(October 16, 2013 at 11:07 pm)Godschild Wrote: There is nothing inaccurate with Matthews story,He repeatedly lies about what the OT says. He claims two historical events which are both fanciful and unsupported by any evidence (the slaughter of infants around Jerusalem (lifted straight out of the story of Moses) and the attack of the zombie saints). He claims Jesus had a famous ministry, word of which spread to the neighboring provinces, yet nobody who lived at that time seemed to think JC was noteworthy. On what basis do you claim "nothing inaccurate"?
Quote: it doesn't contradict Luke's story.Start with what decade Jesus was born and end with what his last words were and tell me there are no contradictions.
Quote:You are purposely avoiding what I've asked, why?
Not to the best of my knowledge. Maybe you aren't being clear with your questions.
Quote:First of all you can't prove that it's not history.How many history books do we have that talk about zombies?
Quote:It boils down to trying to avoid the reality of the birth record.What reality? What decade was Jesus supposedly born?
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
