The end of the World is at hand.

[Darwinian]

Why do so many atheists reject the life, ministry and death of Jesus when clear evidence supports the New Testament writings?

Because we've already established that we have very different interpretations of what the word evidence means.

You may think that what you have is evidence but the rest of us don't.

[The_Truth]

Why do so many atheists reject the life, ministry and death of Jesus when clear evidence supports the New Testament writings?

Because we've already established that we have very different interpretations of what the word evidence means.

You may think that what you have is evidence but the rest of us don't.

Well, this leads me to believe that atheists will never accept God even if they were confronted with evidence. Evidence of Christ Worship that predates the bible is an awesome discovery!!

[Violet]

Actually... Jesus really did not exist. The New Testament story is heavily plagiarized from an Egyptian god named Horus.
Sites:
Best source: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5b.htm
http://www.sanfords.net/Framed_pages/ori...nity.shtml
Edit, added: http://www.truthbeknown.com/origins.htm

(books, if you are near a library):

The Horus myth in its relation to Christianity by Cooper, W. R. (William Ricketts), 1843-1878 (London: Hardwicke & Bogue, 1877)

Allen, T. G., Horus in the Pyramid texts (Chicago:University of Chicago Libraries, 1916)

Broze, Michčle, Les aventures d’Horus et Seth dans le Papyrus Chester Beatty I: mythe et roman en Egypte (Leuven: Uitgeverij Peeters, 1996).

Cooper, W. R., The Horus myth in its relation to Christianity (London: Hardwicke & Bogue, 1877)

George, Beate, Horus en Egyptisk gud (Stockholm:Medelhavsmuseet,1984)

Mercer, Samuel A. B., Horus, royal god of Egypt (Grafton, MA: Society of Oriental research, 1942)

Virolleaud, Charles, Le dieu cananéen Horon (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1937)

Watterson, Barbara, The house of Horus at Edfu: ritual in an ancient Egyptian temple (Stroud: Tempus, 1998)

[Darwinian]

Well, this leads me to believe that atheists will never accept God even if they were confronted with evidence. Evidence of Christ Worship that predates the bible is an awesome discovery!!

That's not really true. If I were given real, proper evidence that God actually existed then I would accept it, of course I would.

We're not rejecting evidence because we don't want to believe it. We simply don't accept the sort of evidence that you offer because it isn't proper evidence.

And what Saerules says about Horus is quite true..

[Violet]

Second thing, even if 100% of the bible is NOT plagiarized: it is STILL garbage nonsense.
Links: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/ <--really the only one we need. I Recommend you check it out The_Truth... you may or may not change your mind, but it will be VERY informative. Hell, i'm atheist, and i was impressed enough by it that it was my primary reading last spring.

[Eilonnwy]

Yes that is evidence. Someone asked for evidence of Christianity. So I proved Jesus Christ (The founder of Christianity) was praised long before the Bible. What more proof or evidence do you want? Many atheists claim Christianity was invented by Paul long after the supposed life and death of Jesus Christ. Well, I am here to prove Jesus Christ is the inventor of Christianity, and not Paul.

Why do so many atheists reject the life, ministry and death of Jesus when clear evidence supports the New Testament writings?

That is absolutely not what Void asked. He asked:

I want you do describe a single piece of evidence that makes Christianity more valid than any other religion.

Meaning, provide evidence that shows Christianity is true or at least is more likely to be true.

You failed. Your evidence is shaky at best and only shows there may have been earlier Christians. Earlier Christians does nothing to prove the validity of Christianity. You completely miss the point and you are fractally wrong at every turn.

[Overmars]

Hey Truth, why wait for rapture? I can offer you a free ticket to heaven pronto...

[Cyphern]

Well, this leads me to believe that atheists will never accept God even if they were confronted with evidence. Evidence of Christ Worship that predates the bible is an awesome discovery!!

I will grant you that people worship jesus. I will even grant, for the sake of argument, that jesus was a real person, and that he was worshipped prior to the writing of the bible.

So what??

The fact that people will worship something doesn't mean the thing they are worshiping is in any way supernatural. When we ask you for evidence, we are not asking you to point out how many lemmings jumped off the cliff, or when they jumped. We are asking you what justification there is for jumping at all.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

The New Testament story is heavily plagiarized from an Egyptian god named Horus.

Do you perhaps refer to the Jesus myth found in The Gospels?

Yes,there are some SUGGESTED parallels between the Jesus and Horus myths,but the claims of the story of Jesus being lifted directly from other myths are bogus and have been thoroughly debunked. It does seem plausible that Horus may have been the archetypal Christ. However,mythology is a mine field.It's a brave scholar who claims causal connections between myths in different cultures as fact.

Note :The term ' historical fact" is often misleading.Artefacts,such as ruins and documents are are facts. The interpretations are not. Historians' accounts of events,people's lives and beliefs are deductions based on available evidence,which is ALWAYS limited. Explanations are constantly changing.

EG a few recent changes:

Revisionist historians are beginning to accept that the popular monstrous image of the emperor 'Caligula' ('little boots'. Actual name;Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus) ) is a gross exaggeration.

It is now becoming widely accepted by historians that the Jewish Egyptian captivity and exodus is complete myth..The age of Judaism is also being revised downwards to around 800BCE. (Babylonian captivity)

It also becoming increasingly clear that it was unlikely that Egypt was a slave society.That conclusion has been deduced from recent discoveries of what seem to be the ruins of entire worker's villages in Giza and elsewhere. ( Google 'ancient Egyptian workers villages')


This link is worth a glance as a starting place.


http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


FOR YOUR INFORMATION: THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT:

Gospels

Each of the Gospels narrates the life and death of Jesus of Nazareth. The traditional author is listed after each entry; modern scholarship generally regards these as anonymous.

* The Gospel of Matthew, traditionally ascribed to the Apostle Matthew, son of Alphaeus according to Papias, (see the Gospel according to the Hebrews) Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus and Eusebius.[1]
* The Gospel of Mark, traditionally ascribed to Mark the Evangelist, who wrote down the recollections of the Apostle Simon Peter according to Papias, Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, Eusebius.[2]
* The Gospel of Luke, traditionally ascribed to Luke, a physician and companion of the Apostle Paul according to Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Canon Muratori.[3]
* The Gospel of John, traditionally ascribed to the Apostle John, son of Zebedee according to Papias, Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Canon Muratori, Codex Vaticanus Alexandrinus.[4]

The first three are commonly classified as the Synoptic Gospels. They contain very similar accounts of events in Jesus' life. The Gospel of John describes several miracles and sayings of Jesus not found in the other three.

[edit] Acts

The book of Acts, also termed Acts of the Apostles or Acts of the Holy Spirit, is a narrative of the Apostles' ministry after Christ's death and subsequent resurrection, which is also a sequel to the third Gospel. Examining style, phraseology, and other evidence, modern scholarship generally concludes that Acts and Luke share the same author.

* Acts, traditionally ascribed to Luke according to Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, Canon Muratori.[5]

[edit] Pauline epistles

The Pauline epistles (or Corpus Paulinum) constitute those epistles traditionally attributed to Paul. However the authorship of a number of the other epistles is sometimes disputed (see section on authorship below, and Authorship of the Pauline epistles).

* Epistle to the Romans
* First Epistle to the Corinthians
* Second Epistle to the Corinthians
* Epistle to the Galatians
* Epistle to the Ephesians
* Epistle to the Philippians
* Epistle to the Colossians
* First Epistle to the Thessalonians
* Second Epistle to the Thessalonians
* First Epistle to Timothy
* Second Epistle to Timothy
* Epistle to Titus
* Epistle to Philemon

* Epistle to the Hebrews - about which modern scholars agree with Origen (d 254) "Men of old time have handed it down as Paul's, but who wrote the Epistle God only knows"[6] - few modern scholars believe it to be written by Paul[7].

[edit] General epistles

See main article: General epistles

Includes those Epistles written to the church at large (catholic in this sense simply means universal).

* Epistle of James, traditionally by James, brother of Jesus and Jude Thomas.
* First Epistle of Peter, traditionally ascribed to the Apostle Simon, called Peter.
* Second Epistle of Peter, traditionally ascribed to the Apostle Simon, called Peter.
* First Epistle of John, traditionally ascribed to the Apostle John, son of Zebedee.
* Second Epistle of John, traditionally ascribed to the Apostle John, son of Zebedee.
* Third Epistle of John, traditionally ascribed to the Apostle John, son of Zebedee.
* Epistle of Jude, traditionally ascribed to Jude Thomas, brother of Jesus and James.

[edit] Revelation

The final book of the New Testament is the Book of Revelation. The authorship is attributed either to the Apostle John, son of Zebedee or to John of Patmos. For a discussion of authorship see Authorship of the Johannine works.

Revelation is sometimes called The Apocalypse of John. It is also not read or used during church services by the Eastern Orthodox church.

See also: Apocalyptic literature, Bible prophecy

Much of your evidence was produced in the C19th by sincere quacks,not Egytptologists.

[Minimalist]

Yes that is evidence.

No, it is a statement of belief. It is not evidence.

Were I to say that you were a religious lunatic that would also be a statement.

Were I then to point to some of your inane bible-babble THAT would be evidence.

I doubt you will be able to see the subtlety....or admit it if you did. Truthfully, I'm not even talking to you but to the rational people on the board.