Atheists: Can you disprove the resurrection or Jesus' existence?

[Minimalist]

You can highlight it in pink with polka dots and it still going to remain the same silly shit.

[Barre]

Can you give me your best evidence that Jesus was not the son of God and died on the cross, or that he didn't exist? There's a theory that was in the movie ''Zeitgeist'' where the filmmakers claim that Jesus was a myth and never existed. They also claimed that all religion came from ancient astrology and sun worship.

It should be "the semi-resurrection of Jesus" who is said to have appeared as some sort of hybrid being, a cross between a ghost and a human being. Such a description appears to be artificial--even hoaky.

[little_monkey]

They also claimed that all religion came from ancient astrology and sun worship.

Sun worship makes sense -- without the sun, none of us would exist. Primitive people had more sense than jews, christians and muslims.

[The Grand Nudger]

While many religions share elements of sun worship and astrology, this is not strictly speaking where they came from. Put down zeitgeist and pick up "A History of God" by Karen Armstrong.

http://www.amazon.com/History-God-000-Ye...0345384563

[Doubting Thomas]

Coming in way late to the party, but:

Can you give me your best evidence that Jesus was not the son of God and died on the cross, or that he didn't exist?

I will right after you give me your best evidence that Chef Boyardee isn't the son of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

It's my greatest wish that Christians would realize that shifting the burden of proof is not evidence, and that they would realize when they try that tactic. "You can't prove he doesn't exist so he must" is not valid logic.

[Greatest I am]

Coming in way late to the party, but:

Can you give me your best evidence that Jesus was not the son of God and died on the cross, or that he didn't exist?

I will right after you give me your best evidence that Chef Boyardee isn't the son of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

It's my greatest wish that Christians would realize that shifting the burden of proof is not evidence, and that they would realize when they try that tactic. "You can't prove he doesn't exist so he must" is not valid logic.

Can I play?

Is lack of evidence evidence in and of itself?

Is the fact that God would have to break his commandments to be the father of Jesus good evidence or is God allowed to have us do as he says and not as he does.

He would have had to covet another man's woman.
Not only this but as a trinity, we would see Jesus impregnating his own mother.

Incest is best for God as well is it?

Further, if you follow O T God, then Ashera, his wife, would likely wring his thing off if he went after lowly filthy humans for reproduction of half breed chimera bastards.

Regards
DL

[Doubting Thomas]

I don't believe that lack of evidence is total evidence, but should at least be compelling. It shouldn't be incumbent upon me to defend my lack of belief in something when there is a lack of evidence for it, but that's the way it is in Christian America.

[Minimalist]

Is lack of evidence evidence in and of itself?

Yes.

Evidence, not proof. Two words that religious shits do not understand to begin with.

[DeistPaladin]

Lack of evidence may be evidence IF the claims are such that we should reasonably expect to find evidence if the claims were true.

Let me demonstrate with these examples:

Scenario 1: A local friend of mine says his home was broken into and burglarized. We are not at his house and he doesn't have pictures of the aftermath. I've heard nothing about this crime on the news or read about it in the local newspaper.

Scenario 2: A local friend of mine says his home was destroyed in a fire that consumed his entire block. We are not at his house and he doesn't have pictures of the aftermath. I've heard nothing about this terrible event on the news or read about it in the local newspaper.

Scenario 3: A local friend of mine says a UFO appeared over his neighborhood and used its photoblasters to level the entire neighborhood. We are not at his house and he doesn't have pictures of the aftermath. I've heard nothing about this most unusual event on the news or read about it in the local newspaper.

My reaction to each:

Scenario 1: While burglary may be upsetting to the victim, it probably would not be newsworthy or catch the attention of local journalists unless he was some celebrity or some other factors come into play. The claim would be accepted at face value without evidence.

Scenario 2: I'd think it really unusual that I'd heard nothing about a fire that consumed an entire block. I'd wonder why I'd missed that story and I'd be a little confused about that but would believe my friend unless I had reason to suspect his sanity.

Scenario 3: Call the local asylum and reserve a padded room for my friend.

Now some examples that apply to the discussion of Jesus:

Claim 1: Some guy named Yeshua lived in 1st century Judea, he was a wandering rabbi who had a small insignificant following that nobody notice until one day he got crucified by Pilate.

Claim 2: He led a very successful religious movement that stirred up controversy and his reputation spread to the surrounding provinces. His religion deified him after his death and many fantastic myths were told about him in later decades.

Claim 3: Actually, all the myths were true stories. He healed the sick, raised the dead, cast out demons, was born of a virgin, a booming voice from the Heavens announced that he was God's son, he was raised on the 3rd day after his death (give or take a day or two) and flew up into the sky.

Not a shred of evidence in the 1st century validates any of the above claims.

My reaction:

Claim 1: OK. and...?

Claim 2: Extremely unlikely. Such a successful ministry would have gotten someone's attention.

Claim 3: You're kidding, right?

[Greatest I am]

Is lack of evidence evidence in and of itself?

Yes.

Evidence, not proof. Two words that religious shits do not understand to begin with.

I agree.
It is to those who cry wolf to show the tracks or the shit.
Not to others to show that the wolf never existed in the first place.

Regards
DL