Friday, December 09, 2005

Christmas should be called Buy-Mas

Christmas is rolling around, and with it come the commercials we see on TV and the ads we see in newspapers.

Christmas has experienced a sort of evolution over time. It started out as a purely religious holiday, celebrating the birthday of Jesus Christ. Then, Christians all over started adding things to the celebration. For example:
  • The Christmas tree, which Started out as just a custom, but went on to be a way for stores to make money selling "super-high-efficiency Lightomatic SuperGloober christmas lights."
  • Mistletoe, which I really can't argue against :)
  • Candy canes... just plain wtf
  • Santa Claus, who started out as a character in christmas stories. It's evolved into a way to get kids to be nice to each other, and also into something we atheists like to use as a metaphor for countless things.
  • Gift giving, which started out as a nice way to celebrate the holiday for families. Now it's a nice way to get people to buy tons of expensive consumer electronics.
Christmas just annoys me in that it's linked to religion but also used by companies to suck money from you into their pocket. I kinda like the way atheism doesn't force you to buy things...


At 12/10/2005 7:12 AM, Blogger Enil Edam said...

It's not that atheism doesn't force you to buy things. The only reason atheists don't buy things is because many of us are also a-religion and therefore would despise the commericallism tied to Christmas.

I was talking with a few of my friends yesterday who celebrate Christmas even though they aren't Christian. It has become a holiday just for the sake of being a holiday. Stupid commercial empires.

At 12/10/2005 10:39 AM, Blogger Aeger said...

You stoll my post idea! Oh well, I guess I'll have to reword it and post it later.

I agree, that whole commercial takeover has especially hit me at my fathers house, where we sit down and go through about 100 presents (I kid you not) until the wee hours of the morning. Disgusting.

At 12/10/2005 6:41 PM, Blogger Francois Tremblay said...

"It started out as a purely religious holiday, celebrating the birthday of Jesus Christ."

No it didn't. It was NEVER about "Jesus Christ". And all the traditions you listed are PAGAN.

I got a hint for you : READ SOME HISTORY before bad-mouthing our atheist holiday.

At 12/10/2005 9:11 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

yeah, i agree with francois, you should really read up on your history before you go off and bad mouth christians, it was the catholics who started the whole christmas trees, santa clauses and all that other watered down stuff people use to try to take the focus off of the true meaning of CHRISTMAS. oh, by the way, im new to this whole athism idea and a christian asked me a question that i hope you can answer for me. so i have this question in which if you do not answer i pressume you do not know.
christians were and are persecuted for believing in Christ Jesus, christianity is the main persecuted religion, why?
why, for centuries, have nations and countries and even today been so threatened of Jesus Christ if they do not even believe he is real?

At 12/10/2005 9:25 PM, Blogger seth said...


More Christian delusions. First off, I want to see the statistics that say Christianity is the "main persecuted" religion. Please explain how Non-Christians have committed atrocities worse than the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, and the Holocaust. Don't be so quick to tell others to do research if you have not done your own.

Nor are Christians being persecuted in America. Public exposition of religion, any religion, has been discouraged only because the law forbids it.

I will conclude with a tidbit spoken by Jon Stewart:

"Yes, the long war on Christianity. I pray that one day we may live in an America where Christians can worship freely! In broad daylight! Openly wearing the symbols of their religion.... perhaps around their necks? And maybe - dare I dream it? - maybe one day there can be an openly Christian President. Or, perhaps, 43 of them. Consecutively."

At 12/11/2005 8:42 AM, Anonymous Sam said...


Christianity has about as much to do with the holocaust as it did with the forced suicides commited by Jim Jones in Guyana. Hitler and Jim Jones were both completely insane. As far as the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition go.....Seth, grow up! Get your head out of the middle ages. Christians today had as much to do with those events as Americans today had to do with slavery.

Yes, Christians are still persecuted, in this country and elsewhere......go to the webpage "Voice of the Martyrs".

The reason people are so offended by the name of Jesus is because Jesus was very bold in saying that salvation could be had by no other name.

Something you might find interesting: All 12 disciples died horrible deaths for refusing to deny the gospel. Some were crucified like Jesus. I can already hear Seth saying, "So? What does that prove? The terrorists died or what they believe. A lot of people die or their beliefs." The difference is....The terrorists died because they believed what someone else had told them and that someone else (Muhammed) got his information from a vision. The disciples died because of what they experienced personally. They were attesting to what they had seen with their own eyes, touched with their own hands, heard with their own eyes. They KNEW whether or not what they were dying for was a lie. Find me 12 men who will give their entire lives, suffer imprisonment and beatings and then die excruciating deaths all to defend the same "lie", a lie that they all would've known was a lie, yet no a one of them backed down.

At 12/11/2005 8:42 AM, Anonymous El Penguino said...

i know an atheist...who celebrates christmas... and hanukah...WTFH???

and anonymous, i was once catholic so dont flip out on me for this, but christmas really is becoming a big commercialized thing, and actually the christians took the traditions of wreaths and lights and such from the pagan religions of early europe, so, no, they did not start them.
plus, think about it, islam and christianity are the two main religions of the world, if your thinking about all the hatred against them in the middle east then think about it, we're trying too hard to force our ways upon them, plus we had a history of violence with them that still isnt stopping, even on our part,

remember thats from a fellow christian

At 12/11/2005 8:48 AM, Anonymous Sam said...

el penguino,

Yes, a history of violence that goes all the way back to the Old Testament. What is going on in the Middle East can be traced all the way back to the days of Jacob and Essau.

At 12/11/2005 11:20 AM, Blogger seth said...

Sam, I assure you, Jesus, Jacob, and Esau never existed. Do not devote your entire life to a very old and inaccurate book.

And I am unclear as to how Christianity is the most persecuted religion in existence. You people have the majority. That web page has no statistics; it's as full of propaganda as Fox News.

At 12/11/2005 12:30 PM, Blogger Advocate of the Browns said...

Hitler wasn't insane. He was an etremist who convinced people that he was right and got hold of enough power to put his ideas into motion. Most of hitler's ideals stemmed from his long stay in prison.

There is no evidence that Jesus didnt exist. I think he did but obviously wasnt God's son. His mother was an adultress and claimed that she was a virgin to let her marriage be legal.

Islam is easily more persecuted. You would have to be an idiot not to see that. It may not be the most persecuted, but christians aren't bombed for an invalid grudge and greed.

Christmas has become buy-mas. But thats because americans are greedy. In most other countries it's highly religious.

Santa claus was a translation from Saint Nicholas who was the Patron saint of Christ's brithday. Notice however, that Jesus was a pisces and his birthday is celebrated on the same day as Horus's.

At 12/11/2005 12:35 PM, Blogger seth said...

Rohan, there's no evidence that the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist either. However, there is no credible objective evidence that Jesus exist.

And as a response to your crazy life-story of Mary, the Hebrew word for "virgin" also means "unmarried."

At 12/11/2005 3:26 PM, Anonymous Sam said...

Wow. Assurance from Seth. I don't know what to say. This changes everything.

Very few people question the existence of Jesus. The existence of Jesus is recorded by the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus(Antiquities, XVIII, III). Cornelius Tacitus, a Roman historian, writing about the reign of Nero, refers to Jesus Christ and the existence of Christians in Rome (Annals, XV,44).
Tacitus, elsewhere in his Histories, refers to Christianity when alluding to the burning of the temple of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. This has been preserved by Sulpicius Severus. There are other references to Jesus and His followers, such as the Roman historian, Seutonius in Life of Claudius and Lives of Caesars. This testimony, both Christian and non-Christian, is more than sufficient to lay to rest any idea that Jesus never existed. It is absurd to hold such a view, which is why most don't. The question isn't "Did He exist." The question is "Who do you say He was/is?"

Some of you had better start carrying an extra pair of underwear around in your pocket, just in case it's in our lifetime that Jesus reveals Himself that second time. First you're gonna say it and then you're gonna do it all over yourselves.

At 12/11/2005 5:50 PM, Blogger seth said...

Yet again, you assume I do not know what I am talking about. Oh well:

A) Tacitus merely says that Christians existed in Nero's Rome, and continues to describe Christian beliefs; namely, the uncontroversial parts. such as a cult leader being executed.
B) Seutonius wrote of a man named Chrestus, and implied that this person lived in 54 BCE. Sure, it could be a misspelling, but Chrestus was a common name in Rome.
C) The credibility of Josephus' passages (well, his one paragraph) about Jesus is doubted by some scholars, due to:
1. The presence of hapax legomena (a word that only appears once in a body of text), which is often a evidence of forgery.
2. What Josephus wrote is from the perspective of a Christian; Josephus was a Jew.
3. The paragraph occurs as a non-sequitur between two others, which are about a completely different topic.

I would go on to describe sources that you did not mention, but I really should be doing homework. Ciao.

At 12/11/2005 6:03 PM, Anonymous Sam said...

Don't forget to stick those extra Fruit of the Looms in your pocket. You're still gonna need them.

At 12/11/2005 6:08 PM, Blogger seth said...

Heh, nice retort. You will probably need some for when Zeus comes back.

At 12/12/2005 7:06 AM, Blogger Advocate of the Browns said...

And i thought my arguments were childish...

Seth Jesus may have existed. He may have been a decent person. Maybe even a great person. But there is no evidence on that so i think argument is pointless on it.

And sam. Please. The rapture isnt going to happen even if Jesus did exist. And seriously, if this is your idea of promoting christianity. I'm surpised your religion lasted this long.

At 12/12/2005 3:07 PM, Blogger seth said...

Yes, Rohan, I acknowledge that Jesus might have existed. Just like how Hercules might have existed.

At 12/12/2005 4:11 PM, Blogger Enil Edam said...

Don't be snide, there is evidence that Jesus existed. Rohan's right in saying that whether he did or not is irrelevant.

None of us can fully prove or disprove ourselves.

And Hercules may have existed, you have just as little evidence for his existence as you do to prove or disprove Jesus' existence

At 12/12/2005 4:14 PM, Blogger seth said...

Maddy, I have actually done my research. If you do yours, you will realize that it is as sparse as the evidence for Hercules.

I acknowledge that Jesus may have existed. I also acknowledge that there may be a teapot orbiting Jupiter. The burden of proof, however, is on the party making the positive claim; it is not my job to prove that Jesus did not exist, but rather it is Sam's job to prove that Jesus did.

At 12/12/2005 4:39 PM, Blogger Advocate of the Browns said...

Heracles might have existed. He may have thought that since he was really strong, he was the son of god. Alexander thought that because of his unique tactical skill, he was the son of god. There are lots of people who throughout history thought themselves to be or were considered to be the son of god. Like Ghandi. Many Hindus believe he was one of the unforseen Avatars.

At 12/12/2005 4:50 PM, Anonymous Sam said...

Rohan, It's not possible for Jesus to have simply been a decent person or a great person. He claimed to be the Son of God, God incarnate. He said that the only way to God was through Him. Either He was lying (a decent person wouldn't lie about that), knew He was lying and died for the lie (just like all 12 disciples who died because they refused to deny what they saw with their own eyes and touched with their own hands) or he was completely insane, yet still talented enough to trick a multitude of followers or.............He was the Son of God. It's not possible to believe that he could've simlpy been a decent person, considering that he claimed to be God. Have you ever thought about the fact that the Jews do not deny the existence of Jesus as a historical character. They know He existed, they just don't believe He was the Messiah. Muslims do not deny His existence. They know He existed. They consider him a "great teacher" or "prophet", but we've already said why that can't be. Hindus don't deny his existence. They know He existed, but again, consider Him just a great prophet. They all acknowledge Him, but He doesn't acknowledge any of them, but claims to be the ONLY way to God. Straight to the point with no apologies for it.

Maddy, do you still assist with some teaching at the synagogue?...........assuming that you're the Maddy that I think you are.

At 12/12/2005 4:53 PM, Blogger seth said...

But Rohan, the only reason we're mentioning Heracles is because there are stories about him. We might as well speculate whether Alice was on a drug trip when she went to Wonderland.

And Sam, the only reason you think Jesus existed is because some old book says he did.

Just because the Romans and Greeks lived thousands of years ago doesn't mean they were incapable of writing fiction.

At 12/12/2005 5:45 PM, Anonymous Sam said...

I won't argue with that. The Bible plays a very big part in why I believe. I want you to imagine something. Imagine taking 10 people from your local area who have similar educational backgrounds, all speak the same language and all are from pretty much the same culture. Separate them and ask them to write their opinion on only one controversial subject, such as the meaning of life. If you compared the conclusions of these 10 writers would they all agree with each other? No, they wouldn't. The Bible does not consist of merely 10 authors, but 40. It was not written in one generation, but over a period of 1,500 years; not by authors with the same education, culture or language, but with vastly different educations, many different cultures, from 3 continents and 3 different languages and not just one subject, but hundreds. And yet there is complete harmony, which cannot be explained by coincidence. The unity of the Scriptures is only one reason among many which supports the Bible's claim to be the divine Word of God.

At 12/12/2005 6:06 PM, Blogger seth said...

You forget that the stories were passed down orally for thousands of years before they were recorded. A lot can be changed when stories are passed down orally…especially in such a large time period.

At 12/12/2005 7:50 PM, Anonymous Sam said...

No, they weren't. The New Testament was written from about A.D.50 to A.D.90. It was originally composed in Greek. There are approximately 5,500 copies in existence that contain all or part of the New Testament. The earliest fragment dates about A.D. 120, with about 50 other fragments dating within 150-200 years from the time of composition. This may seem like a long span of time, but it's not when compared to most ancient works. The earliest copy of Caesar's "The Gallic Wars" dates 1,000 years after it was written and the first complete copy of Homer's "Odyssey" dates 2,200 years after it was written. The 5,500 copies are by far the most we have of any ancient work. Many ancient writings have been transmitted to us by only a handful of manuscripts (Catallus - 3 copies, the earliest one is 1,600 years after original composition; Herodotus - 8 copies and 1,300 years).

Don't even get me started on the Dead Sea Scrolls.

"You forget that the stories were passed down orally for thousands of years before they were recorded. A lot can be changed when stories are passed down orally…especially in such a large time period." - You just made my next point for me. If the "stories" of the Bible were passed down orally for thousands of years before they were recorded (which they weren't), then the unity and harmony of the scriptures would be that much more miraculous. For "word of mouth" to be passed down for that many generations and the culmination of that word of mouth be the Bible, it would most definitely require nothing less than the divine sovereignty of God.

"Scripture is like a lion. Whoever heard of defending a lion? Just turn it loose; it will defend itself."
- Charles H. Spurgeon

At 12/12/2005 7:57 PM, Blogger seth said...

Durh, how do you know they weren't passed down orally?

And of course, because you can't come up with a better explanation for 'unity' in these records, a god must be responsible.

At 12/12/2005 8:30 PM, Anonymous Sam said...

Seth, this has absolutely nothing to do with you being "too smart" to believe. If God Himself had spoken to you through the burning bush you would've asked, "Yeah, but how do I really know it's You and not Hercules or Alice in Wonderland?" and then you would've pissed the fire out to make sure no one else believed. You don't want to believe and won't. Am I really the only one here who can see that? Seth, do you believe that Christopher Columbus ever existed? How do you know for sure? Have you ever met him? Do you personally know anyone who did? Two scriptures come to mind right now. (1) "Do not give to dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet and then turn and tear you to pieces." - Matthew 7:6 (2) "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: 'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.' Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did no know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe." - 1 Corinthians 1:18-21.

At 12/12/2005 8:34 PM, Blogger seth said...

"You don't want to believe and won't."

…Just like how you don't believe in Zeus, right?

At 12/13/2005 12:57 PM, Blogger Beowulf said...

Seth, I think you’re trying way too hard. Do you treat all historical documents this way? If so, we cannot know or trust anything in history.

Secondly, I have a question: If the “church” created Jesus, who created the church? I can understand questioning whether or not Jesus was who he claimed he was. Everyone should question this—it only natural (and intelligent). However, questioning whether or not this man ever existed is not only counter productive, it’s a-historical. Moreover, talking about teapots and Zeus is a red herring, there is no parallel in the historicity of these subjects—you should come up with better arguments.

At 12/14/2005 12:23 PM, Blogger Delta said...

Brain fry, are you suggesting that a church cannot be created without its central figure being real? If you believe this, you should check out scientology. They definitely have a church and followers, so Xenu must exist as well.

At 12/14/2005 1:40 PM, Blogger Beowulf said...

Scientology was started by sci-fi writer L. Ron Hubbard (who was a real person), and evolved from his initial concept of Dianetics.

At 12/14/2005 3:08 PM, Blogger seth said...

…Which proves that a simple fictional book can cause the creation of a cult.

At 12/14/2005 3:48 PM, Blogger Beowulf said...

Seth, you might be right, but this is a more productive objection. BTW, Hubbard’s Dianetics were non-fictional writings.

At 12/14/2005 9:45 PM, Blogger TheGreyRaven said...

So there may not be 'reasonable' (to you) proof of Jesus' existence. They have a word for believing when there is doubt... Faith! It's the foundation of most, if not all, religions. When presented with ideas, people have different opinions in response.

In addition, I agree with brainfry in that many historical documents are questionable, not just the bible, but we teach them in schools anyway because we accept them as fact.

At 12/15/2005 5:35 PM, Blogger smiterbob said...

Anyway, this is slightly off topic but i felt a need to share this..

The idea of having a "holiday season" itself is actually more stupid than opening. Hanukah is the least important Jewish holiday that's not even in the old testamond, actually, and as my hebrew school teacher claims (and I quote), "Kwanza was created so there would be an additional holiday for African Americans."

Again, sorry about digressing, but i felt that this was relevant.

At 12/20/2005 4:35 PM, Anonymous El Penguino said...

well jesus might've existed, he just probably wasnt god and was only a prophet or something, the point is that he was just human

At 12/20/2005 4:51 PM, Blogger seth said...

Like I said, Hercules "might've existed." Anyone might've existed. However, there's no empirical evidence for either, and so who Jesus was is not a wothwhile or legit debate.

At 12/20/2005 5:32 PM, Anonymous Sam said...

Enough with the "Jesus could've been a prophet" nonsense. He claimed to be the Son of God. He either A)was lying and knew He was lying (which takes away your "prophet" theory) B)was not the Son of God, but thought He was, which would make Him insane (which takes away your "prophet" theory) or C) was exactly who He claimed to be (which takes away your "prophet" theory).

Seth, do you believe that Aristotle, Beethoven, Daniel Boone, Julius Caesar, Christopher Columbus, Erasmus, Galileo, Nero, Marco Polo and Socrates existed? I would be interested in knowing why or why not.

At 12/20/2005 5:46 PM, Blogger seth said...

Ah, we have primary sources and eyewitness accounts of those people. We have books written by them as well.

Unlike Jesus, someone like Caesar is essential to world history. Somebody, at some point, waged a bunch of wars that changed the political and cultural landscape of Europe.

A single person is not necessary to the creation of a religion. Harry Potter does not need to be a real person in order for somebody to start a religion worshipping him. The stories are necessary, however.

I eagerly await your next piece of circular logic.

At 12/20/2005 6:52 PM, Anonymous Sam said...

"Ah, we have primary sources and eyewitness accounts of those people. We have books written by them as well." What are the primary sources? Who are the eyewitness'? How do you know that they wrote these books that you are referring to?

"Unlike Jesus, someone like Caesar is essential to world history. Somebody, at some point, waged a bunch of wars that changed the political and cultural landscape of Europe." Yeah, but how do you know it was Caesar, assuming that he even existed? It could've been Hercules for all you know. If Jesus is so nonessential to world history, why do you think so many people are so offended by the mere mention of His name?

"A single person is not necessary to the creation of a religion. Harry Potter does not need to be a real person in order for somebody to start a religion worshipping him. The stories are necessary, however." A single orange is not necessary to the creation of an apple tree. The price of eggs in China do not have to be the same as the price of eggs in Zimbabwe so long as both eggs were shot out of a chicken's butt..........I couldn't find the point in your last paragraph either.

The ball's in your court.

At 12/20/2005 7:12 PM, Blogger Advocate of the Browns said...

Sam. Seriously you are making yourself seem more and more stupid. Honestly both of you should stop bickering so much.

Seth is right Sam. My sister believes harry potter exists because of the books. She, like most theists, belives in a fictional character based on a book that has no basis in fact. It just helps people live their lives. And dont start any bull that thats not what HP is about. Read between the lines of the books.

Seth is also right on Napolean aristotle Caesar and the other names he listed. We know they existed because they were written about. Depicted. wrote books. formed governments. Killed people. And carved their names in our halls of greatness. We know these people existed because there must have been someone to change the world they did. At least Alexander The Great left his mark well...

At 12/20/2005 8:03 PM, Anonymous Sam said...

"My sister believes harry potter exists because of the books. She, like most theists, belives in a fictional character based on a book that has no basis in fact." How old is your sister? Does she pray to Harry Potter? Does she worship Harry Potter? J.K. Rowling would tell you herself how absurd that statement is.

"Seth is also right on Napolean aristotle Caesar and the other names he listed. We know they existed because they were written about. Depicted. wrote books. formed governments. Killed people. And carved their names in our halls of greatness." Jesus was written about. Jesus was depicted. What books? How do you know they wrote them? Anyone could've written them.......Alice in Wonderland, for instance. How do you know they formed governments? Those governments could've been formed by anything.....a big bang perhaps? Who did they kill? How do you know they killed them? Do you even have any empirical evidence that the people they supposedly killed ever existed? Where are these "halls of greatness located" and do they offer group rates on summer tours?

"We know these people existed because there must have been someone to change the world they did." Why do you believe there must have been someone to change the world, considering that you don't believe there had to be someone to create it? "there must have been someone" is not a very sound argument, coming from an atheist.

At 12/20/2005 8:16 PM, Blogger seth said...

RE, primary sources---
I obviously don't know that Marco Polo wrote his book or that Caesar wrote his. However, I'm quite certain there are ancient ruins of some form in the general vicinity of Rome, Italy. Not only that, but there are busts of Caesar apparently crafted during his life. Sure, it might be someone else, but it's still more evidence than there is for Jesus.

People are offended by Jesus's name because they imagine him to be a real person with some sort of significance.

The last paragraph is some sort of an analogy about the Bible.

"Does she pray to Harry Potter? Does she worship Harry Potter?"
…are you saying that because people worship Jesus, he must be a real person?

As for evidence of Jesus--once again, the depictions you mentioned are quite nonexistent. That is, there is no substantial, objective historical evidence that he existed, and certainly none written during his lifetime. Even Josephus was born several years after Jesus's alleged death, and his writings are doubted by scholars anyways.

At 12/20/2005 9:17 PM, Anonymous Sam said...

"I'm QUITE CERTAIN there are ancient ruins of SOME FORM in the GENERAL VICINITY of Rome...." doesn't cut it......... "I acknowledge that Jesus may have existed. I also acknowledge that there may be a teapot orbiting Jupiter. The burden of proof, however, is on the party making the positive claim; it is not my job to prove that Jesus did not exist, but rather it is Sam's job to prove that Jesus did." Sound familiar? You have yet to prove that any of these people ever existed, but you say that they did. The evidence that you are using to support the existence of these people is the EXACT same evidence that you say isn't strong enough to support the existence of Jesus.

"People are offended by Jesus's name because they imagine him to be a real person with some sort of significance." What is offensive about being a real person with some sort of significance?

Of course I'm not saying that the fact that people worship Him makes Him a real person. He was Who He is long before creation. I'm trying to get a better understanding of his sister's relationship with Harry Potter.

The evidence for the existence of Jesus is just as rock solid as any evidence you've given for the existence of Aristotle, Beethoven, Daniel Boone, Julius Caesar, Christopher Columbus, Erasmus, Galileo, Nero, Marco Polo or Socrates. Don't expect people to take you seriously if you can't stand up to the same scrutiny you expect of others.

At 12/20/2005 9:25 PM, Blogger seth said...

Ah, my bad. I'm just trying to say that there's a great deal more evidence that Julius Caesar or Leonardo Da Vinci existed than there is for Jesus.

At 12/20/2005 9:55 PM, Anonymous Sam said...

If there is a great deal more evidence, then what is it? If you hold everyone up to the same scrutiny that you've been holding Jesus up to, I don't see how it's possible for you to believe in the existence of anyone born before 1800, yet you don't doubt the existence of any of these people. Your disbelief is hardly objective.

At 12/21/2005 5:08 PM, Blogger seth said...

Sure it is. I trust objective eyewitness accounts written during a subject's lifetime more than blatantly-religious tales produced after a subject's alleged death.

At 12/21/2005 5:46 PM, Blogger Advocate of the Browns said...

Stop bickering you imbeciles. Sam Jesus may have existed. He may not have. You might exist. You might not. Seth might exist. He might not. I might exist. i might not. Does it really matter? No. It doesnt. And yes to answer your question. My sister considers harry potter to be godly. Which scares me...

Anyway. This argument is completely pointless. Its going nowhere. All you are doing is pointing out the infinite flaws in the others argument. So please just shut up.

At 12/22/2005 2:55 AM, Blogger TheGreyRaven said...

Does everyone have to argue about something...

The fact of the matter is that the only way to truly prove to oneself that someone or something existed is to experience it firsthand. We accept some writings and accounts as fact in establishing the identity of historical figures; but, to some degree, these accounts require a bit of faith; we believe in them though they may be inaccurate. Though the study of history may seem delved in fact, it in fact requires a lot of faith in things we cannot prove. We establish one item as fact, and it is used to prove another, and they prove another event, and then they prove one false, and it goes on and on; it stacks up is a sequence we call History.

The reason that the process for proving Jesus existed and did what people claim he did is because some people doubt the extraordinary things they claim.

So it comes down to this... It’s a matter of choice. You can choose to have faith. Will it hurt anyone? No. You might be a better person because of it, something our world desperately needs. And if you choose not to? No harm done. It is something that should not cause wars, violence, hatred, and arguments on blogger comments. But it does. Help stop the ignorance. Don't be ignorant.

At 12/22/2005 3:04 AM, Blogger TheGreyRaven said...

And one more thing. Advocate of the Browns, blogs are a public forum and an expression of free speech. Even if an argument may seem petty to you, if they want to argue it out then they can. Don't tell people to shut up. Its better to have someone say something wrong and have it corrected than to go on erring. Criticize by creation - not by finding fault. To quote Cicero:

"If we are not ashamed to think it, we should not be ashamed to say it."

"Hatreds not vowed and concealed are to be feared more than those openly declared."

At 12/28/2005 5:19 PM, Blogger breakerslion said...


Give it up, you putz. You want evidence for the existence of Julius Caesar? Go look it up yourself. It's plentiful, and comes from many sources, including his own hand. In other words, it is collaborated by many of his own contemporaries, unlike Ye-shua of Nazareth-even-though-he-was-allegedly-born-in-Bethlehem. Your arguments are puerile, and distill down to "I know you are but what am I?"

Your stories are consistent because the best lies always are. If they weren't consistent, the priesthood would edit them until they were. They would not serve the purposes of the control-freak power elite otherwise.

If Ye-Shua existed at all, he was exactly what he appeared to be, a human being. All the fantastical claims made of him can be explained with mundane, natural causes and things known to exist in the physical world. The legend grew with the telling. How do I know? Because legends always grow with the telling. Davey Crockett - killed a bear when he was 3. He must be a god! George Washington and the Cherry Tree. Paul Bunyan. It is impossible to believe that distortions did not creep into whatever messianic cult's history that made Ye-Shua their central figure. Why? Because the whole "Three Kings (promoted from Wise Men for service above and beyond the call of duty) was a lift from a pre-existing religion! All of it was pasted together. The ironic thing is, it might have started out as the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" of the day, as a protest against the Emperors' claiming to be divine.

The more we find out about human history, the more the cobbled-together nature of "Christianity" comes to light. The Internet is bringing all of the little pieces together again from the small places in which they have been kept alive. Kept alive in spite of all the hoarding and burning done by the early monasteries.

If you need further proof of the Borg-like absorption of competing religions by Christianity, then look for the roots of the Catholic "statue worship" and the pantheon of Saints in the Roman Pantheon and both Pagan and Egyptian religious practices. One might not be able to disprove religious claims logically (to your satisfaction) but forensically, your claims stink like a month-old corpse. You tell your story by rote. It is make-believe (literally) for grownups. The holes are showing in your rotten and blood-soaked scriptures, and only the blind can ignore them. Let go. Be free.

At 5/28/2007 7:19 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

God bless you all!! My prayer is that the One and Only Jesus Christ will allow each and every one of you to see the light before it is too late. Christmas IS to celebrate the birth of our Lord and Savior. Satan's largest accomplishment is for mankind to cease to believe in his (Satan's) existence. Please do not allow him to destroy your chances for eternal life!


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 License.