The Evidence for the Existence of Jesus
Pt.1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I93OLYzewgY...feature=related
Pt.2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTke6d65szg...feature=related
Pt.3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmhkXX1Df9M...feature=related
Pt.4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkAVXqOVv1M...feature=related

http://www.thedevineevidence.com/jesus_history.html

Oh boy. YOU JUST KNOW there is gonna be some GREAT atheist reading in this post!

The problem being, not that Jesus wasn't a real historical figure, but that a huge assumption is being made by some Christians. That somehow if a case can be made for his historicity, then by default the miracle's, his claims to be the son of God, the resurrection or that God actually exists etc.. are therefore also historical facts.

Even for the sake of this discussion, If I was to grant you the full historicity of the Nazarene. To then go "He was the Son of God" and "He really worked miracles" he was "raised from the dead" Therefore "God exists", is going on nothing but faith.

Apollonius of Tyana, Hanina ben Dosa, Honi the Circle-Drawer and Vespasian, all lived the same time as the Nazarene, are you going to acknowledge with the same conviction and certainty that these other people also did miracles?

For eg. the pagan holy man, Apollonius of Tyana, appeared to his followers after his death, Honi the Circle Drawer also rose again after death, they all supposedly worked great miracles.

How is it that the faith you have happens to be the only one that is historically credible? There are over 38,000 Christian denominations, never mind all the other religions and denominations within them. How do you ascertain which is the one true religion?

of course Jesus was not his real name. Yashua or Ioshu in Greek meaning "Yahweh saves". These videos are full of half truths ,and anyone who has actually read the antiquities for themselves ( earlyjewishwritings.com) would know Josephus is a detailed flamboyant writer who on the same page of the mention of Jesus he gives 5 times more ink to describing a prostitute that hung around the palace. Josephus has paragraphs that are in the thousands of words,but never just a few lines....but what about writers at the exact time and place???Seneca and the Stoics???nothing...Philo of Alexandria???/nothing......but even if he did exist or not,today we have Todd Bentley with 30+ resurrections of the dead.....Chris Angel walks on water.....so

Mark just to see if we are on the same page or not? I posted only the evidence of man called Jesus of Nazareth and he had followers...just the man not God. Can you see the evidence of just that?

Todd Bentley is a nut and a false preacher and never raised anyone from the dead! As far as Chris Angel walking on water...Lets see him try another place besides a swimming pool with trick cameras and mirrors . Jesus walked on stormy seas and calmed the waters. Lets see Chris pull that one off! There is a lot more then just Josephus's writings also. There is CORNELIUS TACITUS (55 - 120 A.D.) GAIUS SUETONIUS TRANQUILLUS (69 - 130 A.D.) THALLUS (~ 52 A.D.) PLINY THE YOUNGER (63 - 113 A.D) CELSUS (~ 178 A.D.) LUCIAN OF SAMOSATA (120 - ~180 A.D.) MARA BAR-SERAPION (Post 70 A.D) THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD, CLEMENT OF ROME (? - 98? A.D.) IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH (? - ~100 A.D) QUADRATUS OF ATHENS (126 A.D.) ARISTIDES THE ATHENIAN (126 A.D.) JUSTIN MARTYR (~100 - 165 A.D.) HEGESIPPUS (110 A.D. - 180 A.D.)

I agree, he was just a man. Are you suggesting he was anything but a man?

Oh, really where you there, did you see Jesus walk on water? As I pointed out how can you claim Jesus is real, and the likes of Apollonius, Honi and Hanina are not? We have the same evidence for all of them as people, but that says nothing about whether their supposed miracles etc.. were actually true.

So which of the 38,000 + Christian denominations do you adhere to Iza and on what merits can you discount the likes of Bentley? There's far more evidence for the Historicity of Joseph Smith, why are you not a Mormon?

OK, but simply saying he never existed at all is just plain denial of facts. Yes I believe he was God. You don't have to believe that, just don't like hearing people claim there is no evidence that he never existed at all.

LOL Joseph Smith never claimed to be God, just a prophet and he was proved to be a false one at that. I am not any denomination Mark. I only follow and listen to what Jesus teaches and if I do listen to any preacher I always check the bible to see if he is correct. That is what we are suppose to do and if more people would do that then there would not be so many Benny Hinns and Todd Bentleys deceiving people. As far as the miracles that Jesus did I believe ever bit, but like I said you don't have too.

There most certainly is no evidence at all that he excised anything. I'm pretty sure he wasn't a tax collector.

Sorry... existed

How do you know what Jesus teaches? Maybe it is your interpretations that are incorrect, how do you know? Its not like he actually wrote anything down or that his equally illiterate followers wrote anything down.

The only writings are the Gospels, and they were written by highly literate, trained, Greek-speaking Christians. They’re not written by Jesus’ Aramaic-speaking followers. They’re written by people living 30- 60 years later. Where did these people get their information from?

You could become a Muslim, Hindu, Scientologist, Mormon or any Theological denomination (or make up your own) for that matter based on the non-evidence you're willing to believe in. All have equal merits in their supernatural claims, no evidence just faith.

I always try to be objective,thats how I studied the bible and other texts. As far as Tacitus and Gaius, they mention heresay ,and it is not even his name, but Christos and Chrestos...a "path" a "messiah" and a common name. Also they are just that a brief text of what "Christians say about" or "who the Christians say started their religious belief". Not to mention that THESE were at least 50 to 100 years after the cross....................These people had language,they wrote letters,the Egyptians were emaculate record keepers, the Babylonian tablets are painfully detailed. I have to ask myself if "I saw the greatest superbowl game EVER", would it take a half century to write about it????????Well a superbowl pales in comparison to a leader of an ancient cult or religion. Cuz these folks had no MALL, INTERNET,MOVIE THEATRE, OR TV...ALL THEY HAD WAS THEIR STORIES. Yet nothing written during his life or even close. All the "large crowds","multitudes", "huge crowds","big crowds" that followed him,just as quickly forgot him I guess..................As far as Bentley goes,of course he is a con-man,fraud. That is not the point! The point is you have thousands of witnesses that REALLY BELIEVE HE RESURRECTS...Im sure some of them are writing in their diaries,or even writing books about his greatness. If a thousand years from now someone found the writings,would not 100's or thousands of EYEwitness accounts be the same thing as 4 conflicting gospels??? Id say much more credible.....People will believe anything. This is proven by the thousands of Christians flying in from all over the world to see a Charlatan named Todd Bentley. I would venture to say Jesus as a man, a leader,existed at some point,maybe,then the myth builds,builds. Just like Superman or Batman every story has a new twist on it,yet they all are claimed as "true",or "eyewitness"

he was a man who ate some sort of hallucinogenic plant and though he was the son of god

Jesus was the Chris Angel of his day. Same with all of the walking talking traveling follower-gathering "prophets". There were plenty. There are nowadays and there will be many more in the future. They are all equally valid since they do not offer any proof or validity over the next prophet.

People back then believed in fucking anything. They were largely uneducated, without human rights, had very short life expectancies and were VERY superstitious. There are THOUSANDS of religions and THOUSANDS of holy books. There is no advantage one has over the next. All it boils down to is what family raised you and who did they worship?

Even if a person came out with absolute scientific evidence for the existence of a God/Gods or scientific confirmation of a miracle... who would you attribute that miracle to? Who is their prophet, and what book did they write? It would spur thousands more questions and the debate would be never ending.

Truth is, religious people know they will never know why their religion is right and thousands others are wrong. They simply will never know and they will never care. Religion is a "just in case" philosophy. Religion does not make peopel more generous or loving. Religion does nothing an atheist group can not do. Religion is just there "just in case" there really is a hell, and religion is the only way to avoid it.

I was a Christian for 11 years, and I can say with every bit of honestly that the ONLY issue I had with leaving the church was fear of hell. That simple. The religion itself, the church and the bible is a joke, a third grader can see that. Leaving that was simple. Hell was a big deal however, and seriously, for a child that kind of stuff is fucking hard to deal with. You tell any child from birth that they are gong to suffer and burn for eternity unless they love and imaginary friend then you are gonna see a fucked up kid with issues, myself included.

Who gives a fuck if Jesus existed. Paul wrote him to be something quite different then who he was even if he did exist. Besides, that bible is so fucked up and convoluted that only a person absolutely blinded with ignorance would take it with any value. But, like I said earlier, Christians don't even care. They just need that spiritual after-life insurance JUST IN CASE, right?

It is the year 2008 and people are still abusing and repressing their children with storied of eternal torture and suffering. That is the action of a parent who can not raise a child on love, respect and discipline. They have to resort to threats and fear tactics.

Christianity is on the way out. Atheism and agnosticism is on the way in. We will win. Now parents have to actually raise their children, and we can all enjoy the lower crime rates, lower divorce rates and all the other benefits that come from being a predominantly atheist country.

Criss Angel sucks. I hate that guy.

He does suck. How the hell did he get popular in the first place?

QUOTE(izabadgirl @ Sep 6 2008, 12:17 PM)
Mark just to see if we are on the same page or not? I posted only the evidence of man called Jesus of Nazareth and he had followers...just the man not God. Can you see the evidence of just that?


I agree, he was just a man. Are you suggesting he was anything but a man?




Wow , I can't believe I missed this "you have won Izabadgirl". mark is 1/2 way there. we are all in the same boat does God exist ? each of us will find out when the history of man as we know it comes to an end. The truth is a big subject greater than our collective brains can muster. the question is why would this truth be hidden and whom is responsible? the information age started before man came into existence but has been dominated by disinformation. wide is the path of distruction and narrow is the way and few if any shall find it.

here is a link that you may find interesting.if you are searching for what you think you know. Jesus's name etc.
http://www.naturalgod.com/SiteMap.html

Upon further thought, I would not mind if there was strong evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ... as long it was for the real Jesus. By "real" I mean brown. Jesus was a middle eastern jewish guy after all, and there is absolutely no way he popped out a European!

If this Jesus was well supported by factual evidence then it would end the KKK immediately. The Klan would instantly dissolve. That is reason alone to unearth real evidence supporting a factual Jesus!

All racist Christians would have to choose to stop being racist in order to "love" their savior, or else start a new religion that would be synonymous with racism. This is also another fantastic reason to unearth real evidence supporting the existence of Jesus.

So yeah, I personally don't find the evidence for Jesus at all compelling yet, but perhaps there with be amazing advances in this field one day? It would do the world a lot of good. As long as Jesus's past is sketchy he is allowed to somehow be perceived as being white, which allows racism and Christianity to blend in America... in the form of the KKK, etc.

Let's find Jesus! I'm on board!

Just wait till the Codex Sinaiticus is available on-line next year, then you'll be able to compare it to a modern one and see how made up it all is. The C.S. is the oldest bible in existence and has books that are not in your modern bible (Shepherd of Hermas & the Epistle of Barnabas a thoroughly anti-Semitic narrative), then there's the crucial verses relating to the Resurrection, guess what? Not there!

Showing how the bible was the first wikipedia project.

Shouldn't this thread be called "The LACK of Evidence for the Existence of Jesus"?

In all honesty Belief in the Christ Jesus son of god is all about Faith. Faith the God does exist and that he sent his son to save our souls from eternal damnation. Its no more different than Evolutionist having faith that Darwin was right. As Darwin's Theory is still a Theory and that means we believe it but have not enough evidence to prove it. Not saying his whole theory is wrong just the where we began part but that is a discussion for another time and place anyhoo... We all can continue to argue our points back and forth. Because its what we love to do, argue, discuss debate is all the same. We Christians will never be convinced otherwise as the Atheist will never be convinced they are wrong. So i guess i am saying thanks for all the fun.


LOL now that i am done trolling

Thanks for the links it was nice learn of the historical references.

Hehe, thats brilliant, the bible as a wiki. Actually, you can add to it just like a wiki, but the minute someone reviews and alters it they either have to start a new sub-sect of the religion, or kill the people who defend those original writings. This makes the bible sort of a bad photocopier that keeps muddying up the copy every time it replicates.

Applying logic to religion is like mixing oil with water, as we all know. It is exciting to every atheist/amateur bible scholar in the world that the Codex Sinaiticus will be open for public viewing... but Christians will combat this every chance they get. If modern Christianity have proven anything it is that you can make up whatever you want, whenever you want, and if things don't make sense you can ignore it and Jesus will forgive you anyways.

Let the Christians worship made up shit. It's all good. Just makes them look bad. Atheists are going to have a field day however! Can't wait.


Holy shit, are you being serious? You mean, the theory of gravity you are fine with, and the theory of relativity you are okay with, but the theory of evolution is "just a theory!". Hehe, a theory is the highest platform an idea can ascend to without being math. This is science, where you get BONUS POINTS for disproving someone else's idea and this is encouraged. If you require proof, then you must go where the facts indicate.

Now, look at religion. Religion is absolutely discourages peer review. Where is the priest who says : "Due to new evidence we have to re-structure this theory of God." There is no evidence and therefore it remains in the realm of "I said so" and "No! I said so." If you require no proof, then you can believe in anything.

Religion is a choice. The belief in evolution is not a choice. It doesn't care whether you believe it or not.

Go ahead an refute it, but the theory of evolution is one of the strongest ever discovered by scientists. This is also a theory that is widely accepted and expanded upon by dozens of branches of science. This is also a theory that has existed for 150 years and have been closely tested, peer reviewed that whole time, and has come out with a 100 percent success rate. 100 percent, in your face! Slam fucking dunk! The thoery of evolution is now the basis for other sciences, like curing disease and genetic research, and it clearly fucking works. It is simple fact, and requires no faith. The evidence is absolutely mind blowingly overwhelming on its own thanks

The bible has been altered and compiled and re-written dozens of times, and includes a whole swarm of stories that pre-date the bible! The book is so full of beans that the modern Christian doesn't even read it! That is not counting all the contradictions, absolutely savage and disgusting verses, and silly anomalies. This is a book that requires faith. Faith is all it requires, as intelligence will only serve to distract ones belief in the bible.

So yeah, evolution does not require faith, and it is disgusting to even see it regarded as a faith-based concept when it is the very embodiment of fantastic science. Stupid unbelievable things require faith, BECAUSE THEY ARE STUPID AND UNBELIEVABLE! If they weren't retarded then people could believe them without faith, like the theory of evolution for example. Owned.

Actually I don't think evolution is any longer considered just a theory. I believe it is now considered scientific fact. You'd be hard pressed to find any scientist claiming it as "just a theory" now. There is TONS of evidence supporting it.

The word faith caught my attention. It's just a word.. has a definitive definition- without proof, confidence, reliance.. yet it's one of those words that has a power given to it by those who use it most to further their agenda. As if not having faith is a negative thing. I have faith that if I don't pay my mortgage... the bank will foreclose. I don't have faith in anything of an organized religous source. I have faith... but I'm a heathen non-believer servant to satan etc.... Hmmmmm... best quit now before I lose other's faith in me....

Even though no one has "witnessed" evolution on a large scale, it's hardly just a theory. I don't see how it's anything like faith in god, which has absolutely no proof.

On a related note, yay for post 2666

It's pretty asinine to have "faith" in science. Because intelligent thinkers do not have faith in anything. What we do have is evidence. It's not that we Atheist will never be convinced that we are wrong, in fact we are DYING to be convinced wrong. Non-thinkers might ask why Atheist would want to be proved wrong, and it's quite simple. We want the truth backed up with evidence. Contrary to Christianity (or any other religion) which bases their beliefs in gut feeling (I have faith that O.J Simpson was always innocent ) Now, it's really hard to side with a religion with little to no evidence compared to science which is based on a foundation of evidence.

Sheesh, if I still believed in my parent's stories about Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy I guess I wouldn't be that intelligent.

On top of that, constantly losing every single discussion in every aspect is not fun, it's rather... retarded. So don't thank us for all the "fun" you guys are having. Because evidently you are not having any, we should be thanking you.

Evidence you want it proof ? do you believe that Satan exists and is worshipped by the elite this very moment . that the world and washington DC is covered in monuments of the Gods of acient times right in your face .
look into the symbols. you are under their system they feed you want they want you to believe .they act in direct conflict with the God you claim doesn't exists. why would they do this if they had nothing to fear. do you think you are smarter than them ? don't believe ? go and learn how to communicate with the Evil one and then come back here and tell us how intelligent you are then . oh they love to do math so you will have plenty of fun while you are at it. to find truth you have to cut down all the falsehoods and they are many .you will have to pick the truth up little by little there is no other formula pun intended.

Some of those Roman historians remind me of sensationalist reporters of such popular modern day rags as The National Enquirer or Star. You know, those tabloids that you pick-up at the check-out stand while waiting to pay for your groceries... I remember reading the cramped Latin texts of Tacitus and Suetonius to do a history report on Early Roman Emperors years ago. I was expecting to fall asleep out of boredom. What I got instead was an unexpected tabloid read of the sordid court intrigue and wild sex parties of the time. Ah, such wonderful tabloid reporters to place one's faith in!

Spin doctors of the past spun sensationalist scatology in the ancient world as much as they do in current events. Machiavellian Marketing exists everywhere and every time period.

Given a choice, I'd rather believe in Santa Claus than other popular religions. He seems like a rather cool omniscient being. He's not like the Etch-a-Sketch religion that Carlos Mencia mentions in a post made by Sylver in the Dumpster. At least kids can look forward to being rewarded for good deeds. If a kid or even an adult does bad things, he still needs to make-up for his poor behavior or face getting nothing but a lump of coal.

No more shoddy Etch-a-Sketch ethics. No matter how bad, cruel or murderous you were, you don't need to be responsible for your actions as long as you believe in a certain deity.

The Evidence for the Existence of Jesus the Man: "evidence of man called Jesus of Nazareth and he had followers...just the man not God"

Pt.1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I93OLYzewgY...feature=related
Pt.2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTke6d65szg...feature=related
Pt.3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmhkXX1Df9M...feature=related
Pt.4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkAVXqOVv1M...feature=related

there help you a bit with the title. this way you won't confuse this jesus with your jesus. i mean this way some people won't confuse this jesus with your jesus.. x__x

LET US SEE...JESUS HAD ALL THESE "CROWDS","VAST CROWDS", 'MULTITUDES",ECT FOLLOWING HIM AROUND YET HOW MANY SOURCES MENTION JESUS AT HIS ALLEGED TIME OF LIFE???ZERO,ZILCH................................NOW IN COMPARISON TO JULIUS CAESAR,A MERE MORTAL WHO HAD NO HOARDS OF PEOPLE FOLLOW HIM AROUND HAD HOW MANY DIFFERENT SOURCES MENTION HIM??/ THESE ARE WHEN HE ACTUALLY LIVED,NOT DECADES LATER.
Contemporary Witnesses to Caesar

Cicero

Orations and Letters provide eyewitness evidence of Caesar

Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC) was almost an exact contemporary of Julius Caesar.
In Caesar's struggle with Pompey, Cicero, governor of Cilicia, sided with Pompey but was subsequently pardoned by Caesar.
In March of 44 BC Cicero was a witness to Caesar's murder, though he was not a part of the conspiracy.
Following the assassination, Cicero made a series of speeches known as the "Philippics" which called on the Senate to support Octavian against Mark Antony. Cicero's "Second Phillipics" was an eulogy of Caesar's conquest of Gaul.
Unfortunately for Cicero Octavian reached a temporary rapprochement with Antony, who then ordered Cicero's murder.
Among some 900 preserved letters to and from Cicero are correspondence both about and with Caesar.
"... if Caesar does lose his head all the same, Pompey feels only the deepest contempt for him, trusting in his own and the state's troops..."
Cicero to Atticus, 7.8, 50BC.





Sallust
Caius Sallust (86-34 BC) tribune, provincial governor and supporter of Caesar. His testimony is in a history "Bellum Catalinae".
Nepos
Cornelius Nepos (c100-24): "Life of Atticus".
Catullus
Gaius Valerius Catullus (c84-54 BC): "Carmina".
Asinius Pollio
Gaius Asinius Pollio (76 BC-4 AD) was an ally of Caesar and founder of the first public library in Rome. He was a source used by Plutarch.
Virgil
Virgil (70BC-17AD): "Aeneid".
Ovid
Ovidius Naso (43BC-17AD): "Metamorphoses".
Near Contemporary Witnesses


Paterculus
Velleius Paterculus (c19 BC-32 AD): "Historiae Romanae".
Lucan
Lucan (Marcus Annaeus Lucanus, 39-65 AD) followed the example of his grandfather, Seneca the Elder – a young contemporary of Caesar – who in later life wrote a history of Rome.
Lucan wrote his own Pharsalia approximately a century after the civil war it chronicles, using Seneca's work as an eye-witness source.
Plutarch
Plutarch of Chaeronea (45-120 AD) was a Greek moralist, historian and biographer (and priest of Delphi). He wrote his Parallel Lives (matching Greek with Roman lives) during the reigns of Trajan and Hadrian. He describes in detail the life and assassination of Julius Caesar (as well as Marcus Brutus and Mark Antony).
Appian
Appian of Alexandria (c.95-165 AD): Civil Wars.
Suetonius
The most famous biographer of Caesar, Tranquillus Suetonius, wrote his Lives of the Twelve Caesars during the reign of emperor Hadrian (117-138).
Suetonius was in charge of the imperial archives and in this capacity, had access to some of the best possible information.

nOW THE LIST FOR THE MOST IMPORTANT MAN OFF ALL TIME GRACE THE EARTH......


ZERO.

I really think, and this is just my humble opinion, that you are just a pompous blow hard, who is not near as intelligent as would like others to believe you are.
carry on with your unremarkable tirades that make no sense, and high light fowl language (do you kiss your mother with that mouth?)
Whether you want, will, or can believe it, every knee will bow, and every tongue will confess that JESUS is LORD.
That means you as well.
owned.

Blah blah blah.. can't attack the message so attack the messenger.. blah blah blah... threats of your imaginary buddy making everyone go to their knees and tongue him in a confessional.. blah blah blah proclaiming victory due this fantasy episode... blah blah blah...
Sweet jumpin Jeebus and his ex-whore gal pal.... Typical lyin ass christian starts off with it's his "humble opinion", to preface an arrogant insult that must be a cut and paste from some christian site cuz I've seen Izabadgirl queen of the cut and pasters from whacko religious sites use the same phrase.... The only thing blowing hard here is you and your freak buddy. So who wear's the priest outfit.. and who get's to play the altar boy.. or do you switch up for effect.... and where's your mom and her mouth during all this....
And as Dr Phil says... "ya can't own what you don't acknowledge"....

And who uses frosted tipped bird talk to smootch their mum up..... "and high light fowl language (do you kiss your mother with that mouth?)".. or was that just another part of your fantasy...

If that qualifies as "owned" to you then all the power to you. If you debated even ONE of my talk points I might give you some credit, but you can not even muster enough sensibility to do that. You are quick to turn this into a "you are just a pompous blow hard" kind of debate. Weak and pointless, and I am not going to lower myself to that level.

In regards to my intelligence/education: I do not even have a high school education. I dropped out in the tenth grade. All of my education in regards to religion and science has been extra-curricular. I am not going to defend my intelligence today. Id rather let my words speak for themselves. If I was so unintelligent I would not have had a chance to turn you into a schoolyard name-caller, for instance. Clearly I hit a nerve, and idiots rarely accomplish this feat.

There is a group of people on earth who are characteristically intelligent and well educated. These people are called scientists. They have cured your diseases, discovered the earth was round, discovered the sun was the center of our universe, made your microwave so you can nuke your hot pockets, etc. I concede that these peopel are much more well educated and intelligent then I will ever be, and I am inclined to beleive in what they are talking about.

Then there are religious people. There is no value put on rational thought or critical analysis among the religious community. This is clear. There is no "prove me wrong" kind of attitude, and this is what truth relies upon. Since I was born an atheist I was given a choice to trust the words of people who seek truth by finding the answers and those who know the answers and ignore opposing truths. I believe my choice was a wise one, and well educated/intelligent people agree. This is considering that scientists and atheists are on average more intelligent as opposed to religious people.

This is what I find rather entertaining...

Christians are atheists towards EVERY religion in the world, disbelieving in over 2000 gods... except for one. Disbelief is a primary function among religious people, as is the same with atheists.

Most Christians believe in EVERY single scientific theory... except for one. Evolution is your one exception, but you know what it is like to believe in scientific theory because you believe in every single other one. Atheists simply accept every scientific theory, until a better one comes along.

...and this is the funny part. Somehow this one billionth of a fraction of difference in a Christian and an atheist constitutes such a massive disagreement?! We are almost in complete agreement with each other and yet I am "just a pompous blow hard"? Priceless.


Mwedge, you seem to be happy to wish hell upon those who disagrees. In the middle ages you would have been happy to burn a witch or torture a heretic no doubt. I believe in humane treatment for all, regardless of race, gender, age or religion, and I would never wish the eternal torture of hell upon anyone.

I think this makes me a more moral person than you.

I disbelieve in thousands of gods and trust science on a daily basis just like you, without any deviation due to the religious choices of my parents or community.

I think this makes me smarter than you. Certainly more consistent and rational.

So.... if you have anything intelligent to discuss here please be my guess. Name calling is for children who have nothing to back themselves up... so how about some actual intelligent debate here? If not, then I think it is clear who is getting owned here.

you folks that are headed to hell and you others that are a bit too keen on jesus amaze me with your willingness to to explain your views to each other.

it is really generous of you all to spend so much time explaining to each other how wrong each is, but i have to ask that you all not attack each other, it just makes for a less enjoyable time here. chasing each post to see and reply to each bit of text posted. it is just a documentary people, it was made by people. if you find that it is consuming your attentions, please just watch a movie or something. it really looks to me like there are a lot of obsessive people in these doc. forums and conflicting opinions just cause conflict. it is not mandatory to reply at all and if you have nothing nice to say keep it in your head. just a thanks to the poster/uploader and keep it in church or in your house.

Condemning people from the offset then calling for tolerance and respect. Oh the irony!

i know, it's my way to break up this thread with a bit of humor. you didn't think it was funny?
i guess you didn't catch onto that because you had to mention it, but i have no problem explaining.

but like mark8 pointed out i am calling for tolerance and respect in all posts made by all members.

It would be funny if you didn't believe a hell existed, but I think you do? So in such a polarised debate, any such attempt at humour is lost and we are left with irony. I know that you had the sole intent of expressing said "tolerance", but your initial statement negates anything good to follow.

Peace & Fucking

Out of curiosity: Where is the Christian who weeps at the thought of ANYONE going to hell? Why is it that if I was a Christian I would imagine this would be the first thing I'd do? Am I just too moral to be a Christian then? I would turn the other cheek, maintain few possessions while giving everything else to the poor, and cry and beg for even my worst enemies to repent. That to me sounds like being a Christian... and I have yet to meet one.

You then go on to say we are ruining everyones fun here. Are you being serious? Why do you think I keep coming back? Why do you think we ALL come back? You honestly do not think there are other forums on the internet?! Hehe, seriously.

My fun and your fun clearly differ, becuase I have fun enlightening dark age superstitious people into the new millennium. Religion holds morals, laws and philosiphy in stasis. It locks things into time, and commands that these things must remain unchanged... yet the world keeps marching on. Massive developments in morality and equality... and still religion unable to change itself, lest it contradicts the words of some old bronze age god.

You did come to the Spirituality & Religion section after all, so what did you expect? This is the place on the forum where the atheists absolutely destroy ancient dogmatic superstitious religions with modern rationality, intelligence and consistency. Since that was too long to put into a forum sub-section title we just stuck with Spirituality & Religion.




Soooooo..... lets get back on track here. Enough personal stuff, this is business. The theists are in the business of saving souls and atheists are in the business of enlightening them... so lets get to work. If anyone gets upset and offended that their ancient religions crumble so easily under a scrutinizing eye then that is not my fault. If you have no rebut, and your last line of defense is to claim unfair treatment, then that means your argument is baseless and you may want to explore some other options. To quote an 8 year old skeptic, "accepting reality just makes you better at dealing with it".

One might be tempted to resort to name calling, hell condemning, and other strange and childish acts... but lets keep this a debate and entertain talk points, not finger pointing.

sounds to me like you are trying to keep us from expressing our thoughts/ideas/opinions. where have i seen this type of leadership/control???
with any internet forum people are going to challenge each others opinions/ideas/thoughts. it is what makes a forum thrive. to be honest i am more involve now than i ever was since i have known of this forum's existence, which was years back before i even registered for a login. people like iza,mnot,mark,ultra...etc they keep me interested in discussions and keep me coming back for discussions. i dont know about everyone else but correct me if im wrong, i think thats why alot of us keep coming back. now if u want us to stop discussing about the vids then i'm sure you will start to see a declined in members visiting this site on a daily bases.

I agree, and well said DDD (or D3).

In regards to my views on religion: I may not agree with religious ideas but I certainly would never wish to censor a religious person from being able to express them. "I might not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it!" comes to mind.

This is ironic, since religious people are quite content with me being tortured for an eternity while I fight for their right to believe and preach such silliness.

It would be nice if the opposite were also true. Wouldn't it be nice if religious people, said stuff like "I disagree with non-belief in my deity, but I thank this atheist for challenging my views and forcing me to take a more critical look into my own beliefs, for the benefit of my eternal soul." That would be nice... but lets face it. Has it happened yet... and will this ever happen?

... now ask yourself... who is more moral?

you guys got it all wrong, i have no problem with people discussing anything till the cows come home if that is what they want.
what i can't tolerate is people attacking each other with names or making judgements about the people who are expressing their views.
the comment about people going to hell was a poorly executed joke on my part, but from what i have read in reply to that, even though i explained it already is becoming something more. never have i claimed to have any kind of association with any type of group or a specific religion or have i claimed to not believe in anything.
it has been poor comprehension or an over enthusiasm to label me as something that has taken place in this thread since i have tried to put a stop to name calling. now, i don't give a shit if any of you ever visit this site again, i really don't. go to some site that deals with spirituality and religion specifically and leave this site for good. it would be a lot less of a headache to me not having to scan posts for ignorance and name calling.
but if you are going to continue to visit this site you will have to go by the rules, and the rule i am trying to enforce is that any abusive behavior towards another member will not be tolerated.
i hope all of you can now return to a discussion of this topic and remember that i care not one bit for your personal beliefs. i care about everyone enjoying themselves.
if any of you have a reply towards me on this matter please do so by pm and i will be happy to consider your opinion. thanks

I agree that it is immature to resort to name calling, but that is one of the many things we must endure due to free speech. I have been called "a pompous blow hard" among other things, but that denotes a certain immaturity and frustration on the part of my debate opponent, and therefore is of benefit to me.

I do not agree that I am a blow-hard but rather a blow-useful-facts-in-the-face-of-ignorance.... type guy. This is fine, becuase I defend ones ability to write whatever they want even if it is wrong, immature, silly or stupid.

If anyone were to become "abusive" due to what is typed on these boards then they would have to be suffering from a pretty significant lack of character in the first place. If I could be made to feel abused by posting and reading forums then why the hell would I be here?! How about instead of policing what is "abusive" or not you just tell all the people who are easily offended to trade in their computers for a set of encyclopedias. Problem solved

.. and why is it that whenever the atheists completely slay a theistic abomination of science that it becomes a pity party? It becomes about feelings? Why? Why do things SO consistently go this way? It is certainly not the atheists who instigate this. It becomes a theist calling an atheist arrogant, abusive, mean, disrespectful, etc. It is not our fault that our arguments rock and that science kicks ass, so stop it with the personal dilemmas. Let facts deal with facts, and leave your fragile egos at the door please.