Christians - Aware you worship a virgin?

[Eilonnwy]

[tackattack]

[theVOID]

[tackattack]

There could have been a time-travelling alien named horus that livedin egypt and swooned the population with his technology. I haven't done much study there. I don't refute that a man named horus could have existed in egypt.

[theVOID]

There could have been a time-travelling alien named horus that livedin egypt and swooned the population with his technology. I haven't done much study there. I don't refute that a man named horus could have existed in egypt.

No, it would be impossible to say for certain whether or not Horus really lived considering the evidence in question, but the standard of evidence is no different for Jesus, of who's existence you stated as fact.

[tackattack]

fact being the burden of evidence is an overwhelming majority that he did exist? Yes then. You're not really giving evidence that he doesn't exists, you're just discrediting entire doctrines and documentation accross multiple regions and faiths because some unrelated facts didn't add up elswhere in the documents? I'm trying to understand.

[theVOID]

fact being the burden of evidence is an overwhelming majority that he did exist? Yes then. You're not really giving evidence that he doesn't exists, you're just discrediting entire doctrines and documentation accross multiple regions and faiths because some unrelated facts didn't add up elswhere in the documents? I'm trying to understand.

No, i am saying that i am not sure whether or not Jesus did exist - what i am saying is testimony from non-contemporary authors is not sufficient for reaching any level of certainty, just like the non-contemporary sources for the existence of Horus do not allow you with any real certainty to state whether or not he existed.

As for why i find it unlikely that Jesus existed, it has to do with the massive events that are reported inconsistently amongst the testimony. How could 2 people believe that the world went dark for 3 hours when another mentions nothing at all of the blackout and instead claimed that at the tomb was an angel and an earthquake that shook the entire region?

Why do Mary and James suddenly disappear from the bible completely after acts when they were supposedly amongst the early Christian preachers?

Why, when peter was on trial under both Jewish and Roman courts was life of the man Jesus never bought into question? No mention of the empty tomb when stealing a body was a crime punishable by death? No mention of punishment for proclaiming a mortal man as king? If the court documents from the time make one thing clear it is that Peter was only ever bought to trial because of disagreement with mainstream jewish teachings and nothing to do with the man Jesus who supposedly did so much to anger the Jews and Pontious Pilot.

Every time peter was bought trial before the romans he was released because in their minds he did nothing other than offend a bunch of Jews who disagreed with him.

[chatpilot]

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

You're not really giving evidence that he doesn't exists

We have no obligation to provide anything. It's up to you 100% to prove your claims. That's what "the burden of proof means"

[Ace Otana]

You're not really giving evidence that he doesn't exists.

It's not down to the atheist to prove or disprove anything. It's a stance. Lack of belief.
You believe in the existence of a god and we do not. Simple and case closed.

Can you disprove the existence of the toothfairy? Or the god posidon? No, you lack belief in it but have no evidence against it. So what's the differance between you dis-believing in posidon and me dis-believing in your god?
The burden of proof is on you. 100% of it. Your claim, you prove it.
If you can't then that's your problem.