My point is atheism doesn’t have a monopoly on science.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
“The work of God”?
- Thread starter city2
- Start date
There’s much more evidence for Jesus existing than many other historical figures that are taken as absolutely existing.
Among atheist scholars, the vast majority thing he existed and was crucified.
Having historical evidence of someone existing 30 years after they died in a ancient times is seen as a given they existed, for any other person.
Atheists go on about evidence and measuring and accuracy and yet ignore the facts on this subject, the fact being there’s barely an atheist scholar alive who thinks Jesus didn’t exist and wasn’t crucified.
for the sake of argument will for the point of debate say a man lived and was hung on a cross in 33AD, how do i make the leap that this man is a deity
My point is atheism doesn’t have a monopoly on science.
but their viewpoint is clouded that it has to have god element to science which there is no evidence for
BimboBob
Well-Known Member
Because they said so. They being the people who want you to believe so they can control you. Do keep up ;)for the sake of argument will for the point of debate say a man lived and was hung on a cross in 33AD, how do i make the leap that this man is a deity
That’s your choice my friend. It’s a tough concept to arrive at, as I was an atheist and now I am not but it’s why it’s called faith.for the sake of argument will for the point of debate say a man lived and was hung on a cross in 33AD, how do i make the leap that this man is a deity
you continually ignore marks gospel cannot of been written before 70AD because of references to the revolt in the jewish/roman war at around 70ADOn the contrary, that’s exactly what you’re doing.
The general perception has always been 65-70 AD, not 80-90.
However there is a significant movement in secular scholarship that is now saying earlier, because of finds from other authors.
“but dates from sometime between the late 30s and early 40s”
so obviously it cannot have been written earlier as the event hadn't happened
They’d disagree.but their viewpoint is clouded that it has to have god element to science which there is no evidence for
That’s your choice my friend. It’s a tough concept to arrive at, as I was an atheist and now I am not but it’s why it’s called faith.
don't do faith mate, you'll have to give me something more than that
bet they would, doesn't make them rightThey’d disagree.
urban genie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 May 2008
- Messages
- 32,641
Guy was a public speaker of sorts who amassed a following and pissed the Romans off who had him knocked off. Then a bunch of magic was added into it to coerce the uneducated masses into believing it out of fear so the population could be controlled.
The roman empire never actually died, it just evolved into something else