[Serious] Time to embrace Islam!

[The Architect Of Fate]

Nope. You presented no credible evidence of Jesus and your attempts failed thus far .That alone justifies my lack of  acceptance of the claim .Nice burden shifting .

Nope.  I did present a credible evidence of his existence.  Multiple accounts by his followers in their own writings as well as Josephus Pliny and Tacitus who were not his followers but were well know historians of that time period.  If you refute well known history then your idea of evidence otherwise is outside the reasonable.

Nope you gave no credible  evidence you stated a bunch of bad claims . None of he people you cite support your claim of a historic Jesus sorry .And i don't need to refute them as their writings don't support a historical  Jesus . Nor do the Gospels credible testimonies. So my non acceptance of your baseless claims are reasonable .

---

None of the gospels were written by any follower of any jesus.  Three historians noted the existence of a group of people, and the rough contents of their beliefs.  

We already know that there is a jesus myth, and a jesus religion.  How would any of the above be evidence, of any kind, for Some Guy™?

This guy loves using long refuted arguments

---

None of the gospels were written by any follower of any jesus.  Three historians noted the existence of a group of people, and the rough contents of their beliefs.  

We already know that there is a jesus myth, and a jesus religion.  How would any of the above be evidence, of any kind, for Some Guy™?

This guy loves using long refuted arguments

[EgoDeath]

It's worth mentioning that several historians have been quoted as saying that, "most historians agree that Jesus of Nazareth existed"... for whatever that's worth. Personally, I'm not so convinced, as no historian ever claimed to have seen Jesus themselves - and none of them could have, as they wrote about Jesus long after he was gone.

I find it to be, mostly, a non-issue anyway. So what if the Jesus of the Bible was real? It means virtually nothing, other than lending some legitimacy to some of the stories of the Bible. It says nothing of Jesus' supposed magical powers or the existence of any sort of divine creator. It's almost inconsequential.

edit:

At best, I think we can say it's very possible that Jesus of Nazareth existed. But once again... my question is... who cares?

---

Let me mention what Josephus said about Jesus... I have a copy of The Works of Josephus in front of me... Here, in book 18, Chapter 3, 3, it says:

"Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works - a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."

I bolded the two statements above to illustrate a few things.

1. It seems that Josephus believed Jesus to be more than a man, saying, "if it be lawful to call him a man"...

2. It seems that Josephus accepts that account of Jesus rising from the dead on the third day.

3. It seems that Josephus does not consider himself to be a Christian, but still accepts Christs divinity as a fact.

Now, are we to believe a person, who seemingly thought of Jesus as more than a man, and believed that this being, Jesus, actually rose from the dead, seriously? Is this what we're supposed to consider a reliable source? Many people will cry, Yes! This is a reliable source! But why? Why should we take the word of a man who seemed to believe in miracles and thought of Jesus as a divine being? It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

I think, if anything, scholars are bending over backwards to give some credence to the stories espoused by Christianity.

[WinterHold]

None of the gospels were written by any follower of any jesus.  Three historians noted the existence of a group of people, and the rough contents of their beliefs.  

We already know that there is a jesus myth, and a jesus religion.  How would any of the above be evidence, of any kind, for Some Guy™?

The whole bible was re-engineered by Christian bishops who agreed to work for the Romans and a unique version for emperor Costantine I was produced:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

The First Council of Nicaea (/naɪˈsiːə/; Greek: Νίκαια [ˈnikεa]) was a council of Christian bishops convened in the Bithynian city of Nicaea (now İznik, Turkey) by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325.

Then 6 other councils were held, Each twisted and presented a new concept to Christianity; even though Jesus -peace be upon him- was long dead -officially-.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_se...l_councils

In the history of Christianity, the first seven ecumenical councils include the following: the First Council of Nicaea in 325, the First Council of Constantinople in 381, the Council of Ephesus in 431, the Council of Chalcedon in 451, the Second Council of Constantinople in 553, the Third Council
f Constantinople from 680–681 and finally, the Second Council of Nicaea in 787.

7 councils to twist what Christianity really said; and the result was a porn book full of gore and enlarged donkey penises.

---

But I have a question and I need an answer to it; ASAP:

can one let his 5 y.o daughter open the bible alone? reading about Roman men with donkey penises and horse cum?

Imagine the little child going to her dad and asks: "daddy; what is the donkey of man; what is the Roman emissions that look like horse emissions?".

Then, how does one call such book holy? no wonder atheists won during the illumination period.

---

But OP, how did we shift from you converting people to Islam forcefully, to discussing Christianity ?

---

I mean Benny..

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

None of the gospels were written by any follower of any jesus.  Three historians noted the existence of a group of people, and the rough contents of their beliefs.  

We already know that there is a jesus myth, and a jesus religion.  How would any of the above be evidence, of any kind, for Some Guy™?

The whole bible was re-engineered by Christian bishops who agreed to work for the Romans and a unique version for emperor Costantine I was produced:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

The First Council of Nicaea (/naɪˈsiːə/; Greek: Νίκαια [ˈnikεa]) was a council of Christian bishops convened in the Bithynian city of Nicaea (now İznik, Turkey) by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325.

Then 6 other councils were held, Each twisted and presented a new concept to Christianity; even though Jesus -peace be upon him- was long dead -officially-.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_se...l_councils

In the history of Christianity, the first seven ecumenical councils include the following: the First Council of Nicaea in 325, the First Council of Constantinople in 381, the Council of Ephesus in 431, the Council of Chalcedon in 451, the Second Council of Constantinople in 553, the Third Council
f Constantinople from 680–681 and finally, the Second Council of Nicaea in 787.

7 councils to twist what Christianity really said; and the result was a porn book full of gore and enlarged donkey penises.

---

But I have a question and I need an answer to it; ASAP:

can one let his 5 y.o daughter open the bible alone? reading about Roman men with donkey penises and horse cum?

Imagine the little child going to her dad and asks: "daddy; what is the donkey of man; what is the Roman emissions that look like horse emissions?".

Then, how does one call such book holy? no wonder atheists won during the illumination period.

---

But OP, how did we shift from you converting people to Islam forcefully, to discussing Christianity ?

---

I mean Benny..

We let five year olds read about murderous witches, death by poison, cannibalism, forced starvation, and torture. Horse semen seems pretty tame by comparison.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

Yes, Atlas..... christians invented the religion that yours is based off of - and magic books are full of strange things. Have you really thought this through?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

On reflection, if I had a 5 year old daughter, no - I would not let her read the Bible on her own. 

Nothing to do with the passages on 'emissions', though.

Boru

[Abaddon_ire]

Nope. You presented no credible evidence of Jesus and your attempts failed thus far .That alone justifies my lack of  acceptance of the claim .Nice burden shifting .

Nope.  I did present a credible evidence of his existence.  Multiple accounts by his followers in their own writings as well as Josephus Pliny and Tacitus who were not his followers but were well know historians of that time period.  If you refute well known history then your idea of evidence otherwise is outside the reasonable.

Why do you continue to propagate outright lies?

[WinterHold]

We let five year olds read about murderous witches, death by poison, cannibalism, forced starvation, and torture. Horse semen seems pretty tame by comparison.

Boru

When you call such stories "the word of God"; then you are giving a clear definition of who the author is.
In other words; an author who keeps mentioning these stories is an author who is dominated by these stories. I expect more from a God who claim utter purity.

[The Grand Nudger]

Why? A god like that wouldn't be hobbled with your puerile human frailties and fetishes. If it sees girls going for the donkeycocks, it's not going to have a hangup about not saying so.

OFC, the whole thing is ridiculous, since no god has ever authored a single book.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

We let five year olds read about murderous witches, death by poison, cannibalism, forced starvation, and torture. Horse semen seems pretty tame by comparison.

Boru

When you call such stories "the word of God"; then you are giving a clear definition of who the author is.
In other words; an author who keeps mentioning these stories is an author who is dominated by these stories. I expect  more from a God who claim utter purity.

So, all the chatter about menstruation in the Quran doesn't trouble you?  Would you let a five year old girl read that?

Boru