Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

[Brian37]

I wouldn't go using the words "blind spot" considering the age of the book of mythology you defend.

Actually, claiming that something is false because it is old, or better because it is new; is a fallacy.

Fine, nail yourself to a cross, heck do that to yourself along with a good sample rate, say 2,000 3,000 people. Make sure they are all dead, no brain or organ or cellular motion, make sure all the blood is out of their body, don't lend them any aid, and see if they come back to life after even 24 hours. Oh yea, gotta also make sure rigor mortis sets in too.

Because if your counter arguments to the stages of death are "poof", sorry, doesn't wash. 

And another thing. I've watched my mother die. I have seen her cold and stiff at the funeral home. I would love to have her still alive. But unlike you I don't fool myself into believing bullshit that is not scientifically possible. I don't concoct poof logic because of that desire to justify a delusion.

And NO, none of what you just read is being angry at a fictional being that does not exist. But yea, your logic pisses me off mainly because there is no evidence. But secondly because it allows you to fake compassion when really all it is is narcissism as if people outside your religion have no capability of having the same emotions and pain.

Nobody survives the death myth as implied in the bible. The torture certainly was real, and the cross itself also was, but in real life, if you were nailed to one and died on one, you stayed dead. But that method of execution WAS NOT exclusively to torture Christians, but anyone who challenged the Roman Empire. They did it to Greeks and Jews and other rival polytheists they conquered.