Atheist conclusions about the historicity of the resurrection

Is that why you act like they are jokes?

Blessed are those who show compassion and forgiveness, as they will receive mercy. LOL. You are incapable of showing mercy. Whoever Percy is has your undying hatred that will apparently go to your grave with you. Your hatred for this person is SO STRONG you spill it over on me and whomever else you don't like at the time. You don't know what forgiveness is if this guy got you this upset that even strangers get the brunt of your upset.


Blessed are those with a sincere and honest heart: LOL. The guy who CONSTANTLY misrepresents other people's posts and then attacks them for it surely doesn't know what this phrase means.


Blessed are those who actively work to bring peace and reconciliation: LOL. Again, your enemies list seems pretty long. You and Doc seem to just sit on here bitching about everyone else.


So you'll forgive me if I think you actually DO think the Beatitudes are uttered by a lunatic. You hold them in extreme disdain apparently.
^^^ Perry is angry and stressed out again.
 
sounds like its the thing for you then.

you don't believe in finding the important parts.
If you believe the New Testament authors were liars and fabricators, you would be a fool trusting anything they wrote.

I'm pretty certain that the students of Plato, Confucius, Zeno weren't flagrant fabricators, so it's not like you don't have choices of role models who aren't supposedly peddling mythological bullshit.
 
Strict biblical literalism is for Neanderthals.
The intelligent person can use their mind to distinguish between poetry, parable, metaphor, hyperbole, embellishment, and historically reliable narrative.

Even well-known atheist New Testament scholars report that there are historically reliable elements in the NT.

Joachim Jeremias wrote an excellent economical and social history of the era, using Jewish sources entirely.


There are no anachronisms in the NT, and even the names of the people used are contemporary. The name Jesus was also not unique, a couple of Rabbis from earlier times had the same name, a Fun Fact not widely known. It is heavily footnoted, and a scholarly work, not a hagiography or a praise book.
 
Joachim Jeremias wrote an excellent economical and social history of the era, using Jewish sources entirely.


There are no anachronisms in the NT, and even the names of the people used are contemporary. The name Jesus was also not unique, a couple of Rabbis from earlier times had the same name, a Fun Fact not widely known. It is heavily footnoted, and a scholarly work, not a hagiography or a praise book.
The Old Testament was one of the best sources of historical information about Mesopotamia and the Levant up until archeologists in the 19th and 20th century started confirming facts about the Babylonian, Persian, and Assyrian empires.
 
If you believe the New Testament authors were liars and fabricators, you would be a fool trusting anything they wrote.

I'm pretty certain that the students of Plato, Confucius, Zeno weren't flagrant fabricators, so it's not like you don't have choices of role models who aren't supposedly peddling mythological bullshit.
you're still using an appeal to authority arument.

that makes you the loser.

the good parts like the golden rule stand on their own merit.

Jesus didn't build up the horror of the catholic church.

he was a philosopher who thought the contemporary religion of his day was fucked up,

and who also liked morality.
 
Too funny. Your dishonest semantic shift from "Israelis" to "Jews" reveals your total dependence on assuming "permanent victim" status to justify any and all transgressions.


You are willing to dehumanize Arabs who never attacked anyone as "homicidal animals" while cheering on their eradication by the world's most active terrorist organization. That is about the shittiest you can be on a political forum.

I judge these fake ;palestinians' by their actions and their history of murder, looting, and degeneracy. all traits which you obviously admire, same as your fellow travellers on the left. Arabs are a bandit culture, and they made up a fake pagan cult to promote their theivery, murder, and robberies. I realize how appealing that is with sociopaths, deviants, and assorted homicidal maniacs; you should propose to moon and raise many psychotic little animals.
 
the good parts like the golden rule stand on their own merit.
You don't need Jesus for that. The Analects of Confucius does a good job articulating the golden rule, as have others.

If you believe the New Testament is a pack of lies and fabrications, you would be a fool to read it or use it as a role model.
 
^^^ Attempts to claim the New Testament is a pack of lies and fabrications, but then claims it is worthy of veneration and honor.

Seems like the schizophrenia of the militant atheist.
i keep saying the golden rule is the most important part of christianity and the rest is mostly irrelevant if its true or not.

the value is the moral message.

your desperate smearing and lies indicate you know you're a douche.
 
The only weakness I see in the 'everybody was hallucinating' theory is the sheer number that were reported to have supposedly seen Jesus after the crucifixion. I can easily believe an individual person have hallucinations. Dozens are a little more problematic.

Still, I'm taking it seriously as a hypothesis.
Easier to follow Occam's Razor and believe that he survived being crucified. He was only up there for a few hours. Sure, if the story is true, he was stabbed in the side, but that wound and nails through the hands and feet, while excruciating, could be survivable...if only for a short time.
 
^^^ Attempts to claim the New Testament is a pack of lies and fabrications, but then claims it is worthy of veneration and honor.

Seems like the schizophrenia of the militant atheist.
actually if you can read, you know I'm against all wars (even dumb Zionism) and constantly harp about the golden.

your desperate smearing and lies indicate you know you're a douche.

was Jesus a Zionist?
 
Easier to follow Occam's Razor and believe that he survived being crucified. He was only up there for a few hours. Sure, if the story is true, he was stabbed in the side, but that wound and nails through the hands and feet, while excruciating, could be survivable...if only for a short time.
why does it matter either way?
 
i keep saying the golden rule is the most important part of christianity and the rest is mostly irrelevant if its true or not.

You don't need Jesus or Christianity for that. Confucius taught the golden rule 500 years before Jesus, and his students memorialized it in the Analects.

You think the New Testament is a pack of lies written by people who had the intent to deceive.

That's not moral. That's flagrantly immoral.

You would be a fool to make liars your model for moral knowledge.
 
Back
Top