New American Atheists Billboards Launched!

Jesus Christ is not a myth, his existence has been attested to by many people in real time.

That is severely incorrect. There are no contemporary multiple external attestations.

Not to mention that his existence and actions have been recorded in the Bible which is not false and is accurate in everything it portrays.

You're claiming it's inerrant? Are you joking? If you compare historical accounts w/the biblical accounts, they don't jibe AT ALL. There was no flood, no tower of babel, the exodus never happened, & NOT ONE SINGLE 'PROPHECY' EVER CAME TRUE.

I would like to know what about Jesus you find to mythical, besides a resistance to believe the things he has done.

Uh...how about everything? You're assuming (like so many countless others) that atheism is an uniformed choice, which is a false assumption.
I, like many others here, refuse to accept the wholly bibble as an authority on ANYTHING.
Trivia quiz: did you know that the bibble actually claims to have a cure for LEPROSY? A disease that has no known cure? It's true. Look it up yourself.

Krystalline,
I understand that you do not take the Bible to be as authoritative or inerrant as your stance portrays. If you look to Josephus or many authors of 1st-2nd century authors they attest to Jesus as a living being. Josephus isn't even a Christian. Now to say that there are no contemporary attestations is also a false claim, there are many men even liberal scholars who would agree that a man named Jesus existed in real time. So saying that everything about Jesus is a myth would be an incorrect statement even if we were looking at purely external sources. Then if we look at the Bible it shows that Jesus walked on earth and did many amazing things showing himself to be fully God and fully man. I'm sorry that you feel this way about what I said but the evidence seems to point towards the fact that at least a man named Jesus existed on earth and I would say that this man also did many miraculous things. Do I believe the Bible is inerrant? yes. The cure for leprosy you are talking about if you are referring to Naaman in 2 Kings is a legitimate healing. This does not mean that everyone who dips in a river 7 times will be healed but at that moment because Naaman was obedient to the prophets words from God he was healed. God could have cured him in anyway, just like Jesus in Mark 1 healed a leprous man by touching him.
You speak in sweeping generalities yes the Bible is accurate in what it records, the Exodus has happened, there was a flood (even external sources have records like this) The tower of Babel did happen and is a valid reason for why man spread out and speaks different languages. The Bible has held up for thousands of years and has withstood countless attacks about what it contains yet those philosophies pass on and the Bible continues to be foundational. If you objectively closely examine prophecies in the Old Testament you will find that a great deal have been fulfilled in the real person Jesus Christ. Ones that have yet to be fulfilled does not mean they are somehow false they are only false if they are found to be fulfilled differently than they are projected. I hope you will consider what I have said and I encourage you to study the Bible study Jesus objectively if you then come to the conclusion that he never existed and is not God and the way by which man can have eternal life and fullness in God than I am sorry to hear that. If you have anything else I would like to hear your comments I'm sorry you responded in the way that you did but I do not hold you in a bad light. Thank you for considering what I have to say.

Skits:

To answer correctly. Outside of the Bible there is no evidence that this man even existed. Period...sorry but that is the plain truth.

As for his name: Jesus (combination of Hebrew and Aramaic) meaning loosely Messiah....The scholars believe that his name was possibly "Joshua". The Christ comes from the Greeks “Christos” also meaning savior. In short “Savior from Savior” . The “Bible was written 100 years after the occurrence, so much was written to embellish this person who's real identity has been lost to antiquity. The word “GOD” is 6th century German, so ask yourself what name did they call your deity prior to the common usages today? Much to your dislike:

No one (BAR-NONE) has ever been turned into a pillar of salt, rivers, ponds or your backyard pool has been ever parted. Outside of the “Bible” no physical evidence has ever existed, nor will there be any.

Stephen F Roberts: “I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”

This is so scary :/ I am constantly finding myself fighting the Christian right. I live in Oklahoma and it I am very outnumbered.

But it is funny that you would say that your external documents are viable and yet my internal evidence is not.

Missing the point by a country mile: there are no external documents whatsoever. So this 'internal evidence' has no solid backbone.

let’s say based on your argument that a thousand years from now there has not been anything writtent about your existence, no contemparary resources state that you exist, no close personal friends ever authoritatively wrote about you and you didn’t write anything.

Uh...DNA evidence? Besides, I have youtube videos, people tell stories about me, I have relatives, there are photos?

The question then is did you still exist?

There's more proof I existed than your Christ fellow did.

The truth is that based on argument the fact that there are Biblical and external witnesses that Jesus existed, he died on a cross, and rose from the grave is further support, not necessary to his existence but supportive that he did.

Actually, no there isn't. Spare me Paul's '500 witnesses', because nobody can name them. Tacitus heard about this, but misspelled the name. Josephus was BORN years after the alleged 'Palestinian ministry'. 40 Romans & Philo Judeus wrote absolutely ZERO about this guy, who was supposed to have such a huge following people were being trampled. Let's also not forget that the Romans instituted severe penalties for anyone robbing ANY grave. Yet no massive manhunt was instituted. In fact, by Roman records, no such event occurred. It's difficult to prove that Pilate existed.

Just like I exist in reality here and now even if no one ever attests to or writes about my existence.

Birth certificate? Social security number? We can all assume you pay bills, so there's a substantial paper trail.
There's more proof you existed than this cat did.

Thank you again for your response I’m praying for you and am glad to have this interaction.

I don't really find courtesy disarming: this is a non-debate. You have zero substantive evidence to support your conjecture, & politeness doesn't lend credence.
As to prayer: you pray, I'll do the thinking for the both of us.

Skits says: "God does not play favorites, he is gracious to all."

Let us review some samplings of his Grace to all skits, shall we?

Deuteronomy 7:16
And thou shalt consume all the people which the Lord thy God shall deliver thee; thine eye shall have no pity upon them.

1 Samuel 15:2-3
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling.

Ezekiel 9:5-6
Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women.

Slaying infant and suckling? My how gracious of Him. Little innocent children are destroyed by your God skits. Is this what you are teaching your children? IS this your gracious and all loving God? No thanks.

Skits says: “God does not play favorites, he is gracious to all.”

Let us review some samplings of his Grace to all skits, shall we?

Yeah, I love how these people insist that their god doesn't play any favors, when it's obvious that some of their mythological heroes are more favored than the rest of us.
We could go over how many times the word 'favored' appears, in both old & new testaments, but then the semantic argument becomes word salad.
The whole idea of eternal damnation kills the argument that Mr. Nonexistent doesn't play favorites.

"But it is funny that you would say that your external documents are viable yet my internal evidence is not...The question still stands as to how Jesus is mythical."

Krystalline and Buckeye point out that there is no credible external evidence for Jesus. There is internal evidence for Jesus in the Bible in the same way that there is for Odysseus and Achilles in Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, and just like how there were likely famous warriors upon whom the legendary mythological Greek heroes were based upon there could possibly be a historical Jesus upon whom the Biblical Jesus is based upon; however, adding on super powers and supernatural elements is what makes their stories unrealistic and mythological. Because there's no real credible evidence for any of Jesus' miracle claims, there's really as much reason to believe that the Biblical Jesus was real as there is that the Odysseus and Achilles from Greek legends are real.

"God does not play favorites, he is gracious to all."

There is more than one reason that Abraham and his followers are known as "God's Chosen People". For example, when Abraham and his wife Sarah went to Egypt, he lied to the Pharaoh and told him that Sarah was his sister because he was afraid that he'd be killed so that other's could claim her. The Pharaoh lavished Abraham with gifts in exchange for making Sarah a part of his harem. God punished the deceived Pharaoh for taking Sarah for himself by bringing plagues upon his people. The Pharaoh realized that the plagues coincided with his making Sarah a part of his harem and discovered that Sarah was really Abrahams wife. Abraham got his wife back, left Egypt, AND got to keep all the gifts given to him by the Pharaoh. He pulled this stunt again to Abimelech, the King of Gerar. He deceived people, cheated them, and got to keep all the goods he was given. Not fair of God, not gracious to the deceived, but good for God's chosen people.

Eternal damnation for good, moral, and just people, such as Gandhi or Gautama Buddha, just because they don't believe in a specific God is also rather unfair...

"I’ll entertain your idea for a second, let’s say based on your argument that a thousand years from now there has not been anything writtent about your existence, no contemparary resources state that you exist, no close personal friends ever authoritatively wrote about you and you didn’t write anything. The question then is did you still exist? You would have to say yes, because you do exist."

Then there would essentially be no reason to believe I existed just as there is no real reason to believe that biblical Jesus existed. You're saying that if there was nothing recorded about me and that I exist that it equates to Jesus existing? You can make the same argument for King Arthur, Big foot, Dragons, Fairies, etc. While it's true that lack of information on something doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it does mean that there's no reason to believe it does.

Let's talk about reality for a second. The government knows I exist so there'd be government documents on that such as birth certificates, school records, criminal record, some documents on government financial aid, scholarships, and awards, etc. Is there credible evidence from the government at the time that Jesus existed and performed miracles? Is there credible evidence that Dragons attacked any ancient civilizations? I've made comments on this site and others, written some stuff that got published in some school newspapers that are archived, etc. Did Jesus write anything himself that's been tracked down? Did King Arthur?

"The truth is that based on argument the fact that there are Biblical and external witnesses that Jesus existed"

Without external evidence, biblical witnesses would be about as credible as witnesses in greek myths who saw Odysseus in battle or soldiers in comic books who've seen Captain America fight Nazi's during WWII.

Credible external witnesses? There are modern day people that will attest to being abducted by aliens. Many of these stories are pretty similar and these people are all over the world. Does that make aliens as they describe them real?

"he died on a cross, and rose from the grave is further support, not necessary to his existence but supportive that he did.""

He's not the first to have supposedly done that. Most of that is highly suspected to be taken from Pagan Myths...As Church Father Justin Martyr once said, “When we say that Jesus Christ was produced without sexual union, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended to heaven, we propound nothing new or different from what you believe regarding those whom you call the sons of Jupiter.” The similarities with greek and hindu myths seem to suggest that such miracle claims are mythological in nature.

"Just like I exist in reality here and now even if no one ever attests to or writes about my existence."

Saying that YOU still would have existed even if nothing was ever recorded about you does NOT equate to Jesus being real despite there being no evidence for his existence. Just as it doesn't equate to King Arthur, Big Foot, Odysseus, and other mythological beings existing. They might have existed, but I've got no reason to believe that they did.

The big difference between the existence of normal human beings such as you and I, and an extraordinary being such as Jesus is that Jesus would have been a pretty big, influential, famous, and noticeable name. He and his miracles would have been noticed and recorded about by the government in some detail, and would have been known possibly as far as Rome - maybe even further...yet this is just not the case.

You are right in that certain groups have been favored throughout history as God's chosen people. This however was not my point if looking at the biblical text it is also seen that God is gracious to all in that he provides for peoples needs, whether a believer or unbeliever, There is a general grace that God gives to all humanity, The favoritism that you speak of is evident but it is not unavailable to all there are just conditions on it. Like a father loves and cares for a son no matter what, but if his son continually acts in disobedience without ever repenting he will not receive his Father's favor.

You all are beginning to mix your arguments up one says Jesus never existed the other says that he could have even without documentation. As far as the Roman empire not recording his life they would have no reason to, He was hung on a cross as a criminal, and accused of insurrection. They believed because of false teaching that he was going to lead people against the government. Why would you put the details of such a figure in your history? They were not concerned with Jesus until the end of his life

John 1:16
Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given.

Acts 15:11
No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.” (this is a specific grace but is available it wasn't just one group but it was through one person)

Romans 3:24
and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

2 Timothy 1:9
He has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time,

Titus 2:11
For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people

Jonah

4:2 I knew that you are a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity.

11 And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?”

"God is gracious to all in that he provides for peoples needs, whether a believer or unbeliever"

Killing 42 children because they called one of God's chosen people bald isn't really gracious...Nor is the idea of slavery, or genocide, etc. I mean the believers had it pretty good, but the unbelievers who were killed or made into slaves and concubines didn't.

"the favoritism that you speak of is evident but it is not unavailable to all there are just conditions on it."

If I'm not mistaken the only condition is to worship God and love him more than anything.

"Like a father loves and cares for a son no matter what, but if his son continually acts in disobedience without ever repenting he will not receive his Father’s favor."

Sounds like a rather horrific parody of fatherhood >_>. If you love me and obey me, then I will love you, but if you don't I will kill you and torture you forever. I'd think that seeing one's children grow into good, moral and happy people would be more important to a father, but the God from the bible seems much more like a Mob Boss who threatens people to bow down at his feet or have their legs broken...

"You all are beginning to mix your arguments up one says Jesus never existed the other says that he could have even without documentation."

We are different people who have different perspectives and thus different arguments and beliefs. Some argue that Jesus never existed, but I do not. I believe a historical Jesus might have existed, but I've got no reason to believe he did, and I have even less reason to believe that a biblical Jesus might have existed. It's rather closed-minded to believe that all atheists think and believe the same things...

"As far as the Roman empire not recording his life they would have no reason to"

Not for his supposed miracles such as walking on water, raising Lazareth from the dead, turning water into wine in front of a vas wedding crowd, curing the sick and blind, and resurrecting from the dead despite being crucified? Pretty sure someone in the government would have taken notice of all that and written it down somewhere.

"He was hung on a cross as a criminal, and accused of insurrection. They believed because of false teaching that he was going to lead people against the government. Why would you put the details of such a figure in your history?"

So you're arguing that because he was a criminal no one bothered to record details about him despite all the miracles...That there were no letters between officials or personal notes and journals by those who were astounded by his power or worried about the trouble they believed he was causing? Kinda sounds like a conspiracy theory...

"They were not concerned with Jesus until the end of his life"

I'm more inclined to believe that people weren't concerned with Jesus until his life-story was either embellished or made-up...

Also, you cant knock the cure for leprosy until you try it.

Here's a thought: you try it (or any lepers you know), & let us know if it works.

Leviticus 14:49-53

King James Version (KJV)

49And he shall take to cleanse the house two birds, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop:

50And he shall kill the one of the birds in an earthen vessel over running water:

51And he shall take the cedar wood, and the hyssop, and the scarlet, and the living bird, and dip them in the blood of the slain bird, and in the running water, and sprinkle the house seven times:

52And he shall cleanse the house with the blood of the bird, and with the running water, and with the living bird, and with the cedar wood, and with the hyssop, and with the scarlet:

53But he shall let go the living bird out of the city into the open fields, and make an atonement for the house: and it shall be clean.
Send us a postcard, wouldja? ;)

Skits quote: “If you look to Josephus or many authors of 1st-2nd century authors they attest to Jesus as a living being. Josephus isn’t even a Christian.”

You are correct about one thing Skits, Josephus is not a Christian but rather a Jewish writer and historian. But the so called attestations are bogus and forged by early Christian church leaders. Bishop Eusebius, the great Church propagandist and self-confessed liar-for-god, was the first to cite Josephus’ claim of Jesus in the year 340. Not a single writer BEFORE the 4th century makes a single reference to Josephus’ grand statement in any of their apologetics. Yet it was supposedly written in the 1st century. It would make sense that Christians of the day would have jumped all over this passage if it had existed in their time. The early Church Leader Origen, “spent half his life arguing against the pagan writer, and the Jesus nonbeliever Celsus during the 3rd century. Origen drew on all sorts of proofs and witnesses to his arguments in his fierce defense of Christianity.” He quotes from Josephus extensively. Yet even he makes no reference to this 'golden paragraph' from Josephus, which would have been the ultimate rebuttal. Then Eusebius apparently finds it almost 300 years later? Come on, if bible scholars cannot accept this, why should any of us?

Skits quote: “the Matthean and Lukan accounts are not contradictory if you understand the timing…”

Ohhhhh, there was special “timing” we all have not considered for the virgin birth and nativity story which will clear all this up. So, Mary and Joseph lived in their own house in Bethlehem and then fled to Egypt and onto Nazareth (no record of this town by the way in 1st century) after Herod sent out the army to find and kill babies under the age of 2; or was it that they lived in Nazareth and had to travel back to Bethlehem for some fictitious census and had to stay in a manger? And the wise men wer able to "follow" a star over such distance??? Try it some time skits and let us know how that works for you. I get so confused by the all the contradictions skits. The timing? Really? It is time to give it a rest.

Skits quote: “As far as the authorship of the New Testament; Paul was an apostle, so was Matthew, and Peter and John, Mark, Luke James, and Jude are all close associates of apostles who had direct contact with Jesus.”

Well thanks for the program listing of all the actors and their roles in this play skits. What would we have done if you did not clear that up for all of us? But reality check skits; which you cannot deny:
1.Fact: Jesus never wrote anything. We have no 1st hand evidence.
2.Fact: None, not one; of the apostles wrote any of the Gospels.All are forgeries. I do not consider Paul an apostle but even half od his letters are forgeries. So no 2nd hand evidence or accounts of Jesus.
3.Fact: Paul, NEVER met Jesus, never spoke with Jesus (do not give me that crap about his seizure/revelation on the road) and knows nothing about the man of Jesus. Consequently Paul hijacked the Christian religion and turned it into what Judaism wasn’t. Some might say, Christianity is truly a cult of Pauline theology.
4.Fact: There are no credible, nor believable non-biblical accounts of Jesus, the Apostles or Paul. They are like the shadowy figure on the grassy knoll. Only to be seen by those who want or need to see them.

Finally, the only thing you are left with for evidence of Jesus, is hearsay evidence which was shaped so long after the supposed “life” of Jesus that it destroys any standard of credibility for acceptance as truth. The only thing your NT supports is the logical and common sense conclusion that it is mythology.

Well, Allah can kiss my ass too. Your book is as much garbage as the Talmud, the bible, or any of that other crap.
Peanut butter and jelly be upon him.

PRTBBBUH: Pork Rinds and Tiny Bacon Bits Be Upon Him…

Mullah, thanks for the ammunition… I’m adding “Ridiculing Jesus” to a spreadsheet where I keep tabs on “Things Which Insult Islam”. I sandwiched “dissing Jesus” between “female nipple”, “The Three Little Pigs”,” “critical thinking” and “Jessica Simpson’s butt” because I loathe a religion that seeks to put an end to the sticky joys of topless sunbathing/swimming in Morocco’s beaches.

No one has a problem with loose bikini tops in southern Spain but as soon as you take that ferry and land in Morocco, you better duct tape your breasts and Scotch tape the glorious nipples or you get the religious treatment which is more of a treat for those dour little men hopping up and down as if the chigger bites of Islamic virtue weren’t enough: they chase you and your gal pals off the beach claiming “an insult to Islam” while we argue “a victory for all beach Barbie cupcake crusaders in the Islamic world.”

You want to dictate both “freedom from criticism” and “freedom burkas” in Spain’s public spaces. We are asking for the cessation of all Islamic aggression against our sunny-side up nipples in Morocco’s beaches. Fair enough? Besides, evenJesus’s mother unsnapped her bikini top and rewarded those of exemplary piety with a generous squirt of her breast milk. This qualifies busty Mary, Diana of Ephesus, as a member of the Bare Breasted Beach Barbies.

Bikini bottom’s line: When your religion claims jurisdiction over our experience and under the plastic hooks on our bikini tops or around our sunburned sacra, you insult us on a level that you can’t even begin to comprehend which is why we are compelled to insult your faith graphically and comprehensively every day, five times every day. Rascal Allah’s nipple torquing be praised!

It's good to have you back Obeah. I'd say Buckeye is pretty good, but wondering where Raymond went.
PB&JBUH. Hehehehe.

Damn- I don't post much, but dumbass theists bring me to it... You don't have to pay to be a member. May I ask why you would want to be a member within a group of atheists and anti-theists (myself the later)? Good idea- I don't go to your forums, and blogs and you stay off mine... be gone...

"The Christian worldview affirms that the universe is the handiwork of a designing agent."

So do the world views of various other religions...

"We live in a designer universe."

This is an assertion. Even if we were to assume this was true, how do you know it wasn't a deist God or one of the God's of the thousands of other religions out there that created the universe?

"the seeming flaws in design are due to the Fall, not to God’s nature....Moreover, the ontological argument rules out the idea that God is less than completely good or less than completely powerful."

Three points

(1) God is completely powerful, yet his design fell apart?

(2) This assumes that God is the Christian God that created an all perfect world, rather than a deist God or any other idea of God that created the world, "flaws" and all.

(3) the Ontological argument? The one that says...

1. God is the greatest imaginable being.
2. All else being equal, a being or entity that exists is greater than one that doesn't.
3. Therefore, God exists.

Even assuming this is true, this would still not prove it's the Christian God. It could be a deist God or any other God. Furthermore I can make Ontological arguments for nonsensical things. For example...

1.Shangri-La is the greatest place on earth.
2A place that exists is greater than one that doesn't.
3Therefore, Shangri-La exists.

1.Martians are the greatest alien beings in the universe.
2.Martians that exist are greater alien beings than ones that do not.
3.Therefore, martians exist.

"The ex nihilo cosmological argument also allows for a being who is omnipotent, since creating everything out of nothing indicates limitless power."

Three points

(1) We have no evidence that our universe originally came into being from absolutely nothing.

(2) Scripture – in Genesis, 2 Peter, and elsewhere – suggests creation from something (water, deep, chaos, etc.), not creation from absolutely nothing.

(3) This still doesn't point to the Christian God over a deist God or any of the other ideas of God out there...

All in all, even if I had been convinced to believe in a God because of your post, I'd have become a deist and not a Christian. Unfortunately, it'll take a little more than blind assertions and previously debunked arguments to convince most people...

The Creator brought everything into existence ex nihilo(out of nothing) and engineered the structure and function of the universe.

There is no such thing as nothing.

God has left his fingerprints in creation for us to discern.

Oh sure, it can't be that people see what they want to see? Because we know nobody ever does that.

Human beings are symbols of the divine, being made in God’s image and likeness.

If I were an immortal powerful being, I sure as hell wouldn't take a human form. It's horribly 'designed'.

God placed us in a world suited for us, ready for development and cultivation.

WOW - what a case of arrested development. The world wasn't made for us, it's just here.

We live in a designer universe.

Please demonstrate this by establishing a criterion of an UNDESIGNED universe.

it is not explicable by chance, by law, by a combination of chance and law, or by an impersonal God.

Wait - what law? So sorry, but that's a load of crap.

This Designer is thus singular, outside the universe, a personal agent and immensely powerful.

Yeah, Aquinas was an asshole when he posited this, & so he remains to this day.

Moreover, the ontological argument rules out the idea that God is less than completely good or less than completely powerful.

Anselm must've been smoking some potent pot that day - I've heard better cosmology from high school stoners.

The ex nihilo cosmological argument also allows for a being who is omnipotent, since creating everything out of nothing indicates limitless power.

There is no proof that this 'nothing' ever existed. So this too, is utter bullshit.

If these arguments stand, we should fall in humility before this being, seeking further knowledge of who this God is, what God might give and what God wants.

These arguments DON'T stand - they fall apart at the 1st application of actual logic. So we don't need to be crazy fairy beggars.

But there is more evidence yet at hand, this time coming from a realm that naturalists tell us has been utterly fumigated of any design or objective meaning – the world of biology.

What a load of crap.
I've yet to meet a christian, online OR in realtime, who applies anything evenly remotely resembling 'objective meaning'. Y'all always say "there's somebody up there", & then selectively cherry-pick what facts you like, & discard the rest that you don't.
That there is no evidence of 'divine intervention' in the centuries following your mythical jay-sus is ample proof nobody's up there. The Holocaust by itself should've prompted some sort of outrage from 'on high'.
That it had to be resolved by people, not your imaginary sky daddy, should be enough for anyone rational.