Is Jesus the son of God?

[Whateverist]

That would have made for a good option, that Jesus is actually the offspring of Osiris making Jehovah a cuckold for claiming him as his Jesus when he was as you rightly point out Horus.

"If you've popped one virgin cherry via long distance, you've popped them all."

Skype is a wondrous thing.

---

2, with 1 coming in very close.

He was a sage with a remarkable message. A message so simple that hardly anyone understood it. In fact, hardly anyone still really knows much about what his message actually was.

Welcome to the website dedicated to whatever crosses the minds of those recovering from god belief and those who either like our company or are here to 'save' us. Most -but certainly not all- of us were some brand of xtian before retiring god and embracing non-belief.

You could call us failed xtians. We just weren't strong enough to go on shutting out reason and denying our own perceptions. Doubt crept in and as a result god got pink slipped.

So it sounds like you have a less than fundamentalist mind set if you don't immediately go for choice #1, Brucer. If you care to elaborate, I'm interested. And don't worry, de-conversion is not on my agenda. I prefer that people choose their own mindset. I'm just nosey to understand the details.

[Free]

Face palming does absolutely nothing to dismiss it as evidence. You can't just hand wave this stuff away. That simply doesn't work.

My facepalm was a reaction to your playing the Josephus card right off the bat - mixed gaming metaphor notwithstanding - especially since we quite recently had a rehash of the exact same routine. As Min suggested, the search facility would have told you this and saved us all a lot of time.

So you think that by me using this forum's search feature it will tell me something I don't already know?

It simply will not. There is nothing here on this forum I have not seen many times.

My contention with Minimalist is his positive claim of Jesus being a complete myth. Any such claim requires evidence for support, and he has provided none. Therefore, that claim is unsupported.

What I see on this forum are nothing more than invalid arguments from silence, unsupported speculation, improbable conclusions, and impoverished attempts of persuasive argumentation.

No one here is actually providing any tangible evidence to support the position that Jesus was a total myth. All you are doing is providing a hypothesis that is very ill supported.

That is simply not good enough.

[Whateverist]

No one here is actually providing any tangible evidence to support the position that Jesus was a total myth.

You're welcome. Nice to find this kind of restraint, isn't it?

That is simply not good enough.

Not if you have points you want to make about Jesus. Fortunately I don't. I have no fucks to give about god claims, mostly because I have no clue what those are supposed to be. Is that good enough for you?

[robvalue]

There was a man named Jesus
He did his best to please us
He did some tricks
And fooled some dicks
And now the church does fleece us

[Cyberman]

Meanwhile, Brucer, you're relying on non-contemporary sources, doctored accounts and biased partisan doctrine. Of the two cases, I know which I find more compelling. If there was any actual, genuinely airtight evidence around, there would never be a need for all this tapdancing.

[Free]

I already know all I need to know. Just another xtian shitwit who thinks his fucking fairy tales are real.

We've seen it all before Stim.

I find this statement to be an inaccurate portrayal of my position, as I clearly stated my position in a previous post, and you either missed it, or chose to ignore it.

Nonetheless, here it is again:

Now before you get the wrong impression, I do concede that much about the man in the Gospels is an embellishment of an actual historical figure.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-30305-po...#pid823721

Hopefully you will keep that in mind as this discussion continues, so that we can avoid unnecessary ad hominems in an effort to keep this discussion civilized.

[robvalue]

Plus who gives a monkey spit. Fuckers back then believed anything you told them. Good thing we've moved on, huh.

[Whateverist]

I don't mind adding hominids but please leave gods out of it unless you have an adequate description for one.

[Free]

No one here is actually providing any tangible evidence to support the position that Jesus was a total myth.

You're welcome. Nice to find this kind of restraint, isn't it?

That is simply not good enough.

To me, the restraint is due to a lack of evidence.

However, I understand the problem of defending such a positive claim. There simply isn't any evidence to support it as a positive claim. If he would have said something to the effect of, "It is my opinion," then that is still a positive claim due to it denoting the positive truth behind his position, but the burden of proof is far less stringent when vocalizing an opinion as opposed to stating a fact.

Not if you have points you want to make about Jesus. Fortunately I don't. I have no fucks to give about god claims, mostly because I have no clue what those are supposed to be. Is that good enough for you?

That's more intellectually honest than anything anyone else has said.

[robvalue]

Doctored doctrine, filed forgeries, suspect scripture, anonymous accounts, rogue references, secondhand sources, burned books, implicating insertions and contradicting claims.