Lol not getting anywhere just an I got it from me.That negative (Jesus) has been sufficiently disproven for me in my mind.The only thing that will prove me wrong on this one is Jesus himself coming down from the clouds in all his heavenly glory which is highly unlikely.

Yes. That would prove you wrong, for example. Which means he isn't disproved.

Well,Jesus descending from heaven on a cloud is also a negative since it cant be disproven that it wont occur lol.

can't be DISproven that it WON'T occur? You mean proven that it won't?

I'm really confused.

If you mean it can't be proven that it won't occur, then yes - so Jesus isn't disproved

Can't be DISproven that it WON'T occur: that confuses me! - Doesn't that mean something like: Can't be proven that it will occur? Well yeah in that case. I guess nothing can be absolutely proved scientifically for sure.

There would have to be a ton of extremely solid evidence of Jesus to reasonably believe he really existed.

If he came down to earth from the clouds: that wouldn't be enough because there are many said witnesses of miracles anyway! And they're all nonsense. You'd need Jesus to take control of the planet and be entirely invincible and to instantly kill anyone with his Jesus powers for it to count as evidence of him. And obviously him saying he is Jesus and talking about God and the second coming. Something that no human could do.

But then I'd say that it's more likely that its some alien that's been spying on humanity for thousands of years - and is pretending to be Jesus.

After all, would Jesus really kill everyone would his magic powers? LOL

Anyway - I was just saying that Jesus can't be disproved. If he cannot be absolutely proved either then I'm just saying he can't and isn't DISproved either. Negative proof is a logical fallacy.
That's all I was saying lol (untill I got on to Jesus killing people with his magic Jesusy powers.

Dunno what they'd be. Biblically Jesusy Magical Super Flower-Power Lasers coming out of his ears or something lol. Probably not.

But it could be anything couldn't it? If he really is alive in heaven and gonna come down lol.

And he won't of course!!

(almost certainly) *whispered hand over mouth*

Lmao !! EvF I am just messing with you buddy dont get all crazy over it.Actually nothing short of Jesus decending from the clouds in all his heavenly glory will prove that he exists.

Hey m8; I'm just messing too. I find it quite interesting and enjoyable discussing such matters actually!

I'm only talking about how you can't prove a negative. Because I have heard you say before on these forums that you KNOW God doesn't exist. And that On Dawkins scale you are one that is in the minority because you are a 7 (100% certain God does not exist).

Of course on Adrian's own scale, the way he defines it: I'M 100% certain too, but I AM agnostic. It's a separate thing. I don't KNOW there is no God so I'm agnostic. I do not believe in God so I'm an atheist; and my certainty is 100% (I'm just open to understand that I can't KNOW so I could still be wrong despite my certainty - so I'm agnostic).

(If I understand your scale correctly Adrian?)

On Dawkins scale I'm about a 6.9

When I don't know if someone is joking or not i act as if they're not anyway. To try and make a point

And it's pretty easy for me to 'get crazy over it' so there's no effort or worry really

(March 6, 2009 at 4:08 pm)chatpilot Wrote: Actually nothing short of Jesus decending from the clouds in all his heavenly glory will prove that he exists.

Technically speaking, couldn't that simply be an advanced alien species who has taken on the guise of Jesus in order to control us?

I think I already suggested that actually Adrian! For it is more likely.

EDIT: Yeah lol. Above.

"But then I'd say that it's more likely that its some alien that's been spying on humanity for thousands of years - and is pretending to be Jesus." - me.

Taken out of context of course.

You guys are a riot lol! Maybe the Jesus of old was actually an alien life form.Of course that would be hard for me to believe since I would have to accept that he existed in some form or another to beleive that.I am totally convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that the biblical Jesus is a fictional character.

(March 9, 2009 at 11:56 am)chatpilot Wrote: You guys are a riot lol! Maybe the Jesus of old was actually an alien life form.Of course that would be hard for me to believe since I would have to accept that he existed in some form or another to beleive that.I am totally convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that the biblical Jesus is a fictional character.

In all seriousness, I don't think that Christianity is a much more serious insult to humanity than most other religions are.

I personally don't see much reason to deny that the historical person Joshua bar Joseph, known to the Greeks as Jesus, existed in Classical Judea and went about preaching. The Gospels give plausible accounts of him; he was mentioned by the historian Josephus; and it would be difficult to understand how a large religious movement enthusiastically devoted to him could have gotten started in without his personal presence. Indeed, it is so much easier to suppose that a real person was at the center of this movement than that one was not, that the burden of proof that such a man did not exist should really fall on those claiming that. This is not to say that there was anything divine about him.

I read your concerns above about the absence of any records, but I think this misunderstands the character of the classical world, which was almost universally illiterate. The Roman state kept records concerning its field of activities: the law courts, the system of taxation, the public works and the military. If any official record of Jesus had been written, it would have concerned his reputed appearance before the Prefect of Judea. Even if this was a court case, it would not have been one of sufficient importance to find its way into Roman case law, some of which has been preserved. If it occurred at all, most likely it was not a court case but a simple interview with the Prefect, which might perhaps have been recorded in his official notes. But to my knowledge, there is no surviving collection of official notes from any Roman provincial governor, let alone this one. It would be quite remarkable if there were. Indeed, the vast body of Roman state records has been lost, and only isolated examples survive.