It's the typical Minnie/cinny fare, stuff like Christ never existed, you have no proof for Christ, your an idiot for faith without proof, despite the fact we have more period manuscripts of Christ than we do any other historical figure of that period.
Then on to the figures mentioned here I was looking to reenforce the Idea that the soceity the gods mention we far older than Judaism or Christianity, but fact and reason kept me from it. In that when one does the actual era search (outside the zeitgeist propaganda movie) we find none of the attributes tying them to Jesus are true. Or we find the oldest source of information we have on those gods are more recent than the events of the NT.
So do you see the problem? To use the standard arguments calling for 'proof' while ignoring existing proof would make me portray the atheist as a hypocritical moron. Yet the irony is I was planing to use arguments I have already faced
Then on to the figures mentioned here I was looking to reenforce the Idea that the soceity the gods mention we far older than Judaism or Christianity, but fact and reason kept me from it. In that when one does the actual era search (outside the zeitgeist propaganda movie) we find none of the attributes tying them to Jesus are true. Or we find the oldest source of information we have on those gods are more recent than the events of the NT.
So do you see the problem? To use the standard arguments calling for 'proof' while ignoring existing proof would make me portray the atheist as a hypocritical moron. Yet the irony is I was planing to use arguments I have already faced
