• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Jesus Myth Claims [W:335]

Nope. Prove (scientifically) your definitions are correct.

How do you like those apples? LOL! You want to live by the sword you go down by the sword (metaphorically speaking, of course).

What apples?
You got busted.
Now your think you can post nonsense and think I am going down?
By definition the claims of divinity/supernatural/magic by Jesus are myths.
You havent even tried to dispute that. Because the definitions prove I am right.
You cannot reverse the burden of proof no matter how much you want to.
 
What apples?
You got busted.
Now your think you can post nonsense and think I am going down?
By definition the claims of divinity/supernatural/magic by Jesus are myths.
You havent even tried to dispute that. Because the definitions prove I am right.
You cannot reverse the burden of proof no matter how much you want to.

While I agree that the many tales of miracles and supernatural happenings are myths, I also understand that definitions change over time. What we today, the rational folks, understand to be mythical occurrences were once upon a time, understood and accepted as historical statements. It is readily apparent that there are some who really and truly wish they had lived "once upon a time" as the modern world is way too complex for them to accept.
 
While I agree that the many tales of miracles and supernatural happenings are myths, I also understand that definitions change over time. What we today, the rational folks, understand to be mythical occurrences were once upon a time, understood and accepted as historical statements. It is readily apparent that there are some who really and truly wish they had lived "once upon a time" as the modern world is way too complex for them to accept.

Doesnt change the fact that claims of the sueprnatural remain by definition myths until proven otherwise.
 
Doesnt change the fact that claims of the sueprnatural remain by definition myths until proven otherwise.

whats wrong with setting your own rules for the conversation? there should be nothing wrong with asking for evidence, as long as hes not saying "because you can't disprove its existence, then its real"
 
whats wrong with setting your own rules for the conversation? there should be nothing wrong with asking for evidence, as long as hes not saying "because you can't disprove its existence, then its real"

There is no evidence for the existence of the magic Jesus.
 
whats wrong with setting your own rules for the conversation? there should be nothing wrong with asking for evidence, as long as hes not saying "because you can't disprove its existence, then its real"

Well aside from that being what he is trying to say say, there is the problem that he set up the thread with a built in fail. He didnt bother to actually look up the meaning of the word myth or he would have realized that it was up to him to prove any claims of supernatural/magic/divinity for them not to be myths.
 
There is no evidence for the existence of the magic Jesus.
I know that, thats not my point

Well aside from that being what he is trying to say, there is the problem that he set up the thread with a built in fail. He didnt bother to actually look up the meaning of the word myth or he would have realized that it was up to him to prove any claims of supernatural/magic/divinity for them not to be myths.
and that is apparent, somebody explained that part atleast 61 pages ago. If someone believes in santa claus, you can say hes just a myth. Then you can say the burden of proof is on them to prove santa claus is real.

But theres nothing wrong with explaining that weve been to north pole and there is no santa's village, then we can explain where story came from and how its blended with different myths and legends over time. Then exlpain why people lied to him from birth and continue to lie, even to this day, about the existence of a santa claus. They may say they have seen santa (at the mall or something) but you can explain how that was not him, that there's a scientific explanation, and it was just a man in a costume, a vivid dream, or possibly an outright hallucination.

But it wasn't santa
 
Back
Top Bottom