Karma reasons for concrete message



    Posts: 3577
  • Darwins +112/-23

Here are some pieces for you. I was going to cut and paste some info here but instead I'll just post the links.

Ok, let's lok at the rest of this. I guess Velkyn already did the first one (thanks Velks) so that leaves me with looking at the rest.

The first site is "In His Steps Ministries"........this is going to hurt.

The site lists several Christian claims which it claims it will try to prove.

Proof of Jesus

Here's another quote from their intro "There is historical, archaeological, and  the study of logical reasoning that disproves that the Bible just a book of myths of legends. "

It is never a good sign when a site promising evidence says something like that. But that doesn't matter because we're finally going to get a look at all of that proof that we've all been waiting for so long. I'm getting special shivers in my "god-place" just thinking about it. So I start to read this revolutionary information and.............

They just quote Josephus and Tacitus......literally that's it. They spend six fucking paragraphs talking about how they have this great evidence and fluffing it up only to quote evidence that you can find to be bullshit from a 10-second web search. Now I'm starting to understand why they put this on their homepage: "Here is the key?are you searching for truth or loopholes. You can always find the loopholes. "

In other words, if you find anything with this information, you weren't actually looking for truth. Ugh, let's move on. I don't think I need to mention why Josehpus and Tacitus suck. Even if they didn't, they have only a small handful of people that might have mentioned Jesus in passing in some of their writings, and that is really the only thing that they offer as evidence for his birth.

Proof of the Crucifixion

Uh-huh "Of course, the Bible more than verifies the truth of Jesus' claims, but an atheist, agnostic, or new spiritual seeker may not believe the Bible is true.", another promising start.

The first section is a medical evaluation of what Jesus went through when he was crucified and I have to admit it puzzles me. It goes through a detailed description of the process of Crucifixion and all of the things that Jesus would have suffered through, but it goes on for about fifteen paragraphs and I really can't imagine what it's actually trying to prove. The best I can figure is that they're trying to go "See how Jesus suffered! How can you not believe in him after all he did for you!". Which admittedly is probably much closer to a rational argument than Dink has made so far.

I love the ending however.

"This is an edited description given by Dr. C. Truman Davis is an Ophthalmologist. Some will argue that he is just an eye doctor. Ophthalmologists (not Opticians) are required to go through the same medical training as a physician."

They know it's so ridiculous that they're actually pre-emptively trying to cover their asses.

Then there's another medical report of what the Crucifixion was like for Jesus (yeah I know, two of them WTF?) but for this one I think I get what it's trying to do. This is basically making the claim that Jesus' death can be proven because he was sacrificing himself and it shows his greatness that he did it willingly.......

Yeah, I know guys. I read that too. What can I say except, they're Christians?

There are some historical sources that they list, so let's see what those are.

Fucking Tacitus and Josephus again? They're like the only two historical figures Christians know that isn't in the bible.

Lucian of Samosta, who lived in the second century. Thus making his account useless.

The Jewish Talmud. Written in 200 AD (or thereabouts).

Let's see Justin Martyr, an early christian apologist who once talked about a letter written to Pius in 150 AD. Yes, you actually read that right. They cite a second century apologist who once wrote a letter addressed to the Roman Emperor a hundred years or so after Jesus died which mentioned the crucifixion as evidence that it actually happened.

Apparently Justin also went on to talk about many other things Jesus had done. And I think the next part really needs to be quoted so that you can appreciate it as I do.

"Justin must have assumed that this record still existed in the official Roman archives and that Antoninus Pius could verify the facts easily. Justin’s whole purpose in writing his letter was to obtain mercy from the highest official in the known world, thus sparing the Christian community a persecution which was becoming so commonplace. It is unlikely that Justin would ask a Roman Emperor to check a document if he did not feel extremely confident that the document existed. Otherwise, he would be foolishly putting his own life and reputation at risk.

There is currently not one original copy of the Acts of Pilate. It also appears the Acts of Pilate had some mean things to say about Christians, so later in time copies started being circulated that were edited. Even though there is no manuscript, again there had to have been something that said what Justin was quoting or he would have no defense."

This is what I've been dealing with, people.

The last piece of evidence (ugh, calling it that nearly caused blood to shoot out my nose) is about a man named Tertullian who also wrote a letter to some Roman officials that talked about Jesus. HA!BULLETPROOF!TAKE THAT ATHEISTS!

I'd also like to quote the end of this as well.

"It should be noted that Christianity is a religion based upon relationship, not knowledge. It is a religion of faith not logic. The information provided is to help answer questions, but ultimately you must believe in the gospel accounts of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ because you believe in the claims of Jesus that we are sinners and we  need a savior."

No comment needed.

How much more of this crap do I need to sift through. I keep hoping that there's at least one intelligent thought in here somewhere.

Proof of the Resurection (AKA I can't believe they actually think this happened, Ha, ha Losers!!)

First though a clarification. This part here actually explains those idiotic medical reports from the last section that I couldn't understand the point of. Apparently (get this) they were supposed to be evidence that the Crucifixion would have killed Jesus, and evidene that he would have suffered in the process. Yeah, they spent about thirty paragraphs in total from two different doctors just to prove that being crucified is both lethal AND painful.

There are no words.

So let's look at their evidence.

Fucking Josephus again? Ugh, I'll pass on that part.

They try to address the lack of historical evidence. Which after four paragraphs of bullshit basically amounts to blaming a Jewish conspiracy (I'm not kidding) to prevent people from turning to Jesus as their saviour. Why am I not surprised that there just HAD to be a jewish conspiracy in there somewhere.

The next point they bring up is the standard one of if it wasn't true, why didn't anyone at the time disprove it, followed by the "why would people die for their faith if it wasn't true" schtick. It's dull and boring and with no evidence or original thought so let's move on.

The next section isn't really relevant. It basically addresses the other Christian views of the resurection (that it was metaphor/myth and other variations) basically they try to justify that the literal interpetation is true. So basically a OneTrueChristian claim made to other Christians.

That's actually the rest of that section. It just goes through all of the alternate Christian theories about the resurection and tries to debunk them. It actually doesn't provide any evidence. Just spends a LOT of pages debunking everyone else.

Fuck, I've still got three more to go and my brain is already threatening to revolt. I'll get back to this in a bit. You guys owe me for this.
Changed Change Reason Date