Permabanned
Lots of people, your point?Homeslice said:Who else got nailed to a tree?
Lots of people, your point?Homeslice said:Who else got nailed to a tree?
dmpoole said:Of course
Of course he deserved it and its documented.
He went into the temple and turned the tables over.
He flouted the religious doctrine of the Jewish people and preached at the base of the temples and made it clear that women, children and lepers were all welcome which the elders were totally against.
The last straw came when he said that he was God.
The bloke set himself up to be crucified, he knew it was going to happen, had a last party and probably told Judas to go tell the authorities where he was.
Meanwhile his plan was hatched that on his death his body would be removed and Mary would say she had seen him. (or he didn't actually die on the wood, he left town and had a family with Mary)
Wham bam new religion.
If I went over to Iran and started preaching outside their Mosques with my new religion that went against all their doctrines then yes I would deserve to die.
jezsoup said:Funny you should sya that, allt he medical experts and such who had anthing to do with him never came up with a scientific reason other than, all the intital examinationn of his 13-14 years of life before he was healed were all wrong!
Joe42 said:You can never prove that god exists, or that he doesn't.
But its perfectly fair to say 'i am more likely to be right, because i have more convincing evidence for my argument than you have for yours'.
iCraig said:With something as large and overwhelming and unmeasurably complex as the universe, I think keeping an open mind is the wisest thing to do.
mrk1@1 said:What would make you do this?
Sleepy said:Some minor points for you to consider:So in comparing the evidence of 33AD ie none with those of 1912 where eyewitnesses, artifacts, plans, film photographs and the pièce de résistance a big sodding wreck all exist; is fundamentally stupid
- There is no contempory evidence for JC existance
- There is no contempory evidence for the resurrection
- The earliest documents refering to JC are Pauls letters, written 15 odd years later
- The synoptic gospels were written post first Jewish War AD66-70
- None of the gospels were written by eye witnesses
- The NT was written over the period 55 -200ADish and what to include was still being finalised 1500 years later
iCraig said:You are, and I agree with you. As an agnostic I don't belief in God per say, I just believe that so far, as humans, orbiting one of a billion planets, of a billion star systems, we do not know the truth. None of us know, so in my opinion, worshipping something as ambigious as God is too vague for me to dedicate my life to, especially as there's a decent chance I've only got one life.
More evidence doesn't equal high-ground though, just because atheism is more probable than creationism doesn't make it 'fact over fiction' like some atheists would phrase.
With something as large and overwhelming and unmeasurably complex as the universe, I think keeping an open mind is the wisest thing to do.
Your picking a hole in a thread you cleary havent read. Read the few posts above this comment and you'll understand why I said it.Sleepy said:Lots of people, your point?
dmpoole said:This is exactly what Jesus did.
It was basically a new religion.
dmpoole said:This is exactly what Jesus did.
It was basically a new religion.
dmpoole said:If I went over to Iran and started preaching outside their Mosques with my new religion that went against all their doctrines then yes I would deserve to die.
mrk1@1 said:You wrote
So I asked what would make you do this? Not what did Jesus do?
So if Jesus was this family guy, married to Mary (as you suggest), why on earth would he go through all this 2000 years ago?
sniffy said:Really not trying to cause offense but perhaps he was mentally ill?
mrk1@1 said:So I asked what would make you do this? Not what did Jesus do?
So if Jesus was this family guy, married to Mary (as you suggest), why on earth would he go through all this 2000 years ago?
I haveHomeslice said:My argument is that if you research the crucifiction and the resurrection and the documents and facts surrounding it (other than the bible) you may be surprised at what you dig up.
No there isn't.There is contemporay evidence for the resurrection.
sniffy said:Really not trying to cause offense but perhaps he was mentally ill?
jezsoup said:Try readign the bible, it tells you why he went through it all and got crucified, and no it wasnt because he was mentally ill.
Why am I pretty sure he wasnt mentally ill? How many mentally ill people can you name from 200 years ago? Mentally ill people are not ones to be remembered, let alone follwed for a faith.
So you don't have any evidence to back up your claim of contempory evidence. Why am I not surprised by this turn of events.Homeslice said:Of course, this would all ultaimtely depend on the Bible being true.