Bilbo, please tell me who all these "eyewitnesses" are, fictitious characters in the gospels?

PS. Clue: an eyewitness is someone who witnesses an event, et al, it becomes "hearsay" when someone else writes about what an eyewitness alleges to have seen (but didn't write about themselves) 50 to 100 years later.

Let's just look at this bit to see how silly it is.

Could you invent a character now from 50 years ago? Forget about television and written evidence, just imagine you live in a small isolated village with no tv, no radio, no written records, just people's memories.

Now imagine that you want to invent a miraculous man who 50 years ago came into the village and healed everybody, claimed to be God, was crucified and rose from the dead.

He's not real, you've just made him up now but you want everyone to believe it.

Now there will be people in that village who have lived there for 50 years. They will also have had children and grandchildren, and presumably uf they witnessed such things then they would most definitely have passed this information on to their own children right?

So how would it have been forgotten in the 50 years from when it happened to when you made up the story?

You can't make up history and then retroactively transplant it back in time, because if he really did perform miracles in Gallilee for example it's a fair bet that 50 years later people would remember them!

Seriously can you not see how retarded this idea of yours is?

[Mars_ax]

Seriously can you not see how retarded this idea of yours is?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So anyone one that doesn't agree with you is silly and retarded? And here I thought that miles was the only condescending, know it all, asshole on this forum. - debate/discussion over.

[Kev]

Seriously can you not see how retarded this idea of yours is?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So anyone one that doesn't agree with you is silly and retarded? And here I thought that miles was the only condescending, know it all, asshole on this forum. - debate/discussion over.

It's not about agreeing with me. Claiming Jesus never existed is like me saying dinosaurs never existed. It IS moronic.

Just think it through logically.

The Jews were no friends of the Christians, who they saw as an heretical cult. They also lived in Israel for hundreds of years, and most were not very socially mobile, thus living in villages for generations.

How is it possible for someone to invent a character 50/60 years previously,make grandiose claims of miraculous healings, thousands of followers, a public execution and then a claimed resurrection and then place him in the very villages that these Jews are living.

Do you not think that some of them might go 'Hang on a minute, we are living here at the time, this bloke never came around our way!'.

Again I ask you, if they made him up 50 years later, why did the Jewish people collude in this grand delusion and seemingly accept that this man really did live, even though presumably nobody had any memory of him whatsoever?

If this really is the extent of your though on this matter, then I repeat it is retarded.

No offence of course.


The birth of the Christian church is proof positive of the existence of the historical figure of Christ. It simply never would have got off the ground had the whole story been fabricated out of thin air.

Now I'm not saying anything concerning the Bible being true, or the gospels accurately portraying him, that is a matter of faith. But it cannot seriously be debated that he didn't exist at all.

[Mars_ax]

Seriously can you not see how retarded this idea of yours is?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So anyone one that doesn't agree with you is silly and retarded? And here I thought that miles was the only condescending, know it all, asshole on this forum. - debate/discussion over.

It's not about agreeing with me. Claiming Jesus never existed is like me saying dinosaurs never existed. It IS moronic.

Just think it through logically.

The Jews were no friends of the Christians, who they saw as an heretical cult. They also lived in Israel for hundreds of years, and most were not very socially mobile, thus living in villages for generations.

How is it possible for someone to invent a character 50/60 years previously,make grandiose claims of miraculous healings, thousands of followers, a public execution and then a claimed resurrection and then place him in the very villages that these Jews are living.

Do you not think that some of them might go 'Hang on a minute, we are living here at the time, this bloke never came around our way!'.

Again I ask you, if they made him up 50 years later, why did the Jewish people collude in this grand delusion and seemingly accept that this man really did live, even though presumably nobody had any memory of him whatsoever?

If this really is the extent of your though on this matter, then I repeat it is retarded.

No offence of course.


The birth of the Christian church is proof positive of the existence of the historical figure of Christ. It simply never would have got off the ground had the whole story been fabricated out of thin air.

Now I'm not saying anything concerning the Bible being true, or the gospels accurately portraying him, that is a matter of faith. But it cannot seriously be debated that he didn't exist at all.

Right, and I hope you're not offended that i've put your pretentious/arrogant ass on ignore.

[Kev]

Seriously can you not see how retarded this idea of yours is?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So anyone one that doesn't agree with you is silly and retarded? And here I thought that miles was the only condescending, know it all, asshole on this forum. - debate/discussion over.

It's not about agreeing with me. Claiming Jesus never existed is like me saying dinosaurs never existed. It IS moronic.

Just think it through logically.

The Jews were no friends of the Christians, who they saw as an heretical cult. They also lived in Israel for hundreds of years, and most were not very socially mobile, thus living in villages for generations.

How is it possible for someone to invent a character 50/60 years previously,make grandiose claims of miraculous healings, thousands of followers, a public execution and then a claimed resurrection and then place him in the very villages that these Jews are living.

Do you not think that some of them might go 'Hang on a minute, we are living here at the time, this bloke never came around our way!'.

Again I ask you, if they made him up 50 years later, why did the Jewish people collude in this grand delusion and seemingly accept that this man really did live, even though presumably nobody had any memory of him whatsoever?

If this really is the extent of your though on this matter, then I repeat it is retarded.

No offence of course.


The birth of the Christian church is proof positive of the existence of the historical figure of Christ. It simply never would have got off the ground had the whole story been fabricated out of thin air.

Now I'm not saying anything concerning the Bible being true, or the gospels accurately portraying him, that is a matter of faith. But it cannot seriously be debated that he didn't exist at all.

Right, and I hope you're not offended that i've put your pretentious/arrogant ass on ignore.

Not offended at all, another one bites the dust.

[Beanz]

Seriously can you not see how retarded this idea of yours is?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So anyone one that doesn't agree with you is silly and retarded? And here I thought that miles was the only condescending, know it all, asshole on this forum. - debate/discussion over.

It's not about agreeing with me. Claiming Jesus never existed is like me saying dinosaurs never existed. It IS moronic.

Just think it through logically.

The Jews were no friends of the Christians, who they saw as an heretical cult. They also lived in Israel for hundreds of years, and most were not very socially mobile, thus living in villages for generations.

How is it possible for someone to invent a character 50/60 years previously,make grandiose claims of miraculous healings, thousands of followers, a public execution and then a claimed resurrection and then place him in the very villages that these Jews are living.

Do you not think that some of them might go 'Hang on a minute, we are living here at the time, this bloke never came around our way!'.

Again I ask you, if they made him up 50 years later, why did the Jewish people collude in this grand delusion and seemingly accept that this man really did live, even though presumably nobody had any memory of him whatsoever?

If this really is the extent of your though on this matter, then I repeat it is retarded.

No offence of course.


The birth of the Christian church is proof positive of the existence of the historical figure of Christ. It simply never would have got off the ground had the whole story been fabricated out of thin air.

Now I'm not saying anything concerning the Bible being true, or the gospels accurately portraying him, that is a matter of faith. But it cannot seriously be debated that he didn't exist at all.

Right, and I hope you're not offended that i've put your pretentious/arrogant ass on ignore.

Not offended at all, another one bites the dust.

That response is Gheyer than a harlequin lycra jumpsuit

[Andre]

Seriously can you not see how retarded this idea of yours is?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So anyone one that doesn't agree with you is silly and retarded? And here I thought that miles was the only condescending, know it all, asshole on this forum. - debate/discussion over.

It's not about agreeing with me. Claiming Jesus never existed is like me saying dinosaurs never existed. It IS moronic.

Just think it through logically.

The Jews were no friends of the Christians, who they saw as an heretical cult. They also lived in Israel for hundreds of years, and most were not very socially mobile, thus living in villages for generations.

How is it possible for someone to invent a character 50/60 years previously,make grandiose claims of miraculous healings, thousands of followers, a public execution and then a claimed resurrection and then place him in the very villages that these Jews are living.

Do you not think that some of them might go 'Hang on a minute, we are living here at the time, this bloke never came around our way!'.

Again I ask you, if they made him up 50 years later, why did the Jewish people collude in this grand delusion and seemingly accept that this man really did live, even though presumably nobody had any memory of him whatsoever?

If this really is the extent of your though on this matter, then I repeat it is retarded.

No offence of course.


The birth of the Christian church is proof positive of the existence of the historical figure of Christ. It simply never would have got off the ground had the whole story been fabricated out of thin air.

Now I'm not saying anything concerning the Bible being true, or the gospels accurately portraying him, that is a matter of faith. But it cannot seriously be debated that he didn't exist at all.

The Jewish religion was originally against the Desposni. When Rome took over the practices from those who had been taught by the Desposni, then they were called Christian. They never took over the Desposni, as they went underground the Roman Church then took over and sculptured their way: Pauline Christianity.

Desposyni Church | Welcome