I gave them a quick glance Sam. It would be fairly simple to go line by line refuting everything those people say and giving you arguments against their position, but that would take a lot more time than I think any of us would want to take to logically dismantle them. Especially since your entire belief system doesn't depend on whether or not those arguments are true; it depends on faith, which isn't logical to begin with.
These links show the truth in Jesus, all Christianity could have been shown to be a lie if a body were found, the old testament prophecies said he would bodily rise again as well as the disciples so if that could be disproved, all of it would go with it. This is because of the fact that everything in the bible hinges on Jesus, he is the main message.
Those links are from Christians who have everything to gain by saying what they say.
Alright, though. You twisted my arm. I'll give you 3 sentence-by-sentence responses and stop there. Start with the first sentence in first link:
"The body of Jesus, according to Jewish burial custom, was covered in a linen cloth. About 45 kilos of aromatic ingredients, mixed to form a sticky substance, were placed on the cloth which covered the body."
As a nitpick, it was actually closer to 35 kilos (75 lbs).
First, Jesus was crucified by the Romans as a criminal. It is entirely possible that Jesus was not afforded a proper Jewish burial because of that. Here is a link and a quote from the link... http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/peter_kirby/tomb/roman.html
The information presented on the Roman practice of crucifixion shows that the very act of taking a body down from the cross for burial was, if practiced at all, the exception to the rule. The popular phrase "Food for Crows," the line about the crucified being an "ugly meal for birds of prey and grim scraps for dogs," the response of Tiberius to the request for burial, the comment from Horace, and finally the story from Petronius about the guard who allowed the body to be stolen off the cross all indicate that part of the very shame of crucifixion was the denial of burial rites as a last act of humiliation.
Second, who covered the body in the spices and sticky substances? If you ask the Gospel of Mark, there was no spice wrap. If you ask the Gospel of Matthew, there was no spice wrap. If you ask the Gospel of Luke, it was the women who came with Jesus from Gallilee, but they had to rest on the Sabbath so they didn't get it done that day. If you ask the Gospel of John, it was Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea who used the 35 kilos of stuff on Jesus body.
See what I mean?
Lets move on to the second sentence.
"They placed the body in a tomb made of solid rock. with the help of levers they moved a massive block of stone (weighing about 2 ton) and closed the entrance of the tomb."
Again it is important to look at the gospel accounts to get a feel for the inherent contradictions to this. Once you do that, you ask yourself, could a single person do it? Where does the 2 ton figure come from? Did they have a scale back then? How many people rolled the stone?
If you ask the Gospel of Mark, then Joseph of Arimathea rolled the stone back in place all by himself. 2 tons? Good luck Joseph. If you ask the Gospel of Matthew, here again we have Joseph cutting a tomb out of rock by himself and then rolling a 'big' stone in front of it, again, by himself. If you ask the Gospel of Luke, there is no rock in front of the door. And in the Gospel of John, Jesus tomb is in a garden, not a cave with a big rock in it.
Where does it say in the bible that they used levers? Where does it say how gigantic the stone was? Where does the 2 ton estimate come from? Did someone just pull that number out of their ass? It doesn't say in the bible.
"A Roman guard composed of strictly disciplined men was ordered to guard the tomb."
Why would they do that to a criminal they just crucified? It makes no sense to do that. There is no reason to think that they would post a guard around Jesus tomb.
Almost every sentence has another side to it Sam. The people who write those sites you link are giving you one side of a VERY 2 sided argument. In order to be fair, you MUST hear the other side of it.
You all here have this very clever way of taking bible verses out of context and using them in the way you'd like.
Did you ever stop to think that maybe you were the one guilty of that? That maybe it's you who twists the meaning to suit what you want to see? For example: take the book of Genesis. When they talk about evening and morning being the first day, it is common now for Christians to realize that God didn't really create the universe in 6 days (because science contradicts it). So when they read 'it was evening and morning of the first day', they say something akin to 'it wasn't REALLY evening and morning and the first day, because a day is like a 1000 years for God, and a thousand years like a day'. This is twisting the meaning. Who is doing the twisting? The Christians. All we are doing is interpreting what the book says as if it came from any other book. This type of thing is constant with you folks.
When the bible says, 'ask anything in my name, and I will do it', I'm not twisting it around, I'm taking it for what it says. As if it was a phrase with which I could prove or disprove what he says. And when I ask something in his name, and it doesn't happen, why am I not allowed to question the truth of the statement? I mean seriously, if I wrote a book and said that I will do anything you ask, as long as you call out to me when you do it, and then you call out to me and I don't do it, don't you just think I was lying? Can you not see that this is exactly what's happening with the bible? You can explain it away all you want with your theology, but the fact remains, 'ask anything in my name' just doesn't work. Even with food and water as you elude to.
Now I know you've heard it a million times the out of context statement but it is part of the truth, it is also very well known in Christian theology that the bible is literal only few times and all the other times( most of the bible) is not literal and a thorough reading and re-reading is needed to dig out all the meanings that lay there.
You can pull whatever meaning you want out of the bible. Want to think that God likes to get revenge? That's in there. Want to think that God forgives everyone who believes in Jesus? That's in there. Want to think eating shellfish is deserving of the death penalty? It's in there. Want to hate gays? It's in there. Want to own slaves? It's in there. Want to love everyone? It's in there. Want to sell your daughter? It's in there. Want your wife to shut up more? It's in there.
Ask and its given is in the context of asking for things within Gods will, our needs in life for food, shelter, and water are things this Verse refers to.
Interesting. Do you know that on average 29,000 children die every day from starvation? Do you think not a single one of them prays? This is a ridiculous statement Sam. God doesn't always give people what they need in terms of food, shelter and water. For some strange reason, the people who pray for food, shelter and water, seem to have it or not have it due to their location and social situations. Almost as if God has nothing to do with food, shelter and water. I mean, I never pray for any of those and I have them in abundance. Lots of people pray for them and have none. What do you make of that? I'm sure your mind has a ready answer, but no matter what you come up with, the notion that God is not real, and that he plays no part in answering prayers about food, shelter and water IS a valid explanation for why some people have those things and some don't.
And what if I (or even a football stadium full of the most devout people in the world) were to sincerely pray for food and water for every child in the world. Do you honestly think that 29,000 kids wouldn't die tomorrow? You can't really think that, can you?
Sorry about my terrible grammar I know I write a bunch a run ons and what have you. Sorry I will really try my best to improve my grammar on here, I write poetry and stories it is very very rare I write formally so really sorry about that.
Don't sweat it. We see it constantly from theists. I dare say we're used to it.
Thanks everyone though for these conversations really I love every second of it sorry it takes me so long sometimes to respond I've been crazy busy lately and it's gonna get worse cause classes are about to start back, but I'm really enjoying talking with you all I'm gonna work harder to respond more to you all.
Sam, I'm glad you are enjoying yourself, but if you really want to get something out of these conversations, really stop and consider that you might be wrong. We aren't atheists for no reason. We don't hate God. We aren't mean and awful people. Most of us haven't been physically harmed by worshipers. I, personally, have had no seriously bad experiences with religion. When you see the well thought out, logical responses from the people here, we aren't playing games or twisting what you say. We're just judging things with a critical eye, from both sides of the argument.
I know there is no Christian God like I know there is no Santa Claus. It's just not reasonable to believe in it. It's not the truth.