Atheism is unreasonable

[His_Majesty]

Surely you're not too stupid to understand the difference between asking for corroborating evidence outside of one set of documents and asking for corroborating evidence outside of the region the events supposedly occurred iin?

You want corroborating evidence outside one set of documents. I want corroborating evidence outside of one tomb (King Tut's). I expect more evidence for the tomb thing than the document thing.

What goal post have I previously moved that justifies you making that assertion?

You will find the answer if you look at whatever I was responding to.

I lean towards Jesus being a real person, I'm more than happy to accept convincing corroboration. It's not like confirmation that there really was an apocalytiic preacher named Yeshua who ran afoul of the authorities whose teaching formed the basis of Christianity would mean he was really a miracle worker. I've got no more issue with Jesus existing than with Mohammed existing. Mohammed being a real person doesn't make Islam the one true religion, and Jesus being real doesn't make Christianity the one true religion. Having a confirmed founder isn't the criteria for religious truth.

Ok, I have a simple question for you...which will make or break the case. Do you believe that the disciples believed that Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to them..yes or no?

I'm aware of the internal evidence, that's why I lean to better than 50/50 odds of the man having existed. The external evidence is faint and of very doubtful authenticity and implication. Unless you've got something new we haven't heard before, which you're keeping to yourself for some reason.

Another thread

You misunderstand evolution so profoundly that you posit an event that would prove it wrong as evidence against it. No species EVER produces another species in one generation. No offspring is EVER different enough from its parents to constitute a new species. Evolution is built from small changes accumulating over hundreds or thousands of generations. A grade school understanding of biological evolution would be an improvement over the understanding that you currently possess. Blame the people who have been lying to you about what evolution claims for making you look so foolish. If you never heard of evolution, you would know more about it than you do now with all the misinformation you've aborbed.

See debate. Although the last sentence is kinda funny

An omnipotent being can do anything. An omniscient being can only do what it knows it will do in advance. A God concept that combines omniscience and omnipotence is a married bachelor, it can't exist. Omnipotence can't exist, because it necessarily includes the ability to omniscient if the omnipotent being desires to be so, and in that moment all of its future actions will be set; because perfect future knowledge is only possible if the future is immutable, but an omnipotent being must be able to change it.

Is it logically possible to be able to change the future is the question. Omnipotence means you can do anything that is LOGICALLY possible. I think the concept of changing the future is logically impossible since God cannot do something any different than what he knows that he WILL do.

Now, if you can prove that God can't do something that is logically possible, then yeah, you will be smokin'.

You know what would make it REALLY plausible? A confirmable prediction that can't be made with the current established theory that turns out to be confirmed. You know, doing science.

Once science fails to answer certain questions for me, I have no choice but to look elsewhere. If I go to the bank to borrow money and get denied...and I continue 9 or 10 times and still gets denied...eventually I will go to another bank and see if I can get money from there.

Evolution is the explanation for your features. Abiogenesis is a plausible hypothesis for what kicked it off. Your dissatisfaction with it not being the answer you want isn't my problem.

All bark..

There's only one nature, but many theistic creation myths. If you prove 'God did it', you've got miles to travel from there to 'the Christian God did it'.

That is why there is this thing called "The argument based on the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus" which is used to pinpoint exactly which God in the pool of the many theistic creation myths.

That was an awfully long sentence. And the distance from Jerusalem to Corinth is barely more than a third of the distance you cite. Kind of ironic considering how you're crowing about Esquilax being wrong. A little over 1200 miles would take a caravan about four months to cross.

Well, if I was wrong, then so was the internet "distance calculator" where I got the distance from. But even you said the distance between Corinth and Jerusalem was a four month trip...which is still astounding. That is how far Christianity spread.