I understand your ignorance, h/m. You cannot help yourself because you have been indoctrinated by pious asswipes.

Try to learn something....but don't scare yourself. The truth is you simply do not know what the fuck you are talking about.

https://atheistforums.org/thread-21103-p...#pid513676

(November 22, 2014 at 5:13 am)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote: Nobody has ever come back to life after being clinically dead.

It's impossible until proven otherwise.

The end.

I'm still early in the thread, so apologies if this has already been pointed out, but 'clinical death' is cessation of breathing and blood circulation. A person can be resuscitated from clinical death if reached in time and conditions are right (they aren't brain dead, for instance).

I believe the most delayed successful resuscitation after clinical death is something like 90 minutes. But the victim first fell through ice into freezing pond, she then was able To breath in a trapped air pocket for 30 minutes until she was thoroughly and compketely hypothermic, before Experiencing clinical death by drowning, which filled her lungs with ice cold water and further chilled her already hypothermic blood.

This is not the sort of condition that would likely have been available in 1st century "holy" land to retard the ischemic damage to the brain of the maglomaniacal failed carpenter.

HM, there is one thing you probably need to be aware of.
Whilst your "proofs" maybe satisfactory to you, they are not sufficient for us.

You need to present much better evidence than you have been.

Everything you have presented so far has been rejected in detail.

And for you to continue to rant that we should accept it makes you to appear as nothing more than some petulant child having a tantrum.

Just a thought.

I have to agree, I wonder what you are trying to accomplish here. I'm afraid to say that all you are demonstrating is the effects of indoctrination upon the ability to reason clearly.

Your premise is flawed. The very best you can hope to show about Jesus existing is that there was a guy called Jesus, who may have done or said some of the more mundane things in the bible. And the thing is, I don't think many atheists would argue that it's a possibility. But, so what?

If you then want to demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that he died and came back to life, you are attempting the impossible. Even if we had hundreds of eye witness accounts of his death, burial and return to life, all that would prove is what those people believed. To prove he actually did die, to a standard which would satisfy modern day doctors, and then came back to life, is impossible to verify with textual accounts. It's one of the most extroidanary claims ever, so requires equally extroidanary evidence. People can be fooled, people can lie, people can exaggerate, and people can work together to try and develop a coherent fiction.

And... Even if it was true, that he died and came back to live, then again so what? It would be a very rare occurrence and interesting for sure. But it gives no evidence as to why it happened. Any ideas Jesus or those around him may have had about the cause of this would be guesses. And since it's not something we can ever now investigate, all you are left with is speculation.

To demonstrate the point, if I handed you a hundred eye witness accounts of someone being dead for 3 days and coming back to life yesterday, you would not take that at face value. And if they also claimed Allah did it, you would not believe that either, even if you have no explanation yet yourself.

(November 22, 2014 at 11:11 am)His_Majesty Wrote:

(November 22, 2014 at 5:09 am)Irrational Wrote: Yeah, but just because he's referred to doesn't mean that he must've existed.

Dude, what the hell are you talking about? All knowledge we have on historical figures are based on individuals that are "referred to". You sound like a damn fool.

(November 22, 2014 at 5:09 am)Irrational Wrote: Atheists may call you a follower of God. Does this mean they believe God exists?

Unfortunately, the point that you were trying to make is irrelevant...because I am not basing the sources of the Christians (necessarily)...I am basing it on the non-Christian sources mentioning or implications of Jesus as a historical figure.

But not all individuals referred to in historical sources must be historical figures.

Who's the damn fool now?

And, no, my point is relevant because atheists are non-Christian "sources" as well. Yet, they'll mention God when referring to someone as a believer in God. This does not mean they are implying God exists.

Let me guess what Part 2 will be:

What the New Testatement writers thought about Jesus.

(November 25, 2014 at 8:22 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Let me guess what Part 2 will be:

What the New Testatement writers thought about Jesus.

Who gives a fuck what Paul thought. He never even met the guy, unless temporal lobe seizures count.

(November 25, 2014 at 8:34 am)Lemonvariable72 Wrote:

(November 25, 2014 at 8:22 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Let me guess what Part 2 will be:

What the New Testatement writers thought about Jesus.

Who gives a fuck what Paul thought. He never even met the guy, unless temporal lobe seizures count.

But Paul says he visited and stayed with Jesus' brother and his best friend!!! ;-)

(November 25, 2014 at 9:22 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:

(November 25, 2014 at 8:34 am)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: Who gives a fuck what Paul thought. He never even met the guy, unless temporal lobe seizures count.

But Paul says he visited and stayed with Jesus' brother and his best friend!!! ;-)

Yes, because there was only one dude with that name in all of Palestine.