How strong is the evidence that Jesus existed?
12 Dec 2011, 4:37 pm
So no evidence (or lack of evidence) can convince you you're wrong. You're just like any religious person who clings to his faith regardless of what evidence contradicts it.
If your evidence for your Sun God Jesus is by questioning the Bible or that the requested documents have all been burnt to ashes or that the paintings on the cave walls are evidence, then all I can say is that either you're deluded and brainwashed or worse ... you're being intellectually dishonest.
I hope it's the former.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
12 Dec 2011, 5:44 pm
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
Documents that state this and that.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Let us not forget that the documents christians rely on for their "evidence" of jesus are highly questionable texts that were written by who knows. And that the bible was written long after jesus's supposed lifetime and that we have NO documents written during jesus's life that even mention him.
In fact, Paul's letters were written a mere twenty or thirty years after Christ's time.
Also, Tacitus in the first century mentions how Christians were persecuted by the Emperor Nero. While Suetonius mentioned in the first century how a riot had broken out in Rome's Jewish quarter after it had been learned that followers of "Chrestos" were living there. As well, Nero's predecessor, Claudius, had made it a capital offense to remove the body from it's resting place - but only in Judea.
Sounds like some pretty convincing evidence for Christ's existence to me.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Whether he existed or not is not my issue. My issue is that his life has been embellished by unlikely events that have no evidence one way or another, yet I am being asked to provide evidence for my speculations about these unlikely events that are said to have prophesised his birth and taken place after his death.
Really. I thought it sounded as if you were arguing against the existence of Jesus.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
13 Dec 2011, 4:25 am
MCalavera wrote:
So no evidence (or lack of evidence) can convince you you're wrong. You're just like any religious person who clings to his faith regardless of what evidence contradicts it.
If your evidence for your Sun God Jesus is by questioning the Bible or that the requested documents have all been burnt to ashes or that the paintings on the cave walls are evidence, then all I can say is that either you're deluded and brainwashed or worse ... you're being intellectually dishonest.
I hope it's the former.
If your evidence for your Sun God Jesus is by questioning the Bible or that the requested documents have all been burnt to ashes or that the paintings on the cave walls are evidence, then all I can say is that either you're deluded and brainwashed or worse ... you're being intellectually dishonest.
I hope it's the former.
What am I wrong about and how can you prove that I am wrong? I am being intellectually speculative, something you seem incapable of.
13 Dec 2011, 4:27 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
Documents that state this and that.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Let us not forget that the documents christians rely on for their "evidence" of jesus are highly questionable texts that were written by who knows. And that the bible was written long after jesus's supposed lifetime and that we have NO documents written during jesus's life that even mention him.
In fact, Paul's letters were written a mere twenty or thirty years after Christ's time.
Also, Tacitus in the first century mentions how Christians were persecuted by the Emperor Nero. While Suetonius mentioned in the first century how a riot had broken out in Rome's Jewish quarter after it had been learned that followers of "Chrestos" were living there. As well, Nero's predecessor, Claudius, had made it a capital offense to remove the body from it's resting place - but only in Judea.
Sounds like some pretty convincing evidence for Christ's existence to me.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Whether he existed or not is not my issue. My issue is that his life has been embellished by unlikely events that have no evidence one way or another, yet I am being asked to provide evidence for my speculations about these unlikely events that are said to have prophesised his birth and taken place after his death.
Really. I thought it sounded as if you were arguing against the existence of Jesus.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My argument on this issue is that there is no evidence eithe way. There are only stories. Most stories are works of fiction.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
13 Dec 2011, 5:05 am
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
Documents that state this and that.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Let us not forget that the documents christians rely on for their "evidence" of jesus are highly questionable texts that were written by who knows. And that the bible was written long after jesus's supposed lifetime and that we have NO documents written during jesus's life that even mention him.
In fact, Paul's letters were written a mere twenty or thirty years after Christ's time.
Also, Tacitus in the first century mentions how Christians were persecuted by the Emperor Nero. While Suetonius mentioned in the first century how a riot had broken out in Rome's Jewish quarter after it had been learned that followers of "Chrestos" were living there. As well, Nero's predecessor, Claudius, had made it a capital offense to remove the body from it's resting place - but only in Judea.
Sounds like some pretty convincing evidence for Christ's existence to me.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Whether he existed or not is not my issue. My issue is that his life has been embellished by unlikely events that have no evidence one way or another, yet I am being asked to provide evidence for my speculations about these unlikely events that are said to have prophesised his birth and taken place after his death.
Really. I thought it sounded as if you were arguing against the existence of Jesus.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My argument on this issue is that there is no evidence eithe way. There are only stories. Most stories are works of fiction.
How do you then explain the accounts written by Roman historians such as Tacitus and Suetonius, who clearly wrote about the early Christian community of the 1st century? It only makes sense that a new religion founded in that century is doubtlessly going to have a real life founder.
For that matter, Josephus wrote about Jesus, also in the first century, in his book, The Antiquity Of The Jews, as an historical person. He even credits Jesus with performing miracles.
Even if you don't accept the view that Jesus was the Son of God, the fact is, he was doubtlessly an historical person.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
13 Dec 2011, 5:49 am
MCalavera wrote:
Tadzio wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
Why are you stuck on Meier? Other than that, I wish I could understand what you're saying exactly.
Anyway, there are other experts, nonChristian, who also accept the historical Jesus.
While it's always good to read books from various authors of various views, one must also learn to discern which view is more reasonable than the others.
Meier is the most solid presently. If you want softer versions, try:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html
A few steps further distant, and it's into loose wing-nut true-believer Land again.
If you want abuse of the word "reasonable" again, go back to WLC-Land.
Tadzio
Meier is a Christian. I don't believe Meier is the most solid. I believe Bart Ehrman has it more spot-on than he does.
Have you ever read any of his books?
Hi MCalavera,
I've read 4 of Bart Ehrman's books:
Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not Make It into the New Testament (2003)
Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew (2003)
God's Problem
Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why
I don't know the edition year of the last two (but they're paperbacks, and buried in stacks of other books).
From the interviews I've heard that included Ehrman, he mostly relies also on evidencies Paul recorded from other people about the "real" Jesus, versus just the "historical", and more "legendary", Jesus.
Tadzio
13 Dec 2011, 6:23 am
I think he was actually many people. From different spans of time, even. Jesus is probably some kind of amalgamation of early christians, from back when they were not even called christians.
Maybe there was a man named Yeshua, who gave his identity to this amalgamation, but the rumors of his life have been greatly exaggerated.
13 Dec 2011, 7:14 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
Documents that state this and that.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Let us not forget that the documents christians rely on for their "evidence" of jesus are highly questionable texts that were written by who knows. And that the bible was written long after jesus's supposed lifetime and that we have NO documents written during jesus's life that even mention him.
In fact, Paul's letters were written a mere twenty or thirty years after Christ's time.
Also, Tacitus in the first century mentions how Christians were persecuted by the Emperor Nero. While Suetonius mentioned in the first century how a riot had broken out in Rome's Jewish quarter after it had been learned that followers of "Chrestos" were living there. As well, Nero's predecessor, Claudius, had made it a capital offense to remove the body from it's resting place - but only in Judea.
Sounds like some pretty convincing evidence for Christ's existence to me.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Whether he existed or not is not my issue. My issue is that his life has been embellished by unlikely events that have no evidence one way or another, yet I am being asked to provide evidence for my speculations about these unlikely events that are said to have prophesised his birth and taken place after his death.
Really. I thought it sounded as if you were arguing against the existence of Jesus.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My argument on this issue is that there is no evidence eithe way. There are only stories. Most stories are works of fiction.
How do you then explain the accounts written by Roman historians such as Tacitus and Suetonius, who clearly wrote about the early Christian community of the 1st century? It only makes sense that a new religion founded in that century is doubtlessly going to have a real life founder.
For that matter, Josephus wrote about Jesus, also in the first century, in his book, The Antiquity Of The Jews, as an historical person. He even credits Jesus with performing miracles.
Even if you don't accept the view that Jesus was the Son of God, the fact is, he was doubtlessly an historical person.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I have no misgivings about accepting that a man named jesus once lived. What my interest lies in is why supernatural attributes have been attached to this man long after he was said to have died. Why say this man is the light of the world? Are people saying it is because he gave enlightenment to the wrongdoings of people up until that time? Or are people saying he is literally "the light of the world"?
My argument is that this supernatural story that has been painted on someone, who presumably knows nothing about this elevated honour, is actually an existing concept that can be said about the sun. And seeing as the sun is literally the light of the world, and the sun can be said to die and be reborn in the sense of the winter solstice, that this is a bit of a coincidence and to attach these attributes to a flesh and blood man is insincere to the masses.
So I am not saying jesus did not live because of pagan myths. I am investigating whether the mystical story of his life can be related back to notions of celestial observations that can be witnessed today, and would have been witnessed at his time, and prior to his time.
Perhaps my original contribution to this thread was sweeping and I obviously wanted to grab attention. But I would like to investigate this idea and assess how valid people think it is. But others on here are demanding documental evidence from me that they know doesn't exist, while at the same time holding up the bible as a confident source of historical fact.
I don't know the books you propose but we have to be very aware that when people write about things in a retrospective sense, especially about well regarded people, their status is almost always elevated. It took only a few years after Diana's death for some people to start regarding her as a saint!
I am also interested in the similarities between various religions.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
13 Dec 2011, 12:03 pm
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
Documents that state this and that.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Let us not forget that the documents christians rely on for their "evidence" of jesus are highly questionable texts that were written by who knows. And that the bible was written long after jesus's supposed lifetime and that we have NO documents written during jesus's life that even mention him.
In fact, Paul's letters were written a mere twenty or thirty years after Christ's time.
Also, Tacitus in the first century mentions how Christians were persecuted by the Emperor Nero. While Suetonius mentioned in the first century how a riot had broken out in Rome's Jewish quarter after it had been learned that followers of "Chrestos" were living there. As well, Nero's predecessor, Claudius, had made it a capital offense to remove the body from it's resting place - but only in Judea.
Sounds like some pretty convincing evidence for Christ's existence to me.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Whether he existed or not is not my issue. My issue is that his life has been embellished by unlikely events that have no evidence one way or another, yet I am being asked to provide evidence for my speculations about these unlikely events that are said to have prophesised his birth and taken place after his death.
Really. I thought it sounded as if you were arguing against the existence of Jesus.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My argument on this issue is that there is no evidence eithe way. There are only stories. Most stories are works of fiction.
How do you then explain the accounts written by Roman historians such as Tacitus and Suetonius, who clearly wrote about the early Christian community of the 1st century? It only makes sense that a new religion founded in that century is doubtlessly going to have a real life founder.
For that matter, Josephus wrote about Jesus, also in the first century, in his book, The Antiquity Of The Jews, as an historical person. He even credits Jesus with performing miracles.
Even if you don't accept the view that Jesus was the Son of God, the fact is, he was doubtlessly an historical person.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I have no misgivings about accepting that a man named jesus once lived. What my interest lies in is why supernatural attributes have been attached to this man long after he was said to have died. Why say this man is the light of the world? Are people saying it is because he gave enlightenment to the wrongdoings of people up until that time? Or are people saying he is literally "the light of the world"?
My argument is that this supernatural story that has been painted on someone, who presumably knows nothing about this elevated honour, is actually an existing concept that can be said about the sun. And seeing as the sun is literally the light of the world, and the sun can be said to die and be reborn in the sense of the winter solstice, that this is a bit of a coincidence and to attach these attributes to a flesh and blood man is insincere to the masses.
So I am not saying jesus did not live because of pagan myths. I am investigating whether the mystical story of his life can be related back to notions of celestial observations that can be witnessed today, and would have been witnessed at his time, and prior to his time.
Perhaps my original contribution to this thread was sweeping and I obviously wanted to grab attention. But I would like to investigate this idea and assess how valid people think it is. But others on here are demanding documental evidence from me that they know doesn't exist, while at the same time holding up the bible as a confident source of historical fact.
I don't know the books you propose but we have to be very aware that when people write about things in a retrospective sense, especially about well regarded people, their status is almost always elevated. It took only a few years after Diana's death for some people to start regarding her as a saint!
I am also interested in the similarities between various religions.
As I recall, Peter maintained Christ was alive in the pagan myths - that is, he seemed to believe that the pagans had a sense of Christ's coming, even though they didn't grasp it in its entirety.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
13 Dec 2011, 2:15 pm
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
As I recall, Peter maintained Christ was alive in the pagan myths - that is, he seemed to believe that the pagans had a sense of Christ's coming, even though they didn't grasp it in its entirety.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Who is Peter?
Jesus' disciple, called the Rock. Catholicism claims him as their first Pope.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
13 Dec 2011, 2:19 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
Documents that state this and that.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Why is it we have access to all sorts of ancient myths but not one actually supports your speculation?
Surely, at least one should've noted down how the ancients observed the sun the way you believe they did. But we see none.
Let us not forget that the documents christians rely on for their "evidence" of jesus are highly questionable texts that were written by who knows. And that the bible was written long after jesus's supposed lifetime and that we have NO documents written during jesus's life that even mention him.
In fact, Paul's letters were written a mere twenty or thirty years after Christ's time.
Also, Tacitus in the first century mentions how Christians were persecuted by the Emperor Nero. While Suetonius mentioned in the first century how a riot had broken out in Rome's Jewish quarter after it had been learned that followers of "Chrestos" were living there. As well, Nero's predecessor, Claudius, had made it a capital offense to remove the body from it's resting place - but only in Judea.
Sounds like some pretty convincing evidence for Christ's existence to me.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Whether he existed or not is not my issue. My issue is that his life has been embellished by unlikely events that have no evidence one way or another, yet I am being asked to provide evidence for my speculations about these unlikely events that are said to have prophesised his birth and taken place after his death.
Really. I thought it sounded as if you were arguing against the existence of Jesus.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My argument on this issue is that there is no evidence eithe way. There are only stories. Most stories are works of fiction.
How do you then explain the accounts written by Roman historians such as Tacitus and Suetonius, who clearly wrote about the early Christian community of the 1st century? It only makes sense that a new religion founded in that century is doubtlessly going to have a real life founder.
For that matter, Josephus wrote about Jesus, also in the first century, in his book, The Antiquity Of The Jews, as an historical person. He even credits Jesus with performing miracles.
Even if you don't accept the view that Jesus was the Son of God, the fact is, he was doubtlessly an historical person.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I have no misgivings about accepting that a man named jesus once lived. What my interest lies in is why supernatural attributes have been attached to this man long after he was said to have died. Why say this man is the light of the world? Are people saying it is because he gave enlightenment to the wrongdoings of people up until that time? Or are people saying he is literally "the light of the world"?
My argument is that this supernatural story that has been painted on someone, who presumably knows nothing about this elevated honour, is actually an existing concept that can be said about the sun. And seeing as the sun is literally the light of the world, and the sun can be said to die and be reborn in the sense of the winter solstice, that this is a bit of a coincidence and to attach these attributes to a flesh and blood man is insincere to the masses.
So I am not saying jesus did not live because of pagan myths. I am investigating whether the mystical story of his life can be related back to notions of celestial observations that can be witnessed today, and would have been witnessed at his time, and prior to his time.
Perhaps my original contribution to this thread was sweeping and I obviously wanted to grab attention. But I would like to investigate this idea and assess how valid people think it is. But others on here are demanding documental evidence from me that they know doesn't exist, while at the same time holding up the bible as a confident source of historical fact.
I don't know the books you propose but we have to be very aware that when people write about things in a retrospective sense, especially about well regarded people, their status is almost always elevated. It took only a few years after Diana's death for some people to start regarding her as a saint!
I am also interested in the similarities between various religions.
As I recall, Peter maintained Christ was alive in the pagan myths - that is, he seemed to believe that the pagans had a sense of Christ's coming, even though they didn't grasp it in its entirety.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Peter would say that, wouldn't he?
13 Dec 2011, 2:34 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
As I recall, Peter maintained Christ was alive in the pagan myths - that is, he seemed to believe that the pagans had a sense of Christ's coming, even though they didn't grasp it in its entirety.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Who is Peter?
Jesus' disciple, called the Rock. Catholicism claims him as their first Pope.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
The problem I have with religion is that it is confusing to say the least. Scholars disagree over what the events were and who said what to whom to a certain degree. When it comes to mythology there are numerous contradictions and/or apparent confusions over what things meant. So we living in the 21st century have little hope of getting to the bottom of it.
But I am placing credibility on the sun god worship as the root of all modern religion because as a human I can stand and watch the sunrise and feel what an incredible and dazzling event it is. And I can equally put myself in the position of a prehistoric man living a difficult life in a more natural state and feeling relief and joy at seeing the sunrise further north after the winter solstice because that would tell me that the all powerful sun that gives warmth and light was returning, or born again, and will feed the people for another year.
So that is why I place more credibility in ancient sun god worship and think it is the source of jesus birth and death story.
From reading the bible it sounds like jesus was a man who inspired many and wanted to seek a new way of life for people. But I don't think he was risen from the dead. And there is strong speculation that the pagans in britain accepted jesus as "just another god", they had many. But I think their one true god was the sun.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
13 Dec 2011, 3:45 pm
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
As I recall, Peter maintained Christ was alive in the pagan myths - that is, he seemed to believe that the pagans had a sense of Christ's coming, even though they didn't grasp it in its entirety.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Who is Peter?
Jesus' disciple, called the Rock. Catholicism claims him as their first Pope.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
The problem I have with religion is that it is confusing to say the least. Scholars disagree over what the events were and who said what to whom to a certain degree. When it comes to mythology there are numerous contradictions and/or apparent confusions over what things meant. So we living in the 21st century have little hope of getting to the bottom of it.
But I am placing credibility on the sun god worship as the root of all modern religion because as a human I can stand and watch the sunrise and feel what an incredible and dazzling event it is. And I can equally put myself in the position of a prehistoric man living a difficult life in a more natural state and feeling relief and joy at seeing the sunrise further north after the winter solstice because that would tell me that the all powerful sun that gives warmth and light was returning, or born again, and will feed the people for another year.
So that is why I place more credibility in ancient sun god worship and think it is the source of jesus birth and death story.
From reading the bible it sounds like jesus was a man who inspired many and wanted to seek a new way of life for people. But I don't think he was risen from the dead. And there is strong speculation that the pagans in britain accepted jesus as "just another god", they had many. But I think their one true god was the sun.
I'm a little lost. How did Britain come into the conversation?
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
13 Dec 2011, 4:00 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
As I recall, Peter maintained Christ was alive in the pagan myths - that is, he seemed to believe that the pagans had a sense of Christ's coming, even though they didn't grasp it in its entirety.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Who is Peter?
Jesus' disciple, called the Rock. Catholicism claims him as their first Pope.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
The problem I have with religion is that it is confusing to say the least. Scholars disagree over what the events were and who said what to whom to a certain degree. When it comes to mythology there are numerous contradictions and/or apparent confusions over what things meant. So we living in the 21st century have little hope of getting to the bottom of it.
But I am placing credibility on the sun god worship as the root of all modern religion because as a human I can stand and watch the sunrise and feel what an incredible and dazzling event it is. And I can equally put myself in the position of a prehistoric man living a difficult life in a more natural state and feeling relief and joy at seeing the sunrise further north after the winter solstice because that would tell me that the all powerful sun that gives warmth and light was returning, or born again, and will feed the people for another year.
So that is why I place more credibility in ancient sun god worship and think it is the source of jesus birth and death story.
From reading the bible it sounds like jesus was a man who inspired many and wanted to seek a new way of life for people. But I don't think he was risen from the dead. And there is strong speculation that the pagans in britain accepted jesus as "just another god", they had many. But I think their one true god was the sun.
I'm a little lost. How did Britain come into the conversation?
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
An example?
13 Dec 2011, 5:35 pm
Robdemanc wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
So no evidence (or lack of evidence) can convince you you're wrong. You're just like any religious person who clings to his faith regardless of what evidence contradicts it.
If your evidence for your Sun God Jesus is by questioning the Bible or that the requested documents have all been burnt to ashes or that the paintings on the cave walls are evidence, then all I can say is that either you're deluded and brainwashed or worse ... you're being intellectually dishonest.
I hope it's the former.
If your evidence for your Sun God Jesus is by questioning the Bible or that the requested documents have all been burnt to ashes or that the paintings on the cave walls are evidence, then all I can say is that either you're deluded and brainwashed or worse ... you're being intellectually dishonest.
I hope it's the former.
What am I wrong about and how can you prove that I am wrong? I am being intellectually speculative, something you seem incapable of.
Your speculation is without any real basis. It's influenced by Acharya S herself and because of this influence you now see a pattern related to the Sun that isn't really there. But your selective perception nevertheless sees it.
