RE: Challenge to atheists: I find your lack of faith disturbing!
March 23, 2014 at 2:53 pm
(This post was last modified: March 23, 2014 at 3:37 pm by Confused Ape.)
Edited because I finally found the post.
That website is a fascinating place to explore if you have a lot of time to spare. Kenneth Humphreys throws in everything including the kitchen sink with a lot of the information being contradictory. He also has a habit of presenting snippets of information with leads so readers have to do research themselves if they want to know what he's really talking about.
My conclusion is that he wants people to evaluate everything for themselves rather than just accepting somebody's word for it. That somebody includes himself because he says one thing in one section and says something contradictory in another.
(March 23, 2014 at 1:48 pm)Really? Wrote: Doesn't look like anybody ever provided this link:
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/
It goes over in extenstive detail the evidence.
I cannot say I am certain or not that a man claiming to be a prophet of the the Jewish diety wandered the galilee during the early Roman empirial period. However, the idea that there is TONS of archeological evidence and it lines up on the side of the of a Jesus existing as a historical personage is false.
Most of the accounts (such as Josephus) that are non-biblical are a reference to the fact that christians exist, not to the historocity of their belief set. I will say that I am 100% certain that the religion of chrisitianity exists....
That website is a fascinating place to explore if you have a lot of time to spare. Kenneth Humphreys throws in everything including the kitchen sink with a lot of the information being contradictory. He also has a habit of presenting snippets of information with leads so readers have to do research themselves if they want to know what he's really talking about.
My conclusion is that he wants people to evaluate everything for themselves rather than just accepting somebody's word for it. That somebody includes himself because he says one thing in one section and says something contradictory in another.



