Atheists are just so cool, edgy and hip.

Hitchins is still being stabbed by Satan...right in the booty.

By that rationale.... why did it matter who the Christians voted for?

Logic... how does it fucking work?

So now that your whole premise for why you dislike Christians has been shot down....

What's the real truth?  

I suspect that you are a product of a public school education and you are desperate to conform to the standards which modern pop culture has decided illustrate intelligence.

Secondhand at best. It's interesting that there are TONS of sources in the 50-200 years following Christ's death, but none around what would have been his life. Like I said, for a man doing miracles, few people seemed to notice. Those that did noticed 50 years late. While it's a possibility that a man named Jesus Christ may have existed, the accounts sure are far and few in between.

So basing you world view on logic, reason and evidence is considered edgy and hip?



Who knew?



 

Evangelical atheists feel a need to recruit members by discrediting other religions. Pretty soon they'll be going door to door like Jahovah's Witnesses, LDS missionaries, Avon Ladies and Amway salesmen.

For those who will complain about my use of evangelical, I'm using a lesser definition of:
"marked by ardent or zealous enthusiasm for a cause. "

Or he has already been reincarnated as some other living thing.  Or he is just gone, and isn't anywhere.

All depends what one chooses to believe in  None of us know for sure.

There are athiests, and then there are fucking trolls.

This is a case of the latter.


FWIW, I am a Christian.

An intelligent atheist would certainly have a leg to stand on if they wanted to debate the divinity of Jesus.

To choose to debate his very existence, which is pretty much accepted as fact by historians, shows how batshit crazy some atheists are.  The dead sea scrolls are documents from antiquity that discuss Jesus.  Then we have a handful of Roman sources.  He is mentioned in the koran... if the bible is that distasteful a source.

Considering the span of time and the fragile nature of written history, there is as much written history of Jesus as there is of almost anyone from that time frame with the exception of generals, senators, emperors and roman officials.

He does that all the time. It's really pretty funny.

 

Don't run off now......

Don't let this guy troll you. He posted early on the first page of this thread with a particularly vile comment that many misinterpreted as coming from a Christian. Sierraz then added that he was an agnostic. It seems to be his MO to troll threads like this with incendiary comments.

Because Christians often vote for values over things that actually matter, candidates have to conform to the stupid. If Christians stopped voting on things that don't need to be voted on, we could focus on the issues that matter and perhaps the selection of candidates would be more substantive if they didn't have to talk about things that don't belong in politics. My whole premise for disliking Christianity has not been "shot down" as Christians are still gullible and can be lead whichever way the leaders desire. If our leaders can divide us on a completely inconsequential and moronic issue like gay marriage, then public discourse is not focusing on important issues. Why do Christians care whether gays can get married? Because some little passage in the magic book says that gay=bad.

If modern pop culture has decided that questioning willful ignorance illustrates intelligence ( it hasn't) then I'd be all for it. Your bringing up of public school is irrelevant as I educated myself by my own will and not that of some teacher. A man can go to a private school and come out a complete moron. Just look at some of our past presidents.

BUt we aer told that athiests are moral people and do not have to have an invisble friend in the sky to have a moral compass.  These examples certainly demonstrate the opposite, do they not?

The evangelicals from both sides behave with remarkable similarities.  The Christians treat everyone just like the [A]theists do except the Christians draw the line where criticism is directed at their own religion.  Atheism has to be called religion by believers so as to feel this very point can be laid on non-believers like it is laid on themselves.  The point being that "Everyone is wrong but me." ...When who's "wrong" isn't really the point.  Ones position first has to be open to debate in order to even entertain criticism of ones belief system and dogma, by definition, isn't open to debate.

Article in the OP reminds me of this:

"I don't vote" but then complains about those who actualy do their civic duty and vote.
"COrporate shills."
"Self educated" (RE dropout) . I'm getting the image of a Che shirt wearing highschool junior or senior.

Was there at some point around 2000 years ago a man by the name of Jesus Christ? It'd be difficult to argue that there couldn't have been. The proof is scant, but in all likelihood someone named Christ probably was preaching at that time. Did he conform to the biblical story? No. I'm going further than just saying he wasn't divine and disputing the accuracy of the accepted narrative. With it being written 40 years after his death, there's no possible way that it would be completely accurate. There sure is a lot of inconsistency in a book that Christians claim came from an all knowing god. Maybe god just had dementia? That's why he isn't playing with us anymore.

SHIt, Manson would have gotten shot in ten seconds in my neighborhood. "Officer, he had a knife!"

Ha, hold on there buddy, there's no evidence of a lack of a deity, and can never be.  There's also no objective physical evidence or logic behind being good to people, as there's no such thing as a natural world "goal" of having humanity continue to exist...  scientifically they are just another example of self-organizing matter (called life) that carry no more logical value to the universe than jellyfish, and any justification they make for continued existence or cooperation is just an obvious byproduct of successful evolutionary traits like an irrational desire to live forever, to breed and to stick close to others of their own species.  The members of the species that lacked these qualities weren't somehow more poorly designed or morally lesser, they just had a tendency to not pass their DNA on to another self-organizing set of matter.

Regardless, each set of self-organizing matter will definitely disintegrate into its constituent molecules and the brief identification of that group of molecules as "an individual" will no longer be applicable whatsoever as its constituent parts become either inert or absorbed into some other structure...  the organization they had was very temporary and of little impact given the scale of the universe.

Believing anything else doesn't use any logic based on reason and evidence, just a bunch of hormonal urges that are bound to exist in self-organizing molecular groups that randomly developed sexual intercourse.  Those that did not enjoy it or did not irrationally devote themselves to persistent maintenance of the majority of their constituent parts simply didn't flood the world with copies.

And certainly, nobody who posts in GD on arfcom can claim that their actions are for the most part based on logic, reason and evidence, myself included

You know that's a joke website, right?

FFRF are as petulant children.

And no religion proselytizes like they do either.    



 

Jesus did exist whether or not a person believes he is the son fo God or not. Documented in the works of renowned period historians Tacitus and Josephus.

as for the rest of that... I don't know what to say...its out there man.



 

Well.... a quick check of your posting history reveals...................!!!!

Yes, but that is irrelevant.  He still would get shot in my neighborhood.

See above.

There is a COC rule about attacking the religion of people, not the lack of one... Therefore there is no violation in attacking atheism, unless you want to argue that it is a religion.. Really want to do that?

But as I said in the thread that got locked, the overt attacks on Christianity are just fine, but historically accurate facts about abotber certain religion from the middle east will get you locked...

So saying an atheist bases his world view on logic, reason and evidence....  I'm making a bad assumption by saying that an A-theist denies the existence of a deity on the basis of his/her worldview and you say that his/her worldview is based on logic, reason and evidence?  I really did think you made that claim, sorry if you didn't, but I still can't understand how you didn't.  I'll accept that I just don't understand.  

As far as the free society, there's no objective reason for a free society to exist.  There's no evidence that it somehow maintains the universe or the solar system or has an overall impact on matter or energy at all, there is just no evidence, logic or reason for it based on empirical observation of the physical world without injecting a lot of hormonally-driven irrationality into it.  Humans want to live ONLY because the organisms aeons ago that didn't care about their existence or about propagating did not continue to produce new copies or versions of themselves.  There's nothing scientific about calling a continuing society good...  you can make the claim that certain facets of a society are good for the certain goals, but those goals have no objective value based on reason, logic or evidence...  they are just axiomatic assertions made by irrational beings who are afraid of their inevitable discontinuation.

And I think it IS out there to base one's belief on pure evidence.  Even if you assume that social/species existence somehow creates a universal "good" of continuing to exist (still an assumption), well it's illogical and irrational to allow people with chronic or terminal diseases to breed, or allow anyone with any non-beneficial genetic qualities to breed.  Really, if someone hasn't displayed a clear possibility of contributing to overall advancement, there's no reason to allow them to live after they have passed on their DNA to a new generation.  Simply put, the universe could give a crap about individual rights, clearly there is no such thing, based on evidence, reason and logic.  Empirical science does not judge or value one subatomic particle over another, it just observes, and thus there is no evidence of "good" or "bad" or "right" or "wrong."  These things are just the irrational inventions of people who are scared of dying and are genetically prone to seeking companionship from their own species, an expected aberration to be found in any self-organizing matter which has passed its cellular instructions to more than a few generations.

I think it's way out there to claim only what can be proven as real and still continue to soak up resources in what must be regarded as a doomed effort.  Of course, if you believe there is something else, I agree!  I also know it's not based on reason, logic and evidence.

It's based on faith .  Just because that faith doesn't include a deity doesn't automatically grant it sciency justice, it's just a rejection of one faith for another.

Ya know... if Jesus was so important I'd expect at least one eyewitness to record what he saw at the time of miracles occurring.

Not one eyewitness.

Not one.

Hmmm.

I did not really believe in God when I died, but he not only gave me a second chance he saved my friends too. No amount of arguing can change my mind.



education does not mean as much to me, but what you have done and do for others is what really matters.

Atheism is technically a religion.  There is more than one definition of religion and atheism fits at least one of them.  I'm heading out the door, but look up the definition.  Depending on your chosen source there are at least 2, and as many as 5 or 6.

I don't disagree with your second part at all.  It's very selective enforcement of the coc.

I don't understand Atheists.

Some people just wanna burn the house down.

You two haven't got a clue as to what atheism is.

Yup


typical attack on Christians you dont ever see them trying to make a mockery of islamic/Buddhist/hebrew beliefs,almost like they have a personal agenda against Christianity or their chicken shits

As in recorded him on their cell phone?  Sent a tweet about the miracle they saw? Posted a video on Youtude for the whole world to see?  Just how many people in antiquity were literate?  How much has survived from the writings of the common fishermen and shepherds?

This article is about the basis for holding the view that Jesus existed as portrayed in the Bible

From the first sentence of the wiki......

I feel the same about theists.

My mother died on the 7th, & we just had her funeral last week. I have to sit through all the bullshit about how she is up in heaven with my father, & all those that came before her, Nobody gave a fuck that I don't belive in all your bullshit.

But did I say shit ? No, because I have more couth than that. But it is the fact that no one gives a fuck what the atheist thinks, that pisses us off. As if we are second class citizens for our non-belief in your god.

That is why we do what we do. You give us no other outlet.

So the fact that Cornelius Tactius was born 56 years after jesus was supposed to have died is good enough evidence for you ?  I was born the year my grandfather died, and I know very little about him, and every bit of that is second hand information.

According to your level of proof/evidence I should be able to write a biography on him.

Sorry to hear about your mom. I will pray for you and your family. I lost my dad last year and it was and still is very painful. I suspect the reason you had to sit through a religious service at her funeral is because either she or her next of kin wanted that. At your own funeral you are free to arrange to have no religious services. Thats how it works. You have the same rights as any other American, to practice what you believe. Your rights do not trump the rights of others as you seem to wish they would.

My condolences on your mother.
what could have been done differently at the funeral ?

You seem to have atheism confused with stoicism.



 

Keep moving those goalposts, you wouldn't want to have your beliefs (or lack thereof) challenged.



The atheists in this thread claimed there was no reputable historical evidence of Jesus.  Several posters provided the evidence, and now suddenly there needs to be an eyewitness account.



The Gospel of Mark is considered by historians to be compiled from written accounts of Jesus' ministry; tradition states it was based on the Apostle Peter's account of Jesus' life.  In other words, an eyewitness account from a contemporary of Jesus.



But I'm sure you'll find some other way to not accept it.  As Jesus said:  "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."



 

I hate to tell you but  Abe never existed
the makers of Lincoln logs made those stories up to sell toys

No, but you could write a biography if his best friend had kept a journal of what he did, as well as those of several other people who knew him personally.  Using those sources you would at least know where he lived, what he did for a living, and whom he lived and interacted with.



So to be valid every historical reference has to be based on eyewitness accounts?  Do you know how much ancient history you would have to reject using this standard?