The Skepticism Theists Share With Atheists – Why Don’t They See It?

The Skepticism Theists Share With Atheists – Why Don’t They See It? September 3, 2019

Christians have a lot in common with atheists. A Christian approaches the claim that Vishnu exists the same way we heathens look at Yahweh. A Muslim dismisses the claim that Chango brings the thunder as easily as we dismiss the claim that Allah is the creator of all things. The very same skepticism that is activated in atheists when any god is proposed, is present in theists when any god but their own is proposed. It is undeniable that we share this sort of skepticism with theists, and yet, many of them refuse to see it.

I got an email from a believer the other day that got me thinking more about this. Is it just that they refuse to see the similarities, or is it that they just haven’t thought about it that way?

The email began,

I stumbled across your page in my Facebook feed. Although being a Catholic, I have an open mind (shock horror…) and read your website and facebook posts. Some made me laugh, because I recognise that Catholicism and the Church are far, far from perfect. But what is? Anything run by people is never going to be perfect.

I wholeheartedly agree that anything run by people will never be perfect. The problem here is that the top dog in your church ain’t people. He is claimed to be an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, benevolent, perfect being. This is the claim, and if the claim is correct, then his little club must also be perfect, infallible, and all-good. If God is all-good, why would he call to broken predators who victimize young boys to lead his churches? Many of the men and women who lead congregations describe their inspiration to do so as a call from god. Why would god call people who hurt kids? I’m not asking for a canned apologetic answer. I’m asking you for a truthful answer; something you can live with; something that doesn’t require any cognitive dissonance or cherry-picking. If your god is perfect, and his manifestation on earth is your church, why isn’t your church perfect? Either he’s not in your church, or he’s not perfect. Which is it?

However, one post that caught my eye in particular was ‘atheism is a conclusion, not a belief.’ I thought about this, and I wanted to ask you a genuine question.

God hasn’t been scientifically proven and neither has atheism been scientifically proven (If so, please show me).

Here, you’re making the classic mistake that atheism is the claim that there is no god. It’s not. It’s a lack of a belief in a god. You probably don’t believe in a great many gods even though you likely have not disproven them. The very same way you feel about Vishnu or the great Agwe is the way I feel about your god. I do not make any claims about your god or any others. Not that they do exist and not that they don’t.

So shouldn’t the logical, scientific conclusion therefore be that we genuinely do not know?

If you can apply that logic to a god whose only evidence is an ancient book, you can apply it to vampires, leprechauns, fairies and unicorns, for which the only evidence is literature and other art, really. If I am to say that, logically speaking, I do not know if a god exists or not, I would have to be able to say the same about anything anyone claims that I cannot disprove:

Logically, I do not know if the ghost of Liberace is living in the gas tank of my neighbour’s Nissan Cube.

Logically, I do not know if the dead souls of slaughtered indigenous people communicated with Sarah Winchester, instructing her on how to build her house around the clock for 38 years straight.

Logically, I do not know if god told Victoria Soliz to drown her son in a puddle.

You get the idea. There are plenty of things we cannot disprove, but we can still safely say, “I don’t believe you because that seems a bit far-fetched to me”.

I cannot disprove that a god exists, but the claim that one does seems a bit far-fetched to me.

Logically then, isn’t theism (not confined to Christianity, but just the belief in a God/s) just as ‘logical’ as atheism?

I can ask you a similar question: Logically then, isn’t belief in Yahweh just as ‘logical’ as belief in Allah, Anansi, Loki, Thor, the Great Baron Samedi or Chinnamasta? You have dismissed all of these gods except Yahweh. Why? What evidence do you have for your god that does not exist for any of the others?

There is none. There are holy texts claimed to be divinely inspired supporting the existence of all of them. Followers of each of these gods claim prophecy from their holy texts has come true. These gods are claimed to be felt by their worshippers, and often deliver experiences to them that “can’t be explained any other way.” These gods heal, these gods answer prayers, these gods perform miracles. These gods are what their followers see when they suggest we “look around! Creation is all the evidence we need.”. These gods are as likely as your god, and yet you choose not to follow any but yours. Each of them is equal in the amount of evidence they have supporting them.

So, no, it is not just as logical to lack belief in all gods as it is to choose Yahweh out of the many thousands of gods even though Yahweh has no more evidence for him than all the others. No, the most logical position, is to see that none of them has sufficient evidence, to an equal degree, just like leprechauns, the Ogopogo or Liberace’s ghost, and belief in any of them is equally unsupported.

Unless and until you can present to me demonstrable, repeatable evidence for any god the most logical position remains to withhold belief in any and all gods.

If there is anything you lack a belief in, be it other gods, mythical creatures, magical powers, alien abductions, etc, then you know precisely how I feel about your god. You do not need to be able to disprove something to lack a belief in it. On the flip side, for some of us, you do need to be able to prove something before we believe it. It’s just as simple as that.

How would you answer these questions? Let me know in the comments!

Buy Me A Coffee
I’m writing a book addressing the many reasons believers distrust atheists. I’m around 40,000 words in! If you want to help me get it done, you can support me by donating here or becoming a patron here.

Image: Creative Commons/Pixabay

"I'm so sorry for your loss. I lost my first husband nearly 30 years ago, ..."

When To Keep Your Atheism To ..."
"Having lost my first husband suddenly, I can say that pushing back on thoughts and ..."

When To Keep Your Atheism To ..."
"I have a saying for that: Love the faithful, hate the faith."

There Are No Thoughts And Prayers ..."
"Yes, well said. I have problems with specific religious people but not because they are ..."

There Are No Thoughts And Prayers ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • epeeist

    Personally I take the position that I don’t bloat my ontology with things for which there is no substantive justification.

  • Lefty Jones

    I’d also point out that while there is no evidence against an abstract god, there is quite definitely evidence against an omnipotent, benevolent, and omnipresent god; probably the most popular and solid freethinking argument, the Problem of Evil, which, if attributed to Epicurus, was stated no later than 270 BCE.

  • Believers almost always make a big leap from “There is some sort of being that fits the description of what we think of as God” to “God exists, and it’s my version that exists, not your silly version.” Because the first kind of god isn’t satisfying enough. Most people want a god that will do things for them, even if it’s nothing more than making some guy down the street they don’t like have a bad life.

  • The Bofa on the Sofa

    I, for one, think it is perfectly reasonable that a Nissan Cube gas tank would be a proper place for the ghost of Liberace.

  • WallofSleep

    Ugh. There are light years of difference between not being perfect and decades (if not centuries) of systemic, extreme child abuse and cover ups.

  • Jim Jones

    I’ve only found one definition of god that is consistent.

    “God’ is the ego projection of the self styled believer in the supposed being with added super powers.”

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Actually you may be surprised to find that many Christians such as myself look at other religions and see the elements of Christianity present. When I hear the Native Americans speak of a Great Spirit or the Zoroastrianism followers speak of a benevolent Creator I see the one true God by another name. when I see the legends of gods such as Thor, Apollo, and Horus I think of the Nephilim mentioned in the Old Testament. So although I do great all such claims with skepticism like you do I also understand that there is generally a root source for legends. That is why I laugh when confronted with people who cannot even accept the possibility of a historical man named Jesus

  • Campaigner1

    How have you determined JHVH/Yaweh/Allah is the “One True God” rather than Ra, Quetzacoatl, Ahura Mazda, Skyfather Raven,Xemnu, or the Mormon god who rules over the planet Kolob? Or what if the ur-God is known only in fragmented form by humans, with NONE of the above being true representations? If God cannot be directly seen, observed, or communicated with, and if God’s creation often seems unguided and even contradictory, how could one know the true mind and motivations of God?

  • Jim Jones

    Jesus was a common name around the 1st century, and before and after it. Undoubtedly many such were crucified by the Romans. There are no reports of any coming back to life.

    The gospels are religious fiction, written in a foreign country 350 years after the supposed events.

    There are no contemporary reports of any such events, even Christians are unknown then.

  • rationalobservations?

    I accept the “possibility” of the historical existence of an entirely human mortal man named “Jesus” but observe that there is no authentic and original, 1st century originated historical evidence of “his” existence and no historical evidence supporting the contradictory legends of “Jesus” that appear in the prototype bible (Codex Sinaiticus) that was authored by a small team of human men in the late 4th century a short while after the Roman rellighion they called “christianity” was cobbled together and brutally enforced upon the then known world.

    I recognise that you already indicate that you are in denial of the above evidence supported facts and anticipate that you will respond with the usual “All theologians believe in the existence of “Jesus”” shill. That remains unconvincing due to the utter, total and complete absence of authentic and original evidence in support of this unsupported claim.

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • Rational Human

    It’s really simple – at some point in the past, maybe even unconsciously or when very young, they accepted or believed in their god, usually not on the basis of evidence or logic, and thereafter every god claim is compared to the belief and found to be “not my belief “, and is dismissed out of hand. The god belief becomes a presuppositional worldview and anything that is “not” is not even considered.

  • HairyEyedWordBombThrower

    many Christians such as myself look at other religions and see the elements of Christianity present.

    Hint: If you can claim that for xtianity, they can likewise claim that xtianity (a relative newcomer among world religions) is piggybacking on *them*.

  • Lady Alexandra

    Christianity borrowed a lot from the pagans, too. But we’ll share.

  • MelindaF

    I just stumbled on your page as well. And, so far, I really like it. I just recently shed what remained of my Christian faith. It still feels odd.

    But thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts, ideas and just funny bits of your life with us.

    All the best.

    M.

    Edit: Cannot spell today.

  • blogcom

    The glory has departed from a lot of Churches, Yahweh has left the building in other words, but He still shows up at those rare ones, and people perceive it immediately.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Of course they can. It would not surprise me to find that a follower of Zoroastrianism would look upon the Creator of Christianity as their own

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    “…there is no authentic and original, 1st century originated historical evidence of “his” existence…”

    That is not true. Josephus mentions him in not only the Testimonium Flavianum, which is rightfully brought into question because of pro Christian terminology, but also The Antiquities of the Jews, which is not questioned at all by historians. As such your second point about historians not being almost unilaterally convinced of the historical Jesus is unconvincing from my perspective.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    It is undisputed fact that Nero persecuted Christians in the first century, AD 64 to be precise. Thus saying that Christians were unknown at that time when they were obviously a well known group with significant followers mere decades after Christ does not pass the smell test.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Who said anything about imitation? When investigators are met with similar accounts they usually call that corroboration rather than imitation.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I believe I mentioned that Ahura Mazda could well be the exact same Creator as the one found in Judeo/Christian beliefs.

  • Jim Jones

    Unless you confused Nero with Diocletian, it certainly is disputed.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Nero was the emperor when Rome burned in Ad 64 and he blamed it on the Christians.

  • swbarnes2

    There seems to be no contemporary documentation in Nero’s time, and only a single paragraph in Tacitus.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Tacitus? You mean the HISTORIAN? The one who was alive WHEN IT HAPPENED?

    THAT Tacitus?

  • Jim Jones

    According to the Christian myth.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    No, as the other poster pointed out, the Roman historian Tacitus documented it at the time.

    He was a pagan by the way.

  • Warpaint

    That is the beauty of this country you can worship flaming farm animals if you wish, my beliefs are mine and I do not ask for anyone permission to practice my beliefs, nor do you require permission to practice yours or not practice…

  • Jim Jones

    Tacitus wasn’t a witness. Go reread Remsberg. It’s on Gutenberg.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I see. So you don’t believe historians, who have no identifiable bias, and who lived contemporary with the event in question, are a reliable source for… wait for it… history. Got it.

    Oh, and who the frick is Remsberg? The American football player? LOL

  • Jim Jones

    https://www.gutenberg.org/files/46986/46986-h/46986-h.htm

    Read chapter 2 and save yourself some embarrassment.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    You are asking me to believe a 19th century skeptic with an admitted bias is a more accurate source on what happened in the first century than an impartial historian who lived at the time and in the location of said event?

    And you think I am the one who should be embarrassed?

    By the way. I see that less people have downloaded that book from Gutenberg than bought a novel that I wrote on a lark.

  • Thanks4AllTheFish

    “That is why I laugh when confronted with people who cannot even accept the possibility of a historical man named Jesus”

    As well you should [laugh]. I’m sure the Hebrew name for Jesus was a common one and was held by many people in Biblical times some of whom may even have been itinerant proselytizing preachers. However, since none of us were actually there (to paraphrase Ken Ham) no one can know for sure.

  • Campaigner1

    Joesphus was not a contemporary of the Jesus described in the Bible. He referred to a subset of Jews who followed the teachings of Jesus, but that is describing a movement, not attesting to the nature of the founder, who was alleged to have been crucified.

  • rationalobservations?

    I am always a little surprised that any religionists are so ignorant as to reference the Josephus fraud. But then again those who believe in magic and one/some/all of the millions of fictional gods, goddesses and god-men must be fundamentally ignorant and gullible so it should be no surprise to anyone that folk like this will buy into any myths, legends, lies and propaganda.

    Not one single word exists that was actually written by Flavius Josephus. There are no extant (surviving) manuscripts of Josephus’ works that can be dated as being fabricated before the 11th century, and the oldest of these were “copied” (written!) by Christian monks.

    “When addressing the mythical nature of Jesus Christ, one issue repeatedly raised is the purported “evidence” of his existence to be found in the writings of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from about 37 to 100 CE. In Josephus’s Antiquities of the Jews appears the notorious passage regarding Christ called the “Testimonium Flavianum” (“TF”):

    “Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,–a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.” (Whitson, 379)

    This surprisingly brief and simplistic passage constitutes the “best proof” of Jesus’s existence in the entire ancient non-Christian library comprising the works of dozens of historians, writers, philosophers, politicians and others who never mentioned the great sage and “wonder-worker Jesus Christ, even though they lived contemporaneously with or shortly after the Christian savior’s purported advent.

    Despite the best wishes of sincere believers and the erroneous claims of truculent apologists, the Testimonium Flavianum has been demonstrated continually over the centuries to be a forgery, likely interpolated by Catholic Church historian Eusebius in the fourth century. So thorough and universal has been this debunking that very few scholars of repute continued to cite the passage after the turn of the 19th century. Indeed, the TF was rarely mentioned, except to note that it was a forgery, and numerous books by a variety of authorities over a period of 200 or so years basically took it for granted that the Testimonium Flavianum in its entirety was spurious, an interpolation and a forgery. As Dr. Gordon Stein relates:

    “…the vast majority of scholars since the early 1800s have said that this quotation is not by Josephus, but rather is a later Christian insertion in his works. In other words, it is a forgery, rejected by scholars.”

    So well understood was this fact of forgery that these numerous authorities did not spend their precious time and space rehashing the arguments against the TF’s authenticity. Nevertheless, in the past few decades apologists of questionable integrity and credibility have glommed onto the TF, because this short and dubious passage represents the most “concrete” secular, non-biblical reference to a man who purportedly shook up the world. In spite of the past debunking, the debate is currently confined to those who think the TF was original to Josephus but was Christianized, and those who credulously and self-servingly accept it as “genuine” in its entirety.

    To repeat, this passage was so completely dissected by scholars of high repute and standing–the majority of them pious Christians–that it was for decades understood by subsequent scholars as having been proved in toto a forgery, such that these succeeding scholars did not even mention it, unless to acknowledge it as false. (In addition to being repetitious, numerous quotes will be presented here, because a strong show of rational consensus is desperately needed when it comes to matters of blind, unscientific and irrational faith.) The scholars who so conclusively proved the TF a forgery made their mark at the end of the 18th century and into the 20th, when a sudden reversal was implemented, with popular opinion hemming and hawing its way back first to the “partial interpolation theory” and in recent times, among the third-rate apologists, to the notion that the whole TF is “genuine.” As Earl Doherty says, in “Josephus Unbound”:

    “Now, it is a curious fact that older generations of scholars had no trouble dismissing this entire passage as a Christian construction. Charles Guignebert, for example, in his Jesus (1956, p.17), calls it ‘a pure Christian forgery.’ Before him, Lardner, Harnack and Schurer, along with others, declared it entirely spurious. Today, most serious scholars have decided the passage is a mix: original parts rubbing shoulders with later Christian additions.”

    The earlier scholarship that proved the entire TF to be fraudulent was determined by intense scrutiny by some of the most erudite, and mainly Christian, writers of the time, in a number of countries, their works written in a variety of languages, but particularly German, French and English. Their general conclusions, as elucidated by Christian authority Dr. Lardner, and related here by the author of Christian Mythology Unveiled (c. 1842), include the following reasons for doubting the authenticity of the TF as a whole:

    “Mattathias, the father of Josephus, must have been a witness to the miracles which are said to have been performed by Jesus, and Josephus was born within two years after the crucifixion, yet in all the works he says nothing whatever about the life or death of Jesus Christ; as for the interpolated passage it is now universally acknowledged to be a forgery. The arguments of the ‘Christian Ajax,’ even Lardner himself, against it are these: ‘It was never quoted by any of our Christian ancestors before Eusebius. It disturbs the narrative. The language is quite Christian. It is not quoted by Chrysostom, though he often refers to Josephus, and could not have omitted quoting it had it been then in the text. It is not quoted by Photius [9th century], though he has three articles concerning Josephus; and this author expressly states that this historian has not taken the least notice of Christ. Neither Justin Martyr, in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew; nor Clemens Alexandrinus, who made so many extracts from ancient authors; nor Origen against Celsus, have ever mentioned this testimony. But, on the contrary, in chap. 25th of the first book of that work, Origen openly affirms that Josephus, who had mentioned John the Baptist, did not acknowledge Christ. That this passage is a false fabrication is admitted by Ittigius, Blondel, Le Clerc, Vandale, Bishop Warburton, and Tanaquil Faber.'” (CMU, 47)

    Hence, by the 1840’s, when the anonymous author of Christian Mythology Unveiled wrote, the Testimonium Flavanium was already “universally acknowledged to be a forgery.””

    http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm

  • rationalobservations?

    Your argument that anything actually written by Flavius Josephus must by definition be recycled myths and legends, However:
    Not one single word exists that was actually written by Flavius Josephus. There are no extant (surviving) manuscripts of Josephus’ works that can be dated as being fabricated before the 11th century, and the oldest of these were “copied” (written!) by Christian monks.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    From the same article you cherry picked that quote from:

    “There are about 170 extant Latin translations of Josephus, some of which go back to the sixth century. According to Louis Feldman these have proven very useful in reconstructing the Josephus texts through comparisons with the Greek manuscripts, confirming proper names and filling in gaps”

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I am always surprised by the disingenuous quote mining and reliance on unsupported conspiracy theories some will go to in order to deny even the existence of a man named Jesus.

    You quote the part about surviving complete manuscripts while ignoring this passage:

    “There are about 170 extant Latin translations of Josephus, some of which go back to the sixth century. According to Louis Feldman these have proven very useful in reconstructing the Josephus texts through comparisons with the Greek manuscripts, confirming proper names and filling in gaps”

    You also ignored that i addressed the embellishment of Testimonium Flavianum while pointing out that the Antiquities book is an uncontested reference to Jesus.

    Please note that “ignored” and “ignorant” share the same root so perhaps you should invest in a mirror before making such accusations.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Right. When these people existed there were plenty of people still alive that were contemporaries of Jesus. As such claims about the crowds he attracted were easily disproved if they were fabricated.

    Think about it.

  • HairyEyedWordBombThrower

    That’s SIXTH century…at least 500+ years after the events.

    Why believe it when no contemporary accounts exist?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    You can believe whatever you want but when it comes to history I favor the historians over the conspiracy theorists myself.

  • rationalobservations?

    I don’t deny “Jesus”.
    I truthfully report the fact that there is no authentic and original, 1st century originated historical evidence of the existence of “Jesus” or any of the varied and contradictory, fantastical and very newsworthy exploits written by men in legends that were fabricated centuries after the time in which they are back dated to and in which they are merely set.

    You now reference fragments of legends written in the 6th century. These are folk tales based only upon propaganda that first appeared in the 4th century.

    “the earliest of the extant manuscripts [of the New Testament], it is true, do not date back beyond the middle of the fourth century AD”

    (Catholic Encyclopedia, op. cit., pp. 656-7).

  • rationalobservations?

    Where are the testimonies of the people you say were witness to the existence and remarkable exploits of a “Jesus” that is historically absent from the whole first century?

    You continually recycle the propaganda that first appeared in the 4th century but so far offer NO EVIDENCE that supports any of that propaganda.
    Why is that?

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    No evidence of the existence of “Jesus” here – and merely confirmation of what the original 4th century founded Roman religion they called “christianity” already knew:

    “the most distinguished body of academic opinion ever assembled” (Catholic Encyclopedias, Preface) admits that the Gospels “do not go back to the first century of the Christian era”

    (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, p. 137, pp. 655-6).

    There is not even a single item of 1st century originated graffito that mentions or references “Jesus” or any of the fantastical events attributed to “him” that first appeared centuries later.

    Understand that repeating myths and legends is NOT evidence.
    Recycling the opinions of people deluded by myths and legends written centuries after the time in which they are merely set is not evidence.
    Revealing your own delusions and baseless beliefs is not evidence of anything but your indoctrination.

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png
    https://www.atheistrepublic.com/sites/default/files/Lack%20of%20Understanding%20Is%20Not%20Evidence%20For%20God.jpg
    https://pics.me.me/the-truth-about-faith-having-faith-that-something-is-true-11341532.png

  • rationalobservations?

    Present the EVIDENCE – not the opinions of other indoctrinated religionists.

    Name the historians who believe in a historical “Jesus” and most importantly reveal the evidence upon which they base their belief and the location in which that authentic and original historical evidence is conserved and available for study. It was my personal inability to respond to that challenge and discovery that there is no historical evidence of “Jesus” that confirmed my own non-belief in the diverse and very different content of all the diverse and very different bibles that have been written by deluded and/or dishonest men since the prototype bibles first appeared in the 4th century.

    Here (again) is what one of the world’s leading bible scholars (who was once a christian fundamentalist) wrote after studying the oldest/first 4th century written Greek language bibles and noticing the thousands of discrepancies between those oldest bibles and the much altered versions in circulation today:

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    It is probable that members of the rebellious Jewish messianic cults of which historical evidence exists had their rebellions put down by the emperors of the 1st century. There is NO EVIDENCE of the existence of “Jesus” or of the existence of a cult of “Jesus” from within what only became known as the “1st century” at what at the same time became known as the “8th century”.

    All the claims and propaganda surrounding the 4th century founded Roman state religion they called “christianity” date from the foundation of that entirely fabricated religion.

    It is worth noting that the only “messiah” noted in history and acclaimed as a/the “messiah” is Simon Christ. He left much evidence of his existence. Of Jesus there IS NO EVIDENCE.
    Confused and contradictory myths and legends that cannot be traced back to any historical events that actually occurred in the 1st century is not evidence of anything but the dishonesty of those who invented “christianity” and those who continue to lie for that fraudulent human contrived and human run – obscenely wealthy and endlessly corrupt – enterprise.

    A Simon “Christ” coin showing Simon under the messianic star outside of the temple:
    https://www.livius.org/site/assets/files/18723/bar_kochba_coin1.jpg

  • rationalobservations?

    There remains no evidence of this outside of legends and propaganda written in or long after theth century fabrication of the Roman religion they called “christianity”.

    You must surely know this or you would have discovered and presented more than the dishonest and baseless propaganda, mythology and legend you recycle?

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    Not one single word written by Tacitus survives and the centuries later propaganda written by dishonest christians has no supporting evidence.

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    On the contrary – it appears to be you who do not believe real and contemporary historians who report the nonexistence of a single item of historical evidence relating to the legends of “Jesus”.

  • rationalobservations?

    No.
    There is not one single extant word written by “that Tacitus”.
    What you (and everyone else) means are the centuries later forgeries written by dishonest christians and merely attributed to Tacitus.

    You still don’t appear to “get it”:
    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    All you need to do is present some tangible, authentic, original, 1st century originated evidence in support of the propaganda you endlessly recycle. Then we can discuss that actuallevidence.
    Take all the time you need to search for it!

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • Jim Jones

    > to believe a 19th century skeptic with an admitted bias

    His study of the documents has been repeated. It wound up with over twice as many documents which were from the same time or within a century later being listed. Still, not one mentioned the (magic) Jesus or any Christians etc.

    All you wind up with is a forgery so ludicrous it harms your case plus some references that need to be twisted to death to assist you.

    This, from the creator of the universe.

  • Jim Jones

    He doesn’t even know the biography.

  • Jim Jones

    See http://pocm.info

    The Greeks borrowed everything from other god men.

  • Jim Jones

    The Testimonium, a forgery by Eusebius, wouldn’t fool an 8 year old. It harms your case.

  • Jim Jones

    Oooh! The sixth century. So the only reliable histories of WWII will be written in 2500 CE and later?

  • Jim Jones

    You don’t have any historians, just true believers. and belief can fade.

    Then I began to see that not just the scribal text but the original text itself was a very human book. This stood very much at odds with how I had regarded the text in my late teens as a newly minted “born-again” Christian, convinced that the Bible was the inerrant Word of God and that the biblical words themselves had come to us by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. As I realized already in graduate school, even if God had inspired the original words, we don’t have the original words. So the doctrine of inspiration was in a sense irrelevant to the Bible as we have it, since the words God reputedly inspired had been changed and, in some cases, lost.

    Moreover, I came to think that my earlier views of inspiration were not only irrelevant, they were probably wrong. For the only reason (I came to think) for God to inspire the Bible would be so that his people would have his actual words; but if he really wanted people to have his actual words, surely he would have miraculously preserved those words, just as he had miraculously inspired them in the first place. Given the circumstance that he didn’t preserve the words, the conclusion seemed inescapable to me that he hadn’t gone to the trouble of inspiring them.

    Misquoting Jesus — Bart Ehrman

  • Jim Jones

    Name one person who met Jesus, spoke to him, saw him or heard him who wrote about the event, has a name and is documented outside of the bible (or any other gospels).

    Just one person.

  • Jim Jones

    See http://pocm.info for the real sources of the religion.

  • Jim Jones

    Since Jesus never existed there’s no point.

  • rationalobservations?

    You know what they call educated and intelligent religionists..?
    V
    V
    V

    …”ex-religionists” (or more literally – “atheists”)

    The third largest and fastest growing human demographic are now the “godless” non religious and many of us among the older generation are recovered ex-religionists. Our numbers are growing exponentially as education and free secular democracy becomes stronger in the developed world and is becoming the greatest aspiration among the younger generation within Islamic totalitarian states who merely await the death of those who currently oppress and persecute them.

  • rationalobservations?

    Not according to Judaeo/christian myths and legends…

  • Jim Jones

    ISTR that The God Delusion in Arabic has been downloaded over a million times.

  • Jim Jones

    Oops. Over 13 million and counting.

  • rationalobservations?

    You appear to be recognising that all the religions of the world are similarly unsupported by any evidence and many (most?) of them are reinterpretations of earlier mythologies?

    It is worth noting that “Yahweh” was part of the pantheon of fictional and undetected gods and goddesses of many distantly historical nations and tribes and it appear that the tribes who reinvented their history and reinvented themselves as Hebrews/Jews appear to have “borrowed” Yahweh and his beautiful wife/consort Asherah from the Canaanites who borrowed them in turn from previous religions.

    “Asherah, the Shekinah, consort and beloved of Yahweh. God-the-Mother. Her sacred pillars or poles once stood right beside Yahweh’s altar, embracing it. Moses and Aaron both carried one of these Asherah “poles” as a sacred staff of power. The Children of Israel were once dramatically healed simply by gazing at the staff with serpents suspended from it. This symbol, the snakes and the staff, has become the modern universal symbol for doctors and healers.* Asherah was also widely known in the Middle Eastern ancient world as a Goddess of Healing. Then She was removed forcibly from the Old Testament Hebrew Scriptures around 400 or 500 B.C. Her priestesses & priests, known by the headbands they wore, worshiped on hill-tops, such as Zion, Mount of Olives, Har Megiddo and countless others. Daughter of Zion, a term found numerous times in the Old Testament, was perhaps a term for a priestess of Asherah. It later came to mean the “City of God,” or Jerusalem herself. As the “official” state worship became increasingly male oriented, and the establishment became hostile toward all forms of Asherah worship, a time of conflict and bloodshed lasting over a hundred years began. Those that still clung to Her worship paid the price with their lives at the hands of King Josiah and other rabid Yahwists. (Story in the 2nd Kings ). But She could not be torn from the hearts and souls of Her people.

    Asherah from the Religion of the Canaanites

    She was the wife of El in Ugaritic mythology, and is the goddess who is also called Athirau-Yammi: “She Who Walks on (or in) the Sea.” She was the chief goddess of Tyre in the 15th century BC, and bore the appellation qudshu, “holiness.” In the OT Asherah appears as a goddess by the side of Baal, whose consort she evidently became, at least among the Canaanites of the south. However, most biblical references to the name point obviously to some cult object of wood, which might be cut down and burned, possibly the goddesses’ image (1 Kings 15:13, 2 King 21:7). Her prophets are mentioned (1 Kings 18:19), and the vessels used in her service referred to (2 Kings 23:4). The existence of numerous symbols, in each of which the goddess was believed to be immanent, led to the creation of numerous forms of her person, which were described as Asherim. The cult object itself, whatever it was, was utterly detestible to faithful worshippers of Yahweh (1 Kings 15:13), and was set up on the high places beside the “altars of incense” (hammanim) and the “stone pillars” (masseboth). The translation of asherah by “grove” in some translations follows a singular tradition preserved in the LXX and the Vulgate which apparently connects the goddess’ image with the usual place of its adoration.

    A Hebrew inscription on a broken storage jar, found in Kuntillet ‘Ajrud in north-eastern Sinai and dated from the beginning of the eighth century BCE has three primitive figures: a standing male figure in the foreground; a female figure just behind him; and a seated musician in the background. The Hebrew inscription above the drawing reads: ‘I bless you by Yhwh of Samaria and his Asherah’ (Dever, 1984; King, 1989). Furthermore, a tomb inscription from el-Qom in Judea, dated to the eighth century BCE too, concludes with the words: ‘to Yhwh and his Asherah’ (Margalit, 1989, 1990 and further references there).

    Asherah, like Anat, is a well-documented goddess of the northwest Semitic pantheon. We remember that, according to the Bible itself, in the ninth century BCE Asherah was officially worshipped in Israel; her cult was matronized by Jezebel who, supposedly, imported it from her native Phoenician homeland. Other traces in the Bible either angrily acknowledge her worship as goddess (2 Kings 14.13, for instance, where another royal lady is involved), or else demote her from goddess to a sacred tree or pole set up near an altar (2 Kings 13.6, 17.16; Deuteronomy 16.21 and more). The apparent need for the hostile and widely distributed polemics against her worship constitutes evidence for its continued popularity. Linguistically, Margalit claims (1989), ‘Asherah’ signifies ‘[she] who walks behind’, displaying a prototypic if divine attitude that befits a wife (and is reflected in the Kuntillet Ajrud drawing). Thus both the partially suppressed and distorted biblical evidence and the archaeological evidence combine to suggest one conclusion. The cult of a goddess, considered the spouse of Yhwh, was celebrated throughout the First Temple era in the land, and beyond this period at the Jewish settlement in Elephantine (in Egypt).”

    http://northernway.org/hgoddess.html

    https://pics.me.me/the-truth-about-faith-having-faith-that-something-is-true-11341532.png

  • rationalobservations?

    It may take one or two more generations before the religion superstition dies out totally – but on current trends it is inevitable within the fairly near future.

    https://religionnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/GallupNones.png
    https://i.stack.imgur.com/b4TXu.png

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    “You appear to be recognising that all the religions of the world are similarly unsupported by any evidence …”

    Yah, ummmm, not so much.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Why?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Proof by assertion?

    Lol

    Logic 101

  • HairyEyedWordBombThrower

    Nope.

    Provide evidence or get over yourself.

  • rationalobservations?

    You wrote:
    “Actually you may be surprised to find that many Christians such as myself look at other religions and see the elements of Christianity present.”
    That appears to be just another way of asserting that the elements of many other religions are present within christrianity.

    That is NOT surprising as history reveals that the 4th century Roman religion so brutally imposed upon the world in the mid 4th century was cobbled together from mostly then extant “pagan” components and exclusively “pagan” feast days and festivals.

    As we now begin to approach the mid winter festival season I hope I am the first to wish you a super Saturnalia!

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f1/ab/79/f1ab7952d03ada25831b86970bb1c74d.jpg
    https://i.pinimg.com/236x/16/35/3b/16353b662bb25a520fb617f5aae4d39b–atheism-book-jacket.jpg
    https://mrentropy.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/saturnalia.jpg

  • Jim Jones

    Sherlock Holmes never existed.

    We know that for the same reasons.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Wow! You actually found a liberal college peofessor who published his opinions in a bunch of books and his opinions reflect yours!

    Not impressed. FYI This is an opinion, not a fact:

    “Then I began to see that not just the scribal text but the original text itself was a very human book.”

  • rationalobservations?

    Since no historical trace of any authentic and original work of Tacitus exists – the centuries later written texts merely attributed to Tacitus are meaningless as evidence of anything other than forgery and interpolation.

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Dude. This is the third time i have conceded the embellishments of that and directed you to THE FREAKING ANTIQUITIES OF THE JEWS which was NOT FREAKING “FORGED”!!!

    What is your malfunction?

  • rationalobservations?

    The irony of someone who believes in totally unsupported myths legends and lies saying that the evidence supported observations of one of the world’s leading professors or theology are opinion, not a fact escapes you.

    There is no evidence of the existence of any of the millions of fictional gods, goddesses and god-men.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    If he didn’t find any he wasn’t looking. Just like you. And I’m not going to correct you on the Josephus “forgery” half truth you keep posting anynore.

    There were two different references in two different books.

    Only one was altered

    Pretending you haven’t been told this or just assuming it isnt true rather than fact checking is dishonest.

    If you post that falsehood one more time i will have to assume you dont have the integrity to allow a real conversation

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    The irony is that i have the written records of a Jew and a Pagan, both historians, ,both writing within a generation of the event, who verify the existence of the man. You have a conspiracy theory as to why i shouldn’t believe them. And you have the guts to say i believe unsupported ideas.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    ROFLMAO!!!

    Try pre-K logic instead

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Can you show me where i mentioned evidence?

    No?

    Then what are you arguing here?

  • Jim Jones

    You don’t appear to know what words mean.

  • Jim Jones

    You are too ignorant for this conversation.

  • Jim Jones

    Your desperation proves nothing.

  • rationalobservations?

    The pathetic and dishonest irony is that you continue to make claims that you do not and cannot back up through actual, tangible authentic and original evidence.

    You claim to have the authentic an original written records of a Jew and a Pagan at your disposal. Where are these authenticated original texts conserved and available for actual authentication and why does no library, museum, university, religious archive or private collector know of the existence of such rare and valuable documents?

    You have been repeatedly offered that opportunity to prove you are not the liar you appear to be by presenting the evidence you claim exists. You have repeatedly been unable to present anything but your own opinion and reference to the claimed opinion of unnamed others regarding the existence of “Jesus”.

    We both know that there is no actual tangible authentic and original, 1st century originated historical evidence the existence and later written exploits of the fictional “Jesus”.

    Your vacuous and dishonest claims have been revealed as unsubstantiated by a shred of evidence and your repetition of lies makes you a liar even if you are deluded enough to believe those lies.

    “Our documentary sources of knowledge about the origins of Christianity and its earliest development are chiefly the New Testament Scriptures, the authenticity of which we must, to a great extent, take for granted.”
    (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. iii, p. 712)

    The Church makes extraordinary admissions about its New Testament. For example, when discussing the origin of those writings,

    “the most distinguished body of academic opinion ever assembled” (Catholic Encyclopedias, Preface) admits that the Gospels “do not go back to the first century of the Christian era”

    (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, p. 137, pp. 655-6).

    This statement conflicts with priesthood assertions that the earliest Gospels were progressively written during the decades following the death of the Gospel Jesus Christ.

    In a remarkable aside, the Church further admits that,

    “the earliest of the extant manuscripts [of the New Testament], it is true, do not date back beyond the middle of the fourth century AD”

    (Catholic Encyclopedia, op. cit., pp. 656-7).

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    Your growing hysteria does not alter the evidence supported fact that not one single word written by Josephus exists today.
    Texts written by anonymous scribes who falsely claim they copied (then destroyed all trace of the originals) are forgeries.

    Repeating lies and recycling the lies of others fails to advance you case and condemns you.

    “The oldest manuscripts of the works of Josephus in their original language of Greek date to the tenth and eleventh centuries. Portions of the works are also quoted in earlier manuscripts by other authors, particularly Eusebius (fourth century). There are also versions in other languages, notably a Latin translation made about the fifth century. These are all codexes, bound books, not scrolls.

    As with all ancient texts, variations appear among the manuscripts due to inaccuracies in copying. The two manuscripts considered to have the best texts for the Jewish War are the Codex Parisinus Graecus and the Codex Ambrosianus, both dating from circa 900-1000 CE. The Jewish Antiquities, because of its length, was transmitted in two parts; the best texts for the first half (Antiquities Books 1 to 10) are Codex Regius Parisinus (fourteenth century) and Codex Oxoniensis (fifteenth century); the best texts for the second half (Antiquities Books 11 to 20) are Codex Palatinus (ninth or tenth century) and Codex Ambrosianus; the latter are also the preferred authorities for the Life . The only manuscript for Against Apion is Codex Laurentius, from the eleventh century, which has a large gap in Book II that must be filled by the old Latin version.

    Numerous translations of these manuscripts have appeared over the years, and exploded in number after the invention of the printing press; the first printed edition dates from 1470. An important printed Greek edition, now called the Editio Princeps, was published by Johannes Froben in Basel in 1544, which seems to use a manuscript different from those known. Using the oldest manuscripts to try to determine the original text, Benedict Niese from 1887 to 1889 published a six volume Greek edition with full notes as to the variant readings; this is the text used for the English translations of both the Loeb Library edition and the new Brill Josephus Project, although the translators at times prefer alternate readings as the best ones against Niese’s choices. The very popular Whiston translation, first published in 1737, is unfortunately not based on as fine a text, and so careful readers will find differences between the Whiston version and more modern translations.”

    Your denial of the evidence supported facts cannot alter the evidence supported facts.

    What is you mental malfunction?

  • rationalobservations?

    The only thing that has departed from the rapidly growing number of empty redundant churches that increasingly litter the villages, towns and city streets of the educated, free, predominantly secular democracies of the developed world are the dead or de-converted congregations and the old and dying priests that are not being replaced by the better educated and non superstitious millennial generation.
    https://churches4sale.com/
    https://www.stourbridgenews.co.uk/resources/images/6331520.jpg?display=1&htype=0&type=responsive-gallery
    https://c8.alamy.com/comp/AEY0PK/church-for-sale-southend-on-sea-essex-england-uk-AEY0PK.jpg
    http://www.theholtsclawfamily.com/uploads/1/1/3/4/11340601/1403772_orig.jpg

  • rationalobservations?

    Your repetitive but vacuous denial fails to defend your lies and the lies of those you believe.

    There are no authentic and original texts that reference Jesus from within the 1st century.

    The only way to contradict that absolute fact is to reference actual tangible historical evidence and confirm its existence by revealing the location in which that tangible evidence is conserved. No one (NO ONE!) has ever done so in the whole history of the Roman cult of “Jesus” since it was cobbled together in the 4th century and all traces of real and substantial historical evidence cannot be traced to origination much before that then brand new Roman religion was so brutally imposed upon he world.

    Your blind and repetitive claims are busted myths and debunked bunkum, son.

  • rationalobservations?

    The first of the 10 “commandments” indicates that the imaginary god of the folk who wrote those ridiculous lines believed that other gods existed but theirs was “boss”.

    The mythology of other religions differs from even the diverse and different mythology within the various very different (from each other) bibles that first appeared in prototype in the late 4th century with the Codex Sinaiticus and (different in content) Codex Vaticanus.

    If all the millions of imaginary, undetected and undetectable gods and goddesses are actually the same – why don’t you worshop them all and follow all taboos and diktats of all the religions.

  • rationalobservations?

    Good luck with your journey into reality and the fearless freedom of non belief in ancient ridiculous superstitions and anti-humanitarian taboos.
    We all found it a bit strange when we first shed the myths legends and llies but the longer you grip reality the easier it gets.

  • rationalobservations?

    That’s the point you miss.
    You offer no evidence of the existence and centuries later written exploits of “Jesus” because there is no authentic and original historical evidence of the existence and centuries later written exploits of “Jesus”.

  • MelindaF

    There was not a lot left to lose to be honest. But whatever was still there disappeared the night of August 25th.

    M

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Dude..

    Josephus lived in the first century

    Antiquities was written by him

    No sixth century Christian would feel the need to make an obscure reference to Jesus by mentioning James was His brother because NOBODY in that time disputed His existence.

    How do i know that? Because He is in the Koran

    Which of the above statements do you dispute?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Nice sermon

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Josephus lived in the first century

    Antiquities was written by him

    No sixth century Christian would feel the need to make an obscure reference to Jesus by mentioning James was His brother because NOBODY in that time disputed His existence.

    How do i know that? Because He is in the Koran

    Which of the above statements do you dispute?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Once again to ensure an answer

    Josephus lived in the first century

    Antiquities was written by him

    No sixth century Christian would feel the need to make an obscure reference to Jesus by mentioning James was His brother because NOBODY in that time disputed His existence.

    How do i know that? Because He is in the Koran

    Which of the above statements do you dispute?

  • rationalobservations?

    Josephus lived in the 1st century and the oldest version of any texts merely attributed to Josephus where written by men many centuries after Josephus died.

    To contradict this fact would require the study of an original text by Josephus – but none exist today.

    The oldest Qu ran dates from centuries after the time of Josephus’s death and the time in which the fictional legends of Jesus are merely set.

    Why can’t you offer any actual authentic and original historical evidence in support of your claims of a historical “Jesus”?
    Because there is none.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    As I pointed out nobody doubted His existence at that time as evidenced by His inclusion in the Koran. Again, why do you have any doubt that Josephus wrote the passage in
    question when it merely shows that Jesus existed without attributing any
    divinity to Him?

  • rationalobservations?

    Observations against which you offer no contradiction.

    Now where is that authentic and original historical evidence of the existence and exploits of “Jesus” you claim to know of?

    We know the mythology and propaganda you reference and also know no historical evidence supports any of it.

    Thank you for confirming this and providing the opportunity to expose your nonsense for other readers of this column.

  • rationalobservations?

    As I point out – no one recorded any evidence of the existence and exploits of Jesus within the whole first century.

    All references to “Jesus” first appear centuries after the time in which the historically inaccurate and historically unsupported legends of “Jesus” are merely back dated to and set.

    Not one word written by Josephus exists today.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Opinions against which no response is warranted.

    Been there, done that. Two historians which you simply go into denial over

    Opinion that I disagree with.

    Thank you for showing the innate need for your ilk to resort to ad hominem when your empty talking points are exposed. (Still waiting for you to explain why a Christian would have to fake a Josephus reference just to prove the mere existence of Jesus when it was already accepted as fact by the Muslims)

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    As I pointed out there is no need for any sixth century Christian to fake a passage showing His existence.

    Yet you believe in some crazy conspiracy theory to do just that anyway

    WHY?

  • persephone

    The Native American Great Spirit isn’t a universal god. It’s more of a Gaia-thing, a general harmony of being. Tribes had their own gods.

  • rationalobservations?

    The whole 4th century fabricated Roman religion they called “christianity” was faked as no 1st century historical evidence of “Jesus” or a cult of Jesus has ever been discovered.

    You are deluded by 1600 years of myth legend lies and propaganda.

    Your inability to find any historical evidence of Jesus or any of the confused and contradictory historically inaccurate and historically unsupported content of bibles that first appeared in the late 4th century should at least make you doubt the propaganda you buy into and recycle?

  • rationalobservations?

    Just as the tribes who reinvented themselves as Jews took the previously Canaanite gods and goddesses (including Yahweh and his wife Asherah) as their own.

    There is nothing authentic or original within the fraudulent Judaeo-christian businesses of religion.

  • rationalobservations?

    Texts written by Christian employees many centuries after the death of Josephus are not evidence of the opinions of Josephus regarding mythology written centuries after his death and set in a time before he was born.

    Your constant repetition of nonsense and historically unsupported propaganda fails to give it credibility.

    Your bunkum remains debunked. Get over it.

  • rationalobservations?

    Josephus lived in the first century.
    Every word merely attributed to him was written by anonymous human authors many centuries after his death.
    These evidence supported facts debunk your bunkum.

    Repeating lies fails to make them true.

  • rationalobservations?

    Very few care if anyone believes in and worships one/some/all of the fictional undetected and undetectable nonexistent gods, goddesses and god-men in the seclusion of their indoctrinated imagination, within the privacy of their home or within the private confines of indoctrination centres known as churches, chapels, meeting houses, mosques, temples, vihara, chaitya stupa, wat or pagodas.

    Very few care what nonsense anyone buys into or which superstition based propaganda they accept and privately adhere to.

    What we do object to is having wacko beliefs imposed upon our children and bizarre taboos incorporated into our free, secular laws.
    https://i.imgur.com/efLYGL3.jpg

  • rationalobservations?

    The question appears not to be a binary consideration of god vs no god, but a consideration of any possible existence of all the millions of fictional undetected and undetectable gods, goddesses and god-men that exclusively appear in human fabricated fiction but never in the real world at ant time in history or the present?

    The third largest and fastest growing human demographic related to religion are the godless/nonreligious and our numbers grow exponentially with the near universal scepticism of the worldwide millennial generation.

    Fewer than 18% of American citizens and fewer than 6% of Europeans are active members of any religion and the number drops as fast as the number of redundant churches that litter our villages towns and city streets grows,

    There is no evidence of any of the millions of imaginary deities to scrutinise or to which the scientific method could be applied.

    https://pics.me.me/mythology-is-where-old-gods-go-to-die-zeus-odin-26053285.png

  • rationalobservations?
  • rationalobservations?

    You refuse to accept that there are no extant (surviving) manuscripts of Josephus’ works that can be dated before the 11th century, and the oldest of these were written by anonymous Christian monks.
    Denial is not rebuttal.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    “Every word merely attributed to him was written by anonymous human authors many centuries after his death”

    Evidence???

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    From Wikipedia:

    “The Great Spirit, known as Wakan Tanka among the Sioux,[1] Gitche Manitou in Algonquian, and in many Native American and First Nations cultures as the divine or the sacred, is the supreme being, God, or a conception of universal spiritual force.[2][need quotation to verify] According to Lakota activist Russell Means, a more semantically accurate translation of Wakan Tanka is the Great Mystery.[3]

    Due to perceived similarities between the Great Spirit and the Christian concept of God, colonial European missionaries frequently used such existing beliefs as a means of introducing indigenous Americans to Christianity and encouraging conversion”

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    No, i accept that none of the original texts survive. So what?

  • You’ve avoided my question. Any human being that claims to be rational must hold not only to a conviction but a conception of the nature of truth. I’m. happy with the scientific method of scrutiny that demands a universally testable, repeatable, measurable results. Not to share the same means your are unmoored to anything but what your mind tells you and what you are prepared to believe. That is no better then any existing religious conviction.

    So I ask again. What I would like to know is what would be accecptable, capital P Proof, for an atheist

    to change his/her position on the G-d question? Would the scrutiny, as in the simple example above used in scientific method be sufficient?

    And as a thought experiment. That is also to say that if a proof of G-d existed that met such strict criteria, as a rational being, you would then be obliged to change your mind. Other wise what is left is just hypocricy, prejudice and bias.

  • Jim Jones

    Wot? If there were such a being, the last place it would show up is a church/synagogue/whatever.

    I might believe in THIS god — but no god involved:

    https://www.wsls.com/news/national/kindergartners-in-maine-learn-sign-language-for-deaf-classmate

  • Jim Jones

    Which religions are not evidence free?

  • Jim Jones

    Josephus:

    Born: 37 AD, Jerusalem, Israel

    Died: 100 AD, Rome, Italy

    Not a witness to the Jesus of the myth. He would have learned everything second hand at best.

    Philo of Alexandria, also called Philo Judaeus, was a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher who lived in Alexandria, in the Roman province of Egypt. Philo used philosophical allegory to harmonize Jewish scripture, mainly the Torah, with Greek philosophy.

    Born: 25 BC, Alexandria, Egypt

    Died: Alexandria, Egypt

    Wrote not one word about Jesus or Christians, despite his interest and his location.

  • Jim Jones

    The Quran was created out of whole cloth (twice) many centuries later. It used ‘Jesus’ to support its own myths.

  • Jim Jones

    Eusebius wasn’t called the “Forger of Jesus” for nothing.

    Why were the gospels created after 337 CE and in a foreign language and country?

  • Jim Jones

    Sure. He’s my gardener. Speaks pretty good English too.

  • Jim Jones

    Joseph Smith wrote down his own revelations and observations of his visions. We have it direct from him, and written at the time.

    Are you a Mormon? Why not?

  • Jim Jones

    Tacitus.

    In July, 64 A. D., a great conflagration occurred in Rome. There is a tradition to the effect that this conflagration was the work of an incendiary and that the Emperor Nero himself was believed to be the incendiary. Modern editions of the “Annals” of Tacitus contain the following passage in reference to this:

    “Nero, in order to stifle the rumor, ascribed it to those people who were abhorred for their crimes and commonly called Christians: These he punished exquisitely. The founder of that name was Christus, who, in the reign of Tiberius, was punished as a criminal by the procurator, Pontius Pilate. This pernicious superstition, thus checked for awhile, broke out again; and spread not only over Judea, the source of this evil, but reached the city also: whither flow from all quarters all things vile and shameful, and where they find shelter and encouragement. At [40]first, only those were apprehended who confessed themselves of that sect; afterwards, a vast multitude were detected by them, all of whom were condemned, not so much for the crime of burning the city, as their hatred of mankind. Their executions were so contrived as to expose them to derision and contempt. Some were covered over with the skins of wild beasts, and torn to pieces by dogs; some were crucified. Others, having been daubed over with combustible materials, were set up as lights in the night time, and thus burned to death. Nero made use of his own gardens as a theatre on this occasion, and also exhibited the diversions of the circus, sometimes standing in the crowd as a spectator, in the habit of a charioteer; at other times driving a chariot himself, till at length those men, though really criminal, and deserving exemplary punishment, began to be commiserated as people who were destroyed, not out of regard to the public welfare, but only to gratify the cruelty of one man” (Annals, Book XV, sec. 44).

    This passage, accepted as authentic by many, must be declared doubtful, if not spurious, for the following reasons:

    1. It is not quoted by the Christian fathers.

    2. Tertullian was familiar with the writings of Tacitus, and his arguments demanded the citation of this evidence had it existed.

    3. Clement of Alexandria, at the beginning of the third century, made a compilation of all the [41]recognitions of Christ and Christianity that had been made by Pagan writers up to his time. The writings of Tacitus furnished no recognition of them.

    4. Origen, in his controversy with Celsus, would undoubtedly have used it had it existed.

    5. The ecclesiastical historian Eusebius, in the fourth century, cites all the evidences of Christianity obtainable from Jewish and Pagan sources, but makes no mention of Tacitus.

    6. It is not quoted by any Christian writer prior to the fifteenth century.

    7. At this time but one copy of the “Annals” existed, and this copy, it is claimed, was made in the eighth century—600 years after the time of Tacitus.

    8. As this single copy was in the possession of a Christian the insertion of a forgery was easy.

    9. Its severe criticisms of Christianity do not necessarily disprove its Christian origin. No ancient witness was more desirable than Tacitus, but his introduction at so late a period would make rejection certain unless Christian forgery could be made to appear improbable.

    10. It is admitted by Christian writers that the works of Tacitus have not been preserved with any considerable degree of fidelity. In the writings ascribed to him are believed to be some of the writings of Quintilian.

    11. The blood-curdling story about the frightful [42]orgies of Nero reads like some Christian romance of the dark ages, and not like Tacitus.

    12. In fact, this story, in nearly the same words, omitting the reference to Christ, is to be found in the writings of Sulpicius Severus, a Christian of the fifth century.

    13. Suetonius, while mercilessly condemning the reign of Nero, says that in his public entertainments he took particular care that no human lives should be sacrificed, “not even those of condemned criminals.”

    14. At the time that the conflagration occurred, Tacitus himself declares that Nero was not in Rome, but at Antium.

    Many who accept the authenticity of this section of the “Annals” believe that the sentence which declares that Christ was punished in the reign of Pontius Pilate, and which I have italicized, is an interpolation. Whatever may be said of the remainder of this passage, this sentence bears the unmistakable stamp of Christian forgery. It interrupts the narrative; it disconnects two closely related statements. Eliminate this sentence, and there is no break in the narrative. In all the Roman records there was to be found no evidence that Christ was put to death by Pontius Pilate. This sentence, if genuine, is the most important evidence in Pagan literature. That it existed in the works of the greatest and best known of Roman historians, and was ignored or overlooked by Christian apologists for [43]1,360 years, no intelligent critic can believe. Tacitus did not write this sentence.

  • Jim Jones

    He never will. He’s a deluded Jesus fan boy. At least Justin Bieber exists so his fans have an excuse.

  • Jim Jones

    I maintain that the universe was created when the first oozlum bird achieved total rectal-cranial insertion causing a rift in the space time continuum.

  • rationalobservations?

    The evidence is the existence of the texts merely written by anonymous human authors many centuries after the death of Josephus and the utter, total and complete absence of a single text that was actually written by Josephus and originates from within his life time that itself precludes Josephus from being a witness to the events written about long after his death and claimed to have occurred before his birth.

    Now how about revealing this actual tangible authentic and original 1st century originated historical evidence of the existence and
    fictional centuries later written exploits of a fictional celebrity preacher named “Jesus” of whom no actual 1st century originate trace of real historical evidence exists?

    There is not even any 1st century originated graffiti that mentions “Jesus” and no other evidence of any kind that references or mentions “Jesus”.

    Your lies and recycled propaganda continue to catch you out, Luther.

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    The later written fables of “Jesus” are easily disproved by the utter, total and complete absence of historical evidence the should but does not confirm the later written myths and legends.

    The oldest christian business of religion confirms this:

    “Our documentary sources of knowledge about the origins of Christianity and its earliest development are chiefly the New Testament Scriptures, the authenticity of which we must, to a great extent, take for granted.”
    (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. iii, p. 712)

    The Church makes extraordinary admissions about its New Testament. For example, when discussing the origin of those writings,

    “the most distinguished body of academic opinion ever assembled” (Catholic Encyclopedias, Preface) admits that the Gospels “do not go back to the first century of the Christian era”

    (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, p. 137, pp. 655-6).

    This statement conflicts with priesthood assertions that the earliest Gospels were progressively written during the decades following the death of the Gospel Jesus Christ.

    In a remarkable aside, the Church further admits that,

    “the earliest of the extant manuscripts [of the New Testament], it is true, do not date back beyond the middle of the fourth century AD”

    (Catholic Encyclopedia, op. cit., pp. 656-7).

    Your continual repeating and recycling of lies fails to validate or justify those lies.

  • rationalobservations?

    Texts written by anonymous scribes who falsely claim they copied (then destroyed all trace of the originals) are forgeries.

    Repeating lies and recycling the lies of others fails to advance you case and condemns you.

    “The oldest manuscripts of the works of Josephus in their original language of Greek date to the tenth and eleventh centuries. Portions of the works are also quoted in earlier manuscripts by other authors, particularly Eusebius (fourth century). There are also versions in other languages, notably a Latin translation made about the fifth century. These are all codexes, bound books, not scrolls.

    As with all ancient texts, variations appear among the manuscripts due to inaccuracies in copying. The two manuscripts considered to have the best texts for the Jewish War are the Codex Parisinus Graecus and the Codex Ambrosianus, both dating from circa 900-1000 CE. The Jewish Antiquities, because of its length, was transmitted in two parts; the best texts for the first half (Antiquities Books 1 to 10) are Codex Regius Parisinus (fourteenth century) and Codex Oxoniensis (fifteenth century); the best texts for the second half (Antiquities Books 11 to 20) are Codex Palatinus (ninth or tenth century) and Codex Ambrosianus; the latter are also the preferred authorities for the Life . The only manuscript for Against Apion is Codex Laurentius, from the eleventh century, which has a large gap in Book II that must be filled by the old Latin version.

    Numerous translations of these manuscripts have appeared over the years, and exploded in number after the invention of the printing press; the first printed edition dates from 1470. An important printed Greek edition, now called the Editio Princeps, was published by Johannes Froben in Basel in 1544, which seems to use a manuscript different from those known. Using the oldest manuscripts to try to determine the original text, Benedict Niese from 1887 to 1889 published a six volume Greek edition with full notes as to the variant readings; this is the text used for the English translations of both the Loeb Library edition and the new Brill Josephus Project, although the translators at times prefer alternate readings as the best ones against Niese’s choices. The very popular Whiston translation, first published in 1737, is unfortunately not based on as fine a text, and so careful readers will find differences between the Whiston version and more modern translations.”

    Your denial of the evidence supported facts cannot alter the evidence supported facts.

    What is you mental malfunction?

  • rationalobservations?

    His delusions are based upon busted myths and debunked bunkum.
    I wonder why he subjects himself to the humiliation of repeating garbage that has been refuted through evidence by so many contributors to this column?

    He demonstrates that his ignorance is only exceeded by his egotism and arrogance.

    I wonder if he will get tired of repeating his garbage before the rest of us get tired of debunking it?

  • rationalobservations?

    So your empty claims and recycled propaganda is devoid of a single shred of supporting evidence and your myths are busted and your bunkum remains debunked.

    Next..?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    No, i said there were no ORIGINAL copies. There are copies and short of any EVIDENCE FROM YOU that they were altered from the original they ARE supporting evidence

    Further, as you cannot even provide a logical motive for said manipulation your conspiracy theory is ridiculous

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Evidence for your claims of discrediting my evidence?

    No?

    Then my evidence stands

    Get it?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I gave you my evidence. If you are going to discredit it then YOU need evidence to do so

    Get it?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Where is your evidence the BOOKS he wrote had this one line added for no apparent reason?

    Evidence dude. Show me the evidence

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    A lack of evidence is not evidence

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I believe Joseph Smith existed.

    Duh

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Who calls him that????

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    It was written in the early 600’s at the same time as the copies we refer to were made.

    As such there was no need to insert a passage in them to support the existence of a historical Jesus. That was already commonly accepted.

    What part don’t you understand?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    The first was a historian who would have used first hand accounts to record history

    The second was a Jewish philosopher who would have no interest in a man he would consider apostate

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    There is evidence for all of them.

    Now you conflate evidence with either proof or convincing evidence

  • Jim Jones

    The evidence for Glycon is superb. The evidence for Jesus is non-existant.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Your tantrum doesnt make the evidence disappear.

    If you want to challenge the evidence do so. (That requires evidence btw) Pretending it doesn’t exist is disingenuous

  • Jim Jones

    Your endless whining makes you seem pathetic.

    Your inability to offer any proof of your myths makes you a laughing stock.

  • Jim Jones

    You can’t distinguish fact from fiction?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    You cant distinguish between your unsupported conspiracy theory about manipulation of the historical record and proven fact?

    Seriously, can you???

  • Jim Jones

    You don’t have any proven facts, and you’ve proven this over and over and over and over again.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I am not even defending my faith (unlike you who must believe in forgeries for which you have no evidence)

    I am discussing the historical record about a historical figure. I am citing historians. You are quoting conspiracy theorists whose only “evidence” is a lack of evidence.

    That you cannot distinguish between history and faith or conspiracy theory and evidence does not bode well for someone proclaiming themselves to be a free thinker

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I have evidence which is more than you can say about your conspiracy theory attempting to discredit it

    You know the dishonest conflating of evidence and proof is a standard tactic for zealots.

  • Jim Jones

    If you had evidence you would have posted it. You have posted none because you have none.

  • Jim Jones

    There is no historical record because there was no historical person.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    The only difference between you and a Bible thumping Fundie is the opinion you believe to be irrefutable fact is the denial of the opinion they believe to be indisputable reality.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Two historians wrote about it. I can quote the references. That is evidence.

    You claim they didnt write those things. That is an opinion unsupported by factu

    You claim a lack of evidence to support the evidence i presented means it isnt evidence. That is logically indefensible

  • Jim Jones

    >. Two historians wrote about it.

    Were they there?

  • Jim Jones

    I stand on the known facts. Only evidence will change my opinions. You offer none.

  • rationalobservations?

    The utter total and complete absence of any trace of original texts undermines any credibility in texts written by anonymous authors many centuries after the time in which the legends they concocted are set.

    The utter total and complete absence of historical evidence of any kind of the existence of Jesus or any of the fictional events written by anonymous authors many centuries after the time we are asked to imagine they happened removes all credibility in the existence of the fictional hero of those confused and contradictory myths legends and lies..

    According to your logic the existence of many legends of Robin Hood indicates the historical existence of that fictional character.

    Your bunkum remains debunked.

  • rationalobservations?

    You offer no evidence because no evidence exists.

    Your claim that confused and contradictory myths and legends written by man many centuries after the time in which they are merely set are “evidence” of anything other than the fraudulent nature of all religion is as infantile as it is nonsensical.

    Your bunkum remains debunked.

  • rationalobservations?

    Myths and legends are not evidence.

    Your bunkum remains debunked.

    Get it?

  • Cozmo the Magician

    “I wanted to ask you a genuine question.
    God hasn’t been scientifically proven and neither has atheism been scientifically proven (If so, please show me).”
    FFS, Where? Where EXACTLY where is the QUESTION here. The above is neither genuine NOR a question. It does not even make any sense. You ask how I would respond to this person. I would not bother other than ‘Come back when you have a clue.’

  • Cozmo the Magician

    Didn’t he hang out with Odd Thomas for an while before ‘passing on’. Been a while since i read that series.

  • Cozmo the Magician

    Riiight you see christianity in religions that predate it by thousands of years… Uhuh. So where in the bible does it mention Jesus having a Tardis?

  • Cozmo the Magician

    FUNNY AF ‘original copies’ is that like ‘Genuine Immitation Leather’ . You must be a blast at open mic night at your local comedy club.

  • Cozmo the Magician

    “WWII Through My Eyes” by James Bond.

  • Jim Jones

    The Jews were the Canaanites, or a splinter of them. Of course they shared gods!

  • rationalobservations?

    There is no evidence that any word written many centuries after the death of Josephus were originated by him.
    Evidence of the nonexistence of original and authentic works written by Josephus is the utter, total and complete absence of a single authenticated and original work written by Josephus.

    You ask for the reason that forged legends of “Jesus” were written after the 4th century Roman religion they called “christianity was cobbled together and so brutally imposed upon the then known world? Your ignorance is only exceeded by your naivete and gullibility as demonstrated by the simplistic nature of this question.

    The reason that the confused and contradictory legends of Jesus had forged additional propaganda fabricated is obviously because there is not one single shred of authentic and original, 1st century originated evidence (of ANY KIND!) of the existence and fictional exploits of “Jesus”.

    There are many reasons that the “Testimonium Flavianum” (“TF”) is recognised as a forged interpolation into a potential “copy” of a work attributed to Josephus.

    The paragraph appears in no context at all and relates to nothing within the passage into which it was so obviously inserted by its author of the oldest “Josephus” manuscript that was actually written by an unknown author in the 11th century. There are no extant (surviving) manuscripts of Josephus’ works that can be dated before the 11th century, and the oldest of these are known to have been “copied” (hand written) by Christian monks.

    The paragraph has been subjected to the modern forensic science known as “text typing” and this reveals a different format and writing style used in the TF that is inconsistent with the text that surrounds it.

    You join many others in the simplistic assertion that: “So-and-so says that Jesus was an historical figure….” So-and-so turns out to be just another delusional and evidence devoid fundamentalist writer. This is the age old unsubstantial “argument from authority”, although in every case (as you continually confirm) there is no authority being quoted. It is a nonexistent “proof” based only upon indoctrinated opinion and the indoctrinated unsubstantiated and evidence devoid opinions of others.

    The vast majority of mainstream professional scholars since the early 1800s have observed that this quotation is not by Josephus, but rather is a later Christian insertion in his works. In other words, it is a forgery, almost rejected by scholars . Of course, that doesn’t bother you, Deplorable Luthor Dorn, who demonstrate so little respect for the truth anywhere in your fatuous and evidence devoid entries into this comment column.

    You cannot present evidence because none exists.

    You infantile demand for evidence of the nonexistence of evidence is answered by the utter, total and complete absence of evidence, “dude”. (Is it possible that you could demonstrate your ignorance and immaturity more clearly? It appears not…)

    Evidence of the nonexistence of nonexistent evidence is the nonexistence of evidence, my ignorant young friend.

    Get some education and get over it.

  • rationalobservations?

    Repeating garbage fails to validate that garbage.

    (Meanwhile many may be altering that ridiculous Wiki page as I write this as nothing stops any crank writing any nonsense on Wiki.)

    Now back to the real world and the utter, total and complete absence of evidence of any of the millions of fictional, undetected and undetectable gods, goddesses and god-men…

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    The utter, total and complete absence of a single shred of evidence is itself the evidence of the utter, total and complete absence of a single shred of evidence.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    A lack of evidence that the EVIDENCE I PROVIDED is compromised is not evidence

    Geeze you are dense

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    “Meanwhile many may be altering that ridiculous Wiki page as I write this as nothing stops any crank writing any nonsense on Wiki.)”

    You are quite the conspiracy nut aren’t you?

    Paranoid much?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    “There is no evidence that any word written many centuries after the death of Josephus were originated by him.”

    There is no reason to believe people living in a time where the existence of Jesus was widely accepted would manipulate a historical document to prove WHAT EVERYONE ALREADY BELIEVED!!!

    What part of your paranoid little mind cannot comprehend this?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I see words but they don’t appear to actually mean anything.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    You do understand that an entity that created space time would be, by necessity, unrestricted by it right?

    Oh sorry, I forgot you guys hate when those silly Christians know more about your precious science than you do.

  • The Bofa on the Sofa

    So I ask again. What I would like to know is what would be accecptable, capital P Proof, for an atheist

    to change his/her position on the G-d question?

    I’ll give you an honest answer: I don’t know.

    But I will also tell you, I don’t care because I don’t have to know. Any god worth his omniscient and omnipotent salt knows exactly what it would take, and is able to provide it. That I don’t believe indicates that they have not.

    Although I ask, what is “acceptable, capital P Proof” for a theist? Because, you know, if it’s not universally accepted, it’s not really proof, is it?

  • rationalobservations?

    Claiming there is evidence is NOT the same as presenting evidence. Your failure to find any is because there is no evidence.

  • rationalobservations?

    Not at all.
    The utter total and complete absence of any type of tangible evidence of the existence and adventures of Jesus from within the first century is a fact – not a conspiracy.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    The Antiquities of the Jews

    EVIDENCE

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    He lived in the first crntury and wrote the book then.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I just realized you once again changed the subject

    Do rational observations really need such dishonesty for support?

  • rationalobservations?

    The “subject” is your failure to offer evidence of the existence of “Jesus”.

  • rationalobservations?

    Possibly but no such 1st century originated book exists today and books written in the 4th or 11thcenturyarenot evidence of people and events in the first century.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    The copies we have of the book that was written in the first century were made at a time when the entire population already believed in the existence of a religious leader named Jesus.

    That means there is no logical reason to doubt the reference to a religious leader named Jesus is anything but an accurate first century account.

    That means it is evidence of a first century religious leader named Jesus

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    No, that means you are trying to avoid my observation on your paranoid theories like some nebulous people changing the content of a first century history book and people involved in that same Christian conspiracy changing the content of a Wikipedia article.

    Thus when you are confronted with evidence you rationalize your denial of it with paranoid conspiracy theories. That is the behavior of a Fundie.

  • Cozmo the Magician

    Ok, now you really are trolling. Christians know more about SCIENCE. HA HA HA HA HA. Yah, that whole flat earth with a snow globe and windows to let the water thing is a totes accurate description. There aint no SPACE-TIME in that fantasy. OMFSM, the DISCWORLD is more logically consistent than BibleWorld.

    Bats are birds… PI=3 etc etc All those wonderfull FACTS in the book of complete Bee Ess.

    Keep the hits coming. I need some good laughs today.

  • Cozmo the Magician

    Oh so you DO re-read your posts… ok

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Then argue the science I cited.

    DUH!!!

  • BrianN

    Oh that solved all my concerns, I’m definitely going to trust this website over real qualified historians and scholars.

  • BrianN

    Oh right I said “imitating.” Sorry I thought the rest of my post would make it clear that it’s more closer to plagiarism than coincidence. I obviously don’t know these “investigators,” which I’m sure are totally reputable and aren’t trying to find “corroboration” to reinforce their beliefs.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I think you missed the point. It is possible it is neither plagiarism nor coincidence. It is also possible that they are simply different accounts of the same thing colored by the specific cultures recording them. I guess which of the possibilities one embraces depends on that person’s specific biases.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    If you are going to argue the possibility of my God then you have to argue that God as described by my beliefs. Arguing against my God while ignoring the attributes said beliefs ascribe to Him is a Strawman argument. You are not really arguing against my God but one of your own construction.

    Thus when you look at the God in question who created the universe He would have created space time and as such would not be bound by it. THAT is the scientific argument I would like you to examine and critique. If you are incapable that is fine, but don’t pretend it is not a logical argument.

  • rationalobservations?

    Your claims that there is authentic and original compelling historical evidence of the existence and centuries later written legends of “Jesus” have been proved to be a lie. You have offered only the centuries later written fiction and opinions of those who have been deluded by the confused and contradictory fiction written starting in the 4th century but unsupported by any actual 1st century originated historical evidence.

    When confronted with the total, absolute and complete absence of a single shred of actual tangible historical evidence you repeat that myths legends and lies are somehow “evidence”.

    Your lies remain exposed and your bunkum remains debunked.

    With religiots like you as advocates, it’s not surprising that religion is in such sharp and terminal decline all across the educated, free, godless and predominantly secular western world.

    Keep up the great work in demonstrating why religion is nonsensical and religionists are dishonest and gullible!

    https://www.stourbridgenews.co.uk/resources/images/6331520.jpg?display=1&htype=0&type=responsive-gallery
    http://www.theholtsclawfamily.com/uploads/1/1/3/4/11340601/1403772_orig.jpg

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    You changed the subject again.

  • rationalobservations?

    There is not one single scrap of actual, tangible, first century originated evidence that supports the propaganda and lies you recycle.
    You KNOW this because you nor anyone else has ever referenced anything but propaganda and lies that can be traced back to the 4th century – but of which NO historical evidence from within the 1st century has ever been produced.

    Even the oldest christian business knows this to be fact:

    . “Our documentary sources of knowledge about the origins of Christianity and its earliest development are chiefly the New Testament Scriptures, the authenticity of which we must, to a great extent, take for granted.”
    (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. iii, p. 712)

    The Church makes extraordinary admissions about its New Testament. For example, when discussing the origin of those writings,

    “the most distinguished body of academic opinion ever assembled” (Catholic Encyclopedias, Preface) admits that the Gospels “do not go back to the first century of the Christian era”

    (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, p. 137, pp. 655-6).

    This statement conflicts with priesthood assertions that the earliest Gospels were progressively written during the decades following the death of the Gospel Jesus Christ.

    In a remarkable aside, the Church further admits that,

    “the earliest of the extant manuscripts [of the New Testament], it is true, do not date back beyond the middle of the fourth century AD”

    (Catholic Encyclopedia, op. cit., pp. 656-7).

    You have no evidence and you will now never be able to forget that there is no evidence. Your condition of ignorance and denial has been evident from your first entry. Continued confirmation appears superfluous but by all means carry on attracting attention to you abject humiliation in failing to validate, defend or excuse the lies you constantly recycle.

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    The subject is that there is no historical evidence that supports your dishonest claims and the lies of the christian businesses of fraudulent religion.

    There is not one single scrap of actual, tangible, first century originated evidence that supports the propaganda and lies you recycle.
    You KNOW this because you nor anyone else has ever referenced anything but propaganda and lies that can be traced back to the 4th century – but of which NO historical evidence from within the 1st century has ever been produced.

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    No, the subject was your propensity to invoke conspiracy theory when confronted with evidence.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    “You KNOW this because you nor anyone else has ever referenced anything
    but propaganda and lies that can be traced back to the 4th century – but
    of which NO historical evidence from within the 1st century has ever
    been produced.”

    You seem to be saying that first century manuscripts were altered in the fourth century to prove the existence of a religious leader THAT NOBODY CONTESTED THE EXISTENCE OF in the forth century.

    THAT is why I say you resort to ridiculous conspiracy theory when confronted with evidence.

  • rationalobservations?

    I would accept any actual, tangible, repeatable and scientifically proved EVIDENCE of the existence of one/some/all of the millions of mythological gods, goddesses and god-men.

    I can’t imagine what form that evidence could take but maybe the repeat of an actual stalking snake, bush or donkey as is found within the fiction and fables would be start.

    The whole mythology of the legend of “Jesus” first appeared within the 4th century bibles that are very significantly different from modern bibles that have been cobbled together since then. Even if – through some actual miracle – evidence of the historical existence of an itinerant preacher named “Jesus” was discovered and verified – that would not confirm or validate the magic and supernatural elements of the diverse and very different, confused and contradictory. historically unsupported and historically inaccurate scientifically absurd content of all the many bibles cobbled together by men since the lateth century.

    Contemplating the ridiculous unsupported mythology it is difficult to answer your question as it appear to be ridiculous and based upon fables that are ridiculous.

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    There is no evidence of the existence of. “Jesus”.
    There is no evidence of anyone living in the 1st century ever heard of anyone called “Jesus”.

    In the 4th century when the Roman religion they called “christianity” was cobbled together – fewer than 5% of the population followed any of the several messianic cults of which Mithraism was the most popular and “Jesus” was almost totally unheard of.

    Your recycled propaganda is unsupported by any actual historical evidence.

    The 11th century texts you claim as evidence of myths and legends set in the first century fails.

    Your bunkum remains debunked.

  • rationalobservations?

    The oldest text known as “The Antiquities of the Jews” dates from the 11th century and was written by Christian monks.
    It is evidence of activities of religiots in the 11th century NOT evidence of legends set in the first century of which NO EVIDENCE EXISTS.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Copies made in the 11th century when the existence of Jesus was not questioned by anyone would not be altered to prove He existed

    Seriously, what freaking part do you not understand?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Again, nobody questioned that a religious leader named Jesus existed during the period you say they changed the text of that first century text to prove it

    Seriously, what part don’t you understand?

  • Cozmo the Magician

    I don’t need to argue against your god. You are the one making a claim that it exists. Since you provide no evidence to back up this claim it shows you have no clue. I’m done playing with you. Go troll someone else. Mr block button is my friend. And block exists.

  • Courtney, this is an outstanding essay. Thanks for writing it.

  • This would be pretty impressive to me. What do you think?

    Scenario #2:
    A man or woman claims to be God. This claimant is invited and comes to a high school gymnasium which has been prepared by magicians and engineers to be “trick proof” to the greatest extent possible. The claimant is asked to and then stands at the center of a circle of observers and four audio-video cameras recording from different angles. The observers consist of theists, atheists, agnostics, scientists, magicians, and me and you. The claimant is requested to and then actually brings back to life a human corpse just by touching it. The corpse had been dead for three days or more as verified by objective tests and three physicians. After resurrection the human being then stays alive for three days or more as verified by objective tests and the same physicians. All observers agree that a miracle has occurred.

  • rationalobservations?

    What authentic and original first century originated historical evidence?

  • rationalobservations?

    I am confirming the fact that no first century originated evidence of “Jesus” exists in any firm at all.
    No texts, no inscriptions, no letters, no historical trace at all.

    You confirm this by failing to offer anything but myths, lege nds and propaganda that originated centuries after the time in which those myths and legends are merely set.

  • BertB

    Okay, I am late to this party. I find this obsession with whether a historical Jesus existed or not irrelevant…along with all the other claims of his alleged miracles. What does that have to do with anything in today’s world? Why is it important today? What effect is Jesus having in today’s world? I will not bother to give you a list of the wars and conflicts that belief in Jesus has contributed to…along with the competing beliefs in other deities. The only positive contribution Jesus makes today is that belief in him, and the Christian myths that come in the package, gives some consolation about our mortality. Even if it’s a delusion, I suppose some people need that.
    I hope you don’t believe, as some Christians do, that humans can’t be “moral” without religious belief. I know many lifelong non-believers who are just as decent and moral as any Christian…and a lot better than some.
    I don’t care what religion a person practices…unless they try to impose their religious beliefs on others, or claim special privileges because of their faith. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the way human nature works. The problem is self-righteousness. My observations have convinced me that the more devout a religious believer is, the more self-righteous they are.

  • The nonexistence of gods has been indirectly scientifically proven. The evidence is found in quantum field theory.

  • BertB

    I thought it was the opposite. Some have tried to prove the existence of a god using Quantum Theory. But I think the arguments either way are not convincing.
    https://www.thoughtco.com/does-quantum-physics-prove-gods-existence-2699279

  • Jim Jones

    The Council of Nicea is all the proof needed that the whole religion is a Greek fantasy based on nothing and no one.

  • Jim Jones

    Huh?

  • Jim Jones

    > If you are going to argue the possibility of my God then you have to argue that God as described by my beliefs.

    If you are going to argue the possibility of Eric, the god eating magic penguin, then you have to argue the Eric as described by my beliefs.

    Eric The God-Eating Magic Penguin

    “God can’t exist because of Eric The God-Eating Magic Penguin. Since Eric is God-Eating by definition, he has no choice but to eat God. So, if God exists, He automatically ceases to exist as a result of being eaten. Unless you can prove that Eric doesn’t exist, God doesn’t exist. Even if you can prove that Eric doesn’t exist, that same proof will also be applicable to God. There are only two possibilities – either you can prove that Eric doesn’t exist or you can’t – in both cases it logically follows that God doesn’t exist.”

    — Mark

  • Jim Jones

    > I am confirming the fact that no first century originated evidence of “Jesus” exists in any firm at all.

    No texts, no inscriptions, no letters, no historical trace at all.

    Indeed. OTOH, we have such evidence for Glycon. Luther Dorn is worshiping the wrong god.

  • In order to get the proper handle on this one has to understand what the word exists or existence means. Existence itself is quantum fields of energy, analogous to light, a photon field; a magnetic field, a gravitational field, or even a radio wave field. All of these fields are detectable and real. They are all bosons. I trust we can agree that fermion fields are easily detectable and exist. Today we know the properties and behaviors of these energy fields and actual quantum fields of electrons and quarks are very similar. These fields makeup everything. If there were some thing like a god that can create matter and energy from thought it would have been detected by now and even likely reproduced in large particle accelerators which probe these fields. Gods or anything that even remotely can be considered one are not present within existence. I could go on, but there is much on QFT on the net.

    Do not be making up your own confused and nonsense definition of existence or appealing to magic. That does not fly.

  • John Do’h

    The answer is that difference between religion and non religion is that with religion the motivation to believe is that you get rewards. Religion is like joining a club to get perks. With an atheist they are not making the decision based on rewards. You don’t get eternal rewards and special significance for refusing to believe in the religion. You do (pretend) to get awesome rewards for believing in your religion.

    This is why there is such a disconnect between the theist and non-theist. The believer believes because they think it makes them important, immortal, and they will receive spiritual rewards. They are not going to give up the fantasy benefits for boring rationality.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Does that mean something to you JIm? I ask because I don’t understand your point in relation to my statement.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I’ll bite. How so?

  • Cynthia

    What would cause you to make the leap from thinking “impressive medical feat” to “this is proof of god” though?

    As you know, I don’t come from a Christian background, so resurrection isn’t the first thing that comes to mind. But let’s say that someone did do this feat.

    So what? I mean, my reaction would be really impressed, but I would be thinking of a possible medical breakthrough. (I mean, the scenario is maybe possibly possible if the person was found frozen, for example.)

    How do you make the leap from that to “must be the controlling power behind the universe”?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    If you refuse to even acknowledge the one point I have made to you repeatedly then I will not acknowledge your “response”

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I made no claim that God exists. (I pointed out that other deities COULD reference the same Gos as mine) Saying I did assert God exists as a fact is another Strawman.

    I answered a logical argument precluding His existence with a scientific rebuttal disproving said argument. If you can’t answer said science based logic then so be it. I will take that as a concession on your part.

    If you merely go into denial and proclaim my argument was not based on science I will ignore your non-statement.

  • BertB

    I have read extensively on QFT. I admit that I do not understand most of it. Do you? I am not going to get into the philosophical arguments about what “existence” means. I am a nuts-and-bolts person.
    So I look at all of these arguments and I ask…”what does it mean to me?”
    Answer: NOTHING.
    Until someone can show me how belief in some supernatural entities affects me, I reject it all.

  • BertB

    Exactly, John. It’s fear of death and the great NOTHING that motivates them. I am 82 years old, and a nonbeliever since I was old enough to understand the nonsense they were selling. Sorry, I don’t buy it. I am comfortable with the end being the END.

  • Interesting. You don’t get it. Philosophical discussions about existence mean nothing and lead no where. Only Science can define existence and I have based on what is real and known. This idea of the supernatural is also meaningless.

  • BertB

    Nope. I don’t get QFT. I have a degree in engineering, and I have read about Quantum Mechanics for more than fifty years. I do not pretend to understand it. Einstein didn’t understand it, so I have some distinguished company. If you do, I am really impressed. I too base my worldview on what is real and known. I view QFT as a work in progress. We agree on supernatural entities. I have been a skeptic about gods since I was about seven years old, and that was three quarters of a century ago.

  • I will leave you with two questions. Why was the LHC, large hadron collider built and what does it do?

  • BrianN

    Well the examples I gave I would say are clearly plagiarism without exception. Even the early Christian writers blatantly quoted Jewish scripture and injected their theology to show how the Jews were getting in wrong, coincidence had nothing to do with it as with my other examples. Funny thing is I doubt you subscribe to universalism, you’re likely a Christian. (Which funny how predictable religious beliefs are based on your birthplace.) I imagine you believe there is only one “true” religion, and you probably have a denomination carved out in there too. Basically what I’m trying to say is if there is one true God speaking to everyone why does everyone hear it differently? If those similarities in religions are evidence of an underlying truth, that seems really cold to me. That God would tell you a few things but ultimately not the full truth you need to succeed spiritually. It’s like starving someone to death by holding back the most important nutrients.

  • BertB

    It’s the highest energy collider ever built, and it confirmed the existence of the Higgs Boson.

  • BrianN

    “You should. Idiots like you need all the help you can get.”

    Apparently you’ve never taken sarcasm or eyerolls well, so here’s another one.

  • While this is true it is not the purpose of the LHC, which is of course to probe existence itself. The Higgs field is only another part of existence. PArticles, bosons fermions are vibrations in these fields that we observe as particles. EVERYTHING is fields.

  • Jim Jones

    > I have read extensively on QFT. I admit that I do not understand most of it.

    Jim Al-Khalili has done some great documentaries on Quantum Mechanics which I have watched. Lots of good graphics.

    I’m still amazed and confused.

  • BertB

    Join the club. I think it was Richard Feynman who said nobody really understands Quantum Mechanics.
    Ah, I found it:

    If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don’t understand quantum mechanics.

    Feynman was a brilliant guy. When i read that quote, I no longer felt so bad about my confusion.

  • BertB

    I never read that. But I suppose all the colliders ever built were intended to understand subatomic structure, and of course that is the basis for the Universe. Everything is energy, and energy is equivalent to matter according to Einstein’s famous equation. If you understand it all, I am impressed. I don’t.

  • rationalobservations?

    What evidence supported “point” do you imagine you have made?

    You offer no authentic and original 1st century originated historical evidence of the existence and centuries later written adventures of a fictional character Greek language scribes employed by the Roman empire named “Jesus” (although no such authentic and original Jewish/Hebrew/Aramaic name existed in the 1st century.

    You suggest that propaganda, myths and legends that are historically unsupported by evidence and historically inaccurate in content are somehow “evidence” of newsworthy people and events that are unrecorded in history and that are merely alleged to have taken place within the early decades of what only became known as the “first century” in what at the same time became known as the “8th century”.

    Repeating evidence devoid and unsupported claims fails to validate those claims.

    The 13,820,000,000 year long history past, current and ongoing material evolution of the universe is an evidence supported and observed fact with no evidence of the existence of any of the millions of fictional undetected and undetectable gods, goddesses and god-men and no evidence of “design” or a supernatural “designer” within that chaotic and destructive history and observed current activity.

    The 4,000,000,000 year long history past, current and ongoing biological evolution of the life on Earth is an evidence supported and observed fact with no evidence of “design” or a supernatural “designer” within that chaotic and destructive history that has caused the extinction of 99% of all past life forms and resulted in the observed current blood soaked battle for the survival of living things best equipped for survival.

    The action that caused the current life forms to exist is EVOLUTION. There is no evidence of, or reason/need for; any of the millions of fictional undetected and undetectable gods, and goddesses.

    Your nonsense is unsupported by observation of the evidence.

    Your repetition of your ignorance and indoctrination inspired garbage is pointless – but please carry on as less ignorant folk read these comment columns and will undoubtedly benefit from the evidence that continually debunks your superstitious and ridiculous bunkum.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=81&v=ujnp0beDClo

  • rationalobservations?

    The Roman religion they called “christianity” was cobbled together from mostly pagan components and exclusively pagan feast days and festivals within the 4th century!
    This is the fact that you appear to contest but have been unable to prove through evidence of the existence of “Jesus” or of any of his later invented remarkable and newsworthy exploits that passed by every living person in the 1st century since none of them recorded any record of those fictional people and imaginary events.

    There is no evidence of, or need for, any of the millions of fictional gods, goddesses and god-men.

    Repeating evidence devoid and unsupported claims fails to validate those claims.

    The 13,820,000,000 year long history past, current and ongoing material evolution of the universe is an evidence supported and observed fact with no evidence of “design” or a supernatural “designer” within that chaotic and destructive history and observed current activity.

    The 4,000,000,000 year long history past, current and ongoing biological evolution of the life on Earth is an evidence supported and observed fact with no evidence of “design” or a supernatural “designer” within that chaotic and destructive history that has caused the extinction of 99% of all past life forms and observed current blood soaked battle for the survival of living things best equipped for survival.

    The action that caused the current life forms to exist is EVOLUTION. There is no evidence of, or reason/need for; any of the millions of fictional undetected and undetectable gods, and goddesses.

    The ever changing myths and legends of a fictional hero named “Jesus” were first authored by the Greek language scribes of Rome who first invented the prototypes for tales and bibles in circulation today.

    Your nonsense is unsupported by observation of the evidence.

    Your repetition of your ignorance and indoctrination inspired garbage is pointless – but please carry on as less ignorant folk read these comment columns and will undoubtedly benefit from the evidence that continually debunks your superstitious and ridiculous bunkum.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=81&v=ujnp0beDClo

  • rationalobservations?

    Present this 1st century originated text you claim exists and reveal the location and institution in which it is conserved or be once again confirmed as a fantasist and a liar.

    Seriously; what part of NO EVIDENCE supporting the garbage you recycle do you not understand?

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    There are no history books referencing evidence supported history of the actual unrecorded history of the fictional god-man “Jesus”.

    The many diverse and very different versions of historically inaccurate and historically unsupported human authored bibles that first appear in prototype in the late 4th century are mythology – not history.
    The 14,000+ differences between the prototype 4th century bible “Codex Sinaiticus” and the 17th century human written KJV bible show how the mythology evolved while remaining totally utterly and completely devoid of any 1st century originated historical evidence at all.

    You have demonstrated your profound ignorance of actual recorded and evidence supported history and your gullibility regarding the Circa 1600 years of christian propaganda that is founded in the 4th century but of which no 1st century originated evidence exists.
    Repetitive confirmation of your ignorance and gullibility appear superfluous to that which you have so comprehensively and conclusively demonstrated throughout this thread.

    However your continued exposure of the myths legends and lies of a corrupt and fraudulent religion present great opportunities for the exposure f the evidence supported truth that confounds your ridiculous superstitions and recycled lies – so please keep this going.!

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    The obscenely wealthy and entirely self serving institutions of religion and the world wide corporate wealth of the Vatican corporation (aka “Roman Catholic Church”) are now and for 1600 years have been a blight upon and drain on the resources of mankind.

    Individuals foolish enough to buy into religion are in themselves mostly benign, but the exclusively self serving institutions they support and the lies they believe and recycle are surely an abomination..?

  • David Cromie

    How would a supernatural entity, living outside our universe in it own environment, be able to influence anything in our universe?

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    ….

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    ……

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    ………

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Christians citing Jewish scripture is plagiarism?

    ROFLMAO!

    They believe in Jewish prophesy as JEWISH prophesy

    I think you need to look up the definition of “plagiarism”

  • David Cromie

    Are you feeling OK? Nothing is ‘testable by faith’, not even faeries or unicorns.

  • C1: What would cause you to make the leap from thinking “impressive medical feat” to “this is proof of god” though?

    GW1: You might think “impressive medical feat,” but I wouldn’t. I’d be thinking “this is some good evidence that God exists.”

    C1: As you know, I don’t come from a Christian background, so resurrection isn’t the first thing that comes to mind. But let’s say that someone did do this feat.

    GW1: Resurrection should be the first thing that comes to anyone’s mind, whether you are a Christian or not.

    C1: So what? I mean, my reaction would be really impressed, but I would be thinking of a possible medical breakthrough. (I mean, the scenario is maybe possibly possible if the person was found frozen, for example.)

    GW1: Touching somebody to bring them back to life is not likely to ever be a medical breakthrough. The scenario says the subject person had been dead for three days, so it matters not at all if the person had been previously frozen or not.

    C1: How do you make the leap from that to “must be the controlling power behind the universe”?

    GW1: I would not say “must be.” I would say “This is some good evidence that God exists.” Why? 1) The current act is well documented by witnesses and recordings. 2) The agent claims to be God. 3) The agent is performing a supernatural act. 4) The act is one which matches an act reported in the New Testament, also attributed to God. 5) An agent able to perform a supernatural act like a resurrection, as we have witnessed, is more likely to be able to perform a creation of a universe than any intelligent agent we have ever encountered.

  • rationalobservations?
  • rationalobservations?

    The nonexistence of millions of undetected and undetectable gods goddesses and god-men is universally agreed by 100% of living humans.
    The fact that a declining number of ignorant and superstitious folk hang onto the lie that one/some of them exist while disbelieving in all the millions of others appears irrelevant.

    This little song sums it up very well. Make sure to listen to the end:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujnp0beDClo

  • rationalobservations?

    First point of disagreement is with the line: “….two thousand years of the Gospel and moral teaching of Christ…”.
    The oldest/first prototype bibles and founding state religion called “christianity” both date from the 4th century and there is not one single shred of authenticated original, 1st century originated historical evidence of the existence and adventures of “Jesus”.

    All the diverse and different businesses of the christian religion can date their origin to 4th century Rome and all the mythologies and legends of “Jesus” cannot be traced back to what only became known as the 1st century in what at the same time became known as the 8th century.

    The oldest 4th century founded business of christianity recognises this:

    “Our documentary sources of knowledge about the origins of Christianity and its earliest development are chiefly the New Testament Scriptures, the authenticity of which we must, to a great extent, take for granted.”
    (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. iii, p. 712)

    The Church makes extraordinary admissions about its New Testament. For example, when discussing the origin of those writings,

    “the most distinguished body of academic opinion ever assembled” (Catholic Encyclopedias, Preface) admits that the Gospels “do not go back to the first century of the Christian era”

    (Catholic Encyclopedia, Farley ed., vol. vi, p. 137, pp. 655-6).

    This statement conflicts with priesthood assertions that the earliest Gospels were progressively written during the decades following the death of the Gospel Jesus Christ.

    In a remarkable aside, the Church further admits that,

    “the earliest of the extant manuscripts [of the New Testament], it is true, do not date back beyond the middle of the fourth century AD”

    (Catholic Encyclopedia, op. cit., pp. 656-7).

    Leading theological professors also recognise this:

    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png

  • rationalobservations?

    Thank you for this confirmation that you have no evidence and nothing interesting or evidence supported to contribute.
    Your capitulation is welcomed.

  • rationalobservations?

    Well done in finally recognising the value of taking Abe’s advice:
    https://thumby.wisdomtoinspire.com/thumbs/lrg/E1Ti05dd.jpg

  • rationalobservations?

    This signal of you capitulation may be the first sensible thing you have offered.
    https://thumby.wisdomtoinspire.com/thumbs/lrg/E1Ti05dd.jpg

  • rationalobservations?

    Demonstrating that you have no evidence in support of your wacko claims has already been established and this abbreviated further confirmation appears superfluous?
    Your brevity is welcomed however…

  • When Feynman said this in the 60’s and 70’s it was likely true, but certainly not in the past 20 years. We understand it quite well now and it is a real theory as predictions that are made are borne out.. Additionally all experiments match the theory and thousands have been done.
    If anything, a field, that could possibly possess properties or behaviors that a god would have to have existed it would certainly have been found by now and even reproduced.
    If this “god field” exists it is either to weak or short lived to be detected or too massive to be created here on Earth. Either way it could not have any affect on us.

  • I refer you to the multitude of videos by David Tong and Sean Carroll as a good starting point. Leonard Susskind has a host of university lectures on this too.
    If you are that old as I am; I am 75, you might as well make the realizations before you pass.

  • You should only consider Einstein for relativity and his general theory which is effectively QFT. HE did not accept QFT as you know.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    #1 You claim there is no first century evidence of the historical Jesus

    #2 I point out Josephus and Tacitus

    #3 You point out the eaiest copies of their books are centuries later

    #4 I point out the existence of Jesus was already universally accepted by then and as such there is no logical reason to question the accuracy of the known copies

    #5 You resort to ad hominem to distract from #4 and return to #1 as needed

    I will answer wuth a number from now on. In this case it is #1

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    #5

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    #5 again

  • David Cromie

    The so-called ‘bible’, as it has come down to us, is a syncretically concocted welter of myths, legends, and folklore, mostly based on pre-existing Pagan sources. Does that accord it a cachet of ‘truth’ that the original myths, legends, and folklore did not have on their own.

  • rationalobservations?

    There is no evidence that confirms empty claim #4.

  • rationalobservations?

    Still no evidence supporting #4 or any other vacuous unsupported claim.

  • rationalobservations?

    Still no evidence of #4 and still no authentic and original historical evidence of the existence of Jesus.

    Try again?
    Put up or shut up with your empty lies and unsupported claims.

  • Just one clarification. When I say existence what I specifically mean is space or spacetime itself. That which is out in front of your nose and inside it too.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)
  • rationalobservations?

    There is no mention of “Jesus” within the page you link to.

    There is evidence of many messiah claimants and messianic cults the from the 4th century are called “Christos” instead of Messiah and “christians” instead of messianic cultists.

    There remains NO EVIDENCE of “Jesus” or any cult of “Jesus”.

    You don’t get it but we’re discussing the nonexistence of evidence of “Jesus”. Not any Messiah claimants who did actually exist and of whom tangible evidence of their existence is available.

    Your ignorance and simplistic nonsense continues to be confirmed.

  • BertB

    I am 82. Yes, I know about Einstein and QM. He made the famous statement about God not playing dice with the Universe. And then later admitting that it was one of his biggest mistakes.

  • BrianN

    Definition: The practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own.

    Yep fits the bill. There’s a reason why most Jews didn’t jump into the Jesus pool. If you took Treasure Island and then packaged it into a combination book let’s call the second part “the new adventures of Jim.” Is that not plagiarism? Well, Christians have this book called the Bible in which they unceremoniously label the stolen work as the Old Testament. Plagiarism.

    Thanks for ignoring the more complicated part of my argument, can’t expect much from Christians now days.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    “Definition: The practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own.

    Yep fits the bill. ”
    ——————–
    No, Christians attribute the Pentateuch to Moses. We attribute the book of Job to Job. The only parts of the Bible that any Christian “passed off as their own” are the parts that Christians wrote. That most certainly doesn’t fit the bill.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    We don’t hate Mormons, that is the LGBT community and their progressive affiliates. We just think they are wrong. Just like how Jews think we are wrong and they wear those caps to show they are still waiting for the Messiah. I wouldn’t accuse the LDS church of plagiarism either.

  • David Cromie

    “The Testimonium Flavianum” denotes a later interpolation by christers into the Antiquities of the Jews, which is,itself, a copy of a copy, of a copy, since the original is now lost. No serious scholar takes the Testimonium as the work of Josephus.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Right, unfortunately for detractors i was referring to The Antiquities of the Jews by the same author. No serious scholar doubts the authenticity of that work.

    (Edit) Sorry i jumped the gun when i saw youe reference to The Testimonium Flavianum. Thst is a separate passage in The Antiquities. One is contested. The other isn’t

  • David Cromie

    Check out, for example, the Testimonium Flavianum for yourself.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    Im not taling about that. You are arguing a Strawman

  • Kathryn Baker

    I agree. More cruelty and grief have been caused in the name of religion than anything but Donald Trump.

  • BertB

    The last three words are a good update of something I have often said.

  • Steven Watson

    The Hindu can go one better and nod in agreement: Issa, a.k.a Jesus, is a Hindu god/avatar. I know of one nun in a Dublin school who got her knickers in a right twist when she realised the Hindu pupil she’d asked to speak about their religion was telling the story of a god she thought was her property.

  • Steven Watson

    Why on earth would you need either a website or a university? I read Paul in my ‘teens. The Gospels are later, whatever is in them Paul was not aware of, and his beliefs don’t resemble the Gospels at all. I later read Didache, where what is in the mouth of Jesus in G.Mt. is the teaching of the disciples. In G.Jn. a character in a Lukan parable, Lazarus, becomes a person raised from the dead. Unless your brain has slopped out earlier, you need a Middle School education and a Bible at most to read and think yourself out of this delusion.

  • Steven Watson

    Which scholars are inreasingly leaning to be no earlier than the early third century century BCE. Just because the DSS date 1st/2nd century CE doesn’t make “Moses” a real person. We already know Judeans/Samarians were not monolatrists, let alone monotheists, in the fourth/fifth century BCE (Elephantine Temple texts) and could not have supported the scribal apparatus necessary, or have had the literate base, for the Tanakh before either “kingdom” was subsumed into the Mesopotamian culture that had and could.

  • Steven Watson

    Good grief. Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Lenin, Pol Pot, the Hutu, any incarnation of the R.S.A, Leopold the Second, the Congo post-independance, US troops anytime, ever, the Amritsar Massacre, PIRA, Pinochet. This list is not exhaustive. Donald ” Kill people for blowing up a robot? Belay that order.” Trump? Don’t. Be. Silly.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    From Wikipedia

    “Statue of Jupiter, Vatican, Rome.
    The Romans regarded Jupiter as the equivalent of the Greek Zeus,[7] and in Latin literature and Roman art, the myths and iconography of Zeus are adapted under the name Iuppiter”

    Same god, different name. Jews, Christians, and Muslims all have different names for Abraham. It isn’t a rip off. It is just the same beliefs.

  • Luther Dorn (deplorable)

    I dont get your point. It is a first century work. It mentions Jesus establishing Him as a historic person. There would no need to establish this in the third century as He was already accepted as one then. Thus the reference is credible.

    No Christian would insert that reference just in case some stubborn person two millennia later decided to contest what everyone knew then.

  • Bill Goodwin

    I don’t fear death. I had been dead for billions of years before I was born and it never caused me the slightest inconvenience. -Mark Twain

  • rationalobservations?

    It has already been long established that there is no tangible 1st century originated historical evidence of the existence of “Jesus” or any of the myths and legends of “Jesus” that were written starting centuries after the time in which those myths and legends are merely set.
    Why do you think you can get away with continually lying about it?
    https://pics.me.me/in-the-entire-first-christian-century-jesus-is-not-mentioned-17397524.png
    https://pics.me.me/the-truth-about-faith-having-faith-that-something-is-true-11341532.png

  • David Cromie

    Why would a supposed ‘god’ need a supposed ‘devil’s advocate’, in the first place? Surly the place to start is with the proof that any supposed supernatural entity, you care to mention, actually exists?

  • Bill Goodwin

    That is literally what we are talking about and YOU literally asked me to be God’s/Devil’s Advocate regarding a proposed position that I don’t agree with so I obliged. My work here is done.

  • Bill Goodwin

    Also the existence of the alleged god was presupposed by your question. So if you wanted to start with existence you would have used a different question. And while a person is alleging a gods existence (without proof) they can literally allege any quality they want regarding such a god in order to thwart objections. For instance, again slipping into God’s Advocacy, why should you presume that a god would allow you access to information that proves or disproves its existence. Surely any such being would be capable of giving you or withholding any such evidence.