How a man name Jesus exist 2k years ago, when letter J is only 500 yrs (VIDEO)

[mag357]

I see katts on some straw man shyt right now...
If anybody responding to me said anything about miracles and shyt... that had nothing to do with my point.
Historians say that there is plenty of evidence of a man name jesus or whatever variant of that name was used, lived in them times...
Now u can say that u dont believe what their evidence... cool...

But then nothing from history that u didnt see for urself, u shouldnt believe...
and im cool with that too

 

[egg]

I see katts on some straw man shyt right now...
If anybody responding to me said anything about miracles and shyt... that had nothing to do with my point.
Historians say that there is plenty of evidence of a man name jesus or whatever variant of that name was used, lived in them times...
Now u can say that u dont believe what their evidence... cool...

But then nothing from history that u didnt see for urself, u shouldnt believe...
and im cool with that too

OK so there once was a man named Jesus. So what? You're still trying to imply that this is jesus from the bible. or you just want us to know that some random person named their kid Jesus. Or do you think only one person has ever had that name?

 

[mag357]

OK so there once was a man named Jesus. So what? You're still trying to imply that this is jesus from the bible. or you just want us to know that some random person named their kid Jesus. Or do you think only one person has ever had that name?

Bro... they didnt just randomly mention a dude named jesus.... like "oh., jesus went to the store 1 day"
There are writings that mention this man that went thru the same things the bible said jesus went thru.... by the hands of the same ppl mentioned in the bible.....
What a coincidence

 

[egg]

Bro... they didnt just randomly mention a dude named jesus.... like "oh., jesus went to the store 1 day"
There are writings that mention this man that went thru the same things the bible said jesus went thru.... by the hands of the same ppl mentioned in the bible.....
What a coincidence

That's besides the point. I have already said that i don't accept writings or word of mouth as evidence of someone breaking the laws of physics no matter how many different people wrote about it. so we can just leave it at that

 

[mag357]

That's besides the point. I have already said that i don't accept writings or word of mouth as evidence of someone breaking the laws of physics no matter how many different people wrote about it. so we can just leave it at that

Mr. Egg... cool

 

[bx.lion]

That's besides the point. I have already said that i don't accept writings or word of mouth as evidence of someone breaking the laws of physics no matter how many different people wrote about it. so we can just leave it at that

If you're looking for nonbiblical proof of his miracles you won't find it, but there's proof he existed as a person

 

[egg]

If you're looking for nonbiblical proof of his miracles you won't find it, but there's proof he existed as a person

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

like i said anyone can say and write anything and it could be lies.

People need REASONS to lie especially if it means they will probably end up being ostracized, arrested, or killed for it.

So, for what reason(s) did the writers of the text write these 'lies'?

I'll wait.


​

 

[egg]

People need REASONS to lie especially if it means they will probably end up being ostracized, arrested, or killed for it.

So, for what reason(s) did the writers of the text write these 'lies'?

I'll wait.


​

upset that you cannot prove your cac god is real

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

upset that you cannot prove your cac god is real

I just love strawmen. That's what people like yourself always use when their arguments get destroyed.

Here is MY actual position.....

Ignosticism - RationalWiki​

Ignosticism is sometimes considered synonymous with a closely related concept known as "theological non-cognitivism," which states that talking about "god" is cognitively meaningless. It is slightly distinct in that ignostics would be happy to jump off the fence if a decent enough definition of "God" was put forward. Some theological non-cognitivists reject anthropomorphic gods as false but maintain that non-anthropomorphic gods are meaningless. That is, if something that is not like a human is involved, we can't really talk to it or it can't comprehend us well enough to set rules for us.

I'm talking about a human being that lived about 2,000 years ago and has documented, independently multiply-attested proof of his existence.

Now, what do you mean by 'cac g-d'? Please define it.

I have NO idea what you're talking about.

​

 

[egg]

I just love strawmen. That's what people like yourself always use when their arguments get destroyed.

Here is MY actual position.....

Ignosticism - RationalWiki​

I'm talking about a human being that lived about 2,000 years ago and has documented, independently multiply-attested proof of his existence.

Now, what do you mean by 'cac g-d'? Please define it.

I have NO idea what you're talking about.

​

I'm talking about the cac mangod you worship call jesus christ. who performed magic and had long flowing hair unlike your nappy head

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

I'm talking about the cac mangod you worship call jesus christ.

Strawman. I'm a theological noncognitivist (check my title under my avatar) and still have no idea what YOU mean by the word 'god'.

Please define that term and give evidence as to why Jesus, the man, didn't exist other than the rather poor reasoning you've shown thus far.

I'll wait.

​

 

[egg]

Strawman. I'm a theological noncognitivist (check my title under my avatar) and still have no idea what YOU mean by the word 'god'.

Please define that term and give evidence as to why Jesus, the man, didn't exist other than the rather poor reasoning you've shown thus far.

I'll wait.

​

you define 'god' its your belief. Read my previous replies. Jesus did impossible miracles, because they are impossible they cannot happen therefore jesus of the bible didn't exist. Unless you want to tell me of another nikka named jesus who ain't got shyt to do with that magic nikka from the bible.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

you define 'god' its your belief.

Strawman and absolutely wrong. My entire stance is that the term 'god' is meaningless. You have yet to define what YOU mean by the term, yet keep using it as if it does mean something. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. It may mean something to YOU, not to me, however.

If you can't define what the term means in an objective manner, then you're talking about nothing as far as I'm concerned.

Now, as to the existence of the man known as Jesus, that is an objective subject. Everyone knows what is meant by the term 'man'.

I'm still waiting for you to prove the man did not exist. So far, the only pieces of evidence you've provided are:

(a) 'the writers could have lied', which may be true, but there is no evidence to support that allegation and it seems quite strange that if this man didn't exist, no one stated that for almost 1700 years after the fact.

....and....

(b) 'he did magic tricks' which doesn't prove he didn't exist.

​

 

[egg]

Strawman and absolutely wrong. My entire stance is that the term 'god' is meaningless. You have yet to define what YOU mean by the term, yet keep using it as if it does mean something. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. It may mean something to YOU, not to me, however.

But your jesus is son of god . So your saying jesus dad didn't exist?

I'm still waiting for you to prove the man did not exist. So far, the only pieces of evidence you've provided are:

(a) 'the writers could have lied', which may be true, but there is no evidence to support that allegation and it seems quite strange that if this man didn't exist, no one stated that for almost 1700 years after the fact.

....and....

(b) 'he did magic tricks' which doesn't prove he didn't exist.

and that's all your gonna get cac mangod worshiper