Quantcast

Why is it so hard to be a Christian?

deathbyluxury 2009/09/15 18:48:18
I'm coming from 24 years of faith, and I had full conviction. I loved Jesus, I felt what I thought was the Holy Spirit, as well as spiritual warfare. One tragic event was the tipping point in my deconversion from the faith, but maybe one of the other things that sparked my apostasy was how other Christians acted. It seems that modern Christianity is more about passing judgment and establishing superiority over nonbelievers, than it is about the things Christ actually taught. And I feel like I'm seeing this even more as an "outsider".

It actually makes me sad, to see these things happen in other people. It makes me angry at the faith itself, so I have a tendency to lash out at people. Although I'm much happier as a humanist, I still want to be shown that the faith I once had wasn't all bad.

Don't get me wrong. This isn't me passing judgment on Christians. I had a hard time following the path of Christ just as many do.

But why is it so hard to do?
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • Riana Haimona 2013/01/18 06:55:28
    Riana Haimona
    +6
    It is hard to be a christian, as long as SATAN is out to ROB, KILL & DESTROY, we will have hinderances in our lives. He whispers in our ears and tells us all rubbish things, that are so negative, it is up to us to use our AUTHORITY over SATANS DEADLY WORKS.. DEMONS FLEE AT THE NAME OF JESUS.. Jesus is the only way, the truth and the life, if we choose a life of sin, so be it, but remember, JUDGEMENT DAY will come, and there will be GNASHING of teeth.. SO if i were everyone, i would FEAR GOD.. Have a relationship with him, like you would your family, all you do is talk, read a bit of scripture each day, ask for forgiveness all day every day, praise his name, because he does deserve it after all, he loves us that much, he gave his only son ( JESUS CHRIST) to die on the cross for our SINS.. Isn't that amazing. And the reason why there are born again christians who aren't what they're suppose to be, is because they're not SET FREE.. When we are sinners, we are POSESSED BY DEMONS, but thats another topic that needs to be explained in a more in depth way...., but when we are BORN AGAIN, DEMONS attack us from around and try to hinder our walk. And some christians allow that to happen because sometimes they allow sin to stay in their lives in other words, to be blunt, they LOVE that de...






    It is hard to be a christian, as long as SATAN is out to ROB, KILL & DESTROY, we will have hinderances in our lives. He whispers in our ears and tells us all rubbish things, that are so negative, it is up to us to use our AUTHORITY over SATANS DEADLY WORKS.. DEMONS FLEE AT THE NAME OF JESUS.. Jesus is the only way, the truth and the life, if we choose a life of sin, so be it, but remember, JUDGEMENT DAY will come, and there will be GNASHING of teeth.. SO if i were everyone, i would FEAR GOD.. Have a relationship with him, like you would your family, all you do is talk, read a bit of scripture each day, ask for forgiveness all day every day, praise his name, because he does deserve it after all, he loves us that much, he gave his only son ( JESUS CHRIST) to die on the cross for our SINS.. Isn't that amazing. And the reason why there are born again christians who aren't what they're suppose to be, is because they're not SET FREE.. When we are sinners, we are POSESSED BY DEMONS, but thats another topic that needs to be explained in a more in depth way...., but when we are BORN AGAIN, DEMONS attack us from around and try to hinder our walk. And some christians allow that to happen because sometimes they allow sin to stay in their lives in other words, to be blunt, they LOVE that demon. If it isn't dealt with, we will BACKSLIDE, and that is a fact..
    When born again christians are being attacked this way, SATAN the DEVIL hates it, and tries every way to discourage us born again chrisitans, especially when you are walking right with god... Without god we are nothing..
    Father god i come before you in the name of jesus christ,
    Lord, i pray for each and every person on this page who has written, that you will touch their hearts, and know that they need more understanding, i pray for understanding, and come against any spirit of confusion in the name of Jesus christ.
    Father, you love these people, if only they knew how much, lord, bless them all mightily. and have your way with them lord jesus..
    In jesus, precious holy name i pray..
    Amen..
    God bless you all....
    (more)

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Riana Haimona 2013/01/18 06:55:28
    Riana Haimona
    +6
    It is hard to be a christian, as long as SATAN is out to ROB, KILL & DESTROY, we will have hinderances in our lives. He whispers in our ears and tells us all rubbish things, that are so negative, it is up to us to use our AUTHORITY over SATANS DEADLY WORKS.. DEMONS FLEE AT THE NAME OF JESUS.. Jesus is the only way, the truth and the life, if we choose a life of sin, so be it, but remember, JUDGEMENT DAY will come, and there will be GNASHING of teeth.. SO if i were everyone, i would FEAR GOD.. Have a relationship with him, like you would your family, all you do is talk, read a bit of scripture each day, ask for forgiveness all day every day, praise his name, because he does deserve it after all, he loves us that much, he gave his only son ( JESUS CHRIST) to die on the cross for our SINS.. Isn't that amazing. And the reason why there are born again christians who aren't what they're suppose to be, is because they're not SET FREE.. When we are sinners, we are POSESSED BY DEMONS, but thats another topic that needs to be explained in a more in depth way...., but when we are BORN AGAIN, DEMONS attack us from around and try to hinder our walk. And some christians allow that to happen because sometimes they allow sin to stay in their lives in other words, to be blunt, they LOVE that de...






    It is hard to be a christian, as long as SATAN is out to ROB, KILL & DESTROY, we will have hinderances in our lives. He whispers in our ears and tells us all rubbish things, that are so negative, it is up to us to use our AUTHORITY over SATANS DEADLY WORKS.. DEMONS FLEE AT THE NAME OF JESUS.. Jesus is the only way, the truth and the life, if we choose a life of sin, so be it, but remember, JUDGEMENT DAY will come, and there will be GNASHING of teeth.. SO if i were everyone, i would FEAR GOD.. Have a relationship with him, like you would your family, all you do is talk, read a bit of scripture each day, ask for forgiveness all day every day, praise his name, because he does deserve it after all, he loves us that much, he gave his only son ( JESUS CHRIST) to die on the cross for our SINS.. Isn't that amazing. And the reason why there are born again christians who aren't what they're suppose to be, is because they're not SET FREE.. When we are sinners, we are POSESSED BY DEMONS, but thats another topic that needs to be explained in a more in depth way...., but when we are BORN AGAIN, DEMONS attack us from around and try to hinder our walk. And some christians allow that to happen because sometimes they allow sin to stay in their lives in other words, to be blunt, they LOVE that demon. If it isn't dealt with, we will BACKSLIDE, and that is a fact..
    When born again christians are being attacked this way, SATAN the DEVIL hates it, and tries every way to discourage us born again chrisitans, especially when you are walking right with god... Without god we are nothing..
    Father god i come before you in the name of jesus christ,
    Lord, i pray for each and every person on this page who has written, that you will touch their hearts, and know that they need more understanding, i pray for understanding, and come against any spirit of confusion in the name of Jesus christ.
    Father, you love these people, if only they knew how much, lord, bless them all mightily. and have your way with them lord jesus..
    In jesus, precious holy name i pray..
    Amen..
    God bless you all....
    (more)
  • me 2012/04/18 14:33:22
    me
    +3
    hi, i guess you did not have a relationship with god. yes - this sounds like all the down passed judgement you have heard so often in these christian congregations. But i pretty much know what you mean and had the same troubles. why is so much fake in the christian world? Why do people act as if they would follow god's words and live a completely different live?
    Fact is, a lotta people who claim to be children of god are no children of god. See, being a christian is not hard. it is quite easy. read galatians, we're freed to live in freedom. god will never lay burdens on you, he will never let you be tempted over your capacities - if you are honest to him and tell him (for example): God, i can't stay away from porn, im into it, i love it and it feels pretty good, yet i know you see that different, please let me be the way you are, please change me, i can't, i cannot withstand those temptations, i will try, but i often cannot. the god can make his promise true, you won't be tempted over your capacities any more. that's what i meant in the beginning, having a relationship with god makes it all easy. doesn't matter how many wannabe christians judge you, you hear god whisper in your ear: I love you you're ok the way you are, don't worry!
  • Shalehr... me 2012/09/17 01:00:44
    Shalehrandro
    +3
    Lol, is that really what you think? God doesn't favor those who are attracted to lust. If you think its ok to watch porn, that's fine. Don't except God to give you any rewards if you are not going to at least limit the amount of times you masturbate. I used to watch porn 10 times a day, while repenting daily, Its about 1-3 a week now, and I don't gain any dopamine. Its just something to do. God understands why people love sex, its what humans are. But if you are going to treat your body like filth, then you will not be favored to make it into a pure world. A pure world, heaven, is created by pure souls. Which is why impure souls burn in Hell until they're ready for heaven, if they ever are.
  • Phamie 2009/09/20 14:29:26
    Phamie
    +1
    Judgment belongs to G-d. Do not judge Christ by the behavior of Christians. I have been to many churches where G-d was not welcome.
    I have been a Christian for 58 years. Jesus has never left me nor forsaken me, when all so called Christians around me have.
    My walk with the Lord is just that WITH THE LORD, not with any other. Don't let others hinder your personal relationship with G-d and Jesus.
    Blessings
  • deathby... Phamie 2009/09/20 17:37:03
  • Phamie deathby... 2009/09/20 19:24:14
    Phamie
    As long as you are happy, and your life more pleasant, that is the important thing, but deathbyluxury, not every thing supernatural is G-d. There is a lot out there, and a lot of it is not friendly. And it is difficult to know which is which sometimes.
    Blessings and kind thoughts
  • Daniel Phamie 2013/04/10 04:31:24
    Daniel
    +3
    Thank you brother. Im glad i read your post. That was refreshing
  • Tasha 2009/09/18 09:45:34
    Tasha
    Mt 7:14" Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."

    this pretty much explains it all
  • deathby... Tasha 2009/09/18 17:54:43
  • Daniel Tasha 2013/04/10 04:42:01
    Daniel
    +3
    I think we tend to think we are one sin away from failier. The Bible day's a lot about sin, but i do remember in the gospels, Jesus says, he came for the sick, not the righteous. And I know we are to strive not to sin, but when we do, we can ask for foregiveness. That's the beauty of what The Lord did for us. By the way, i think thats the key to understanding what The Lord was talking about. Im saved by grace, threw faith. Not of myself. It's all what he did for us. God Bless
  • reed67 2009/09/17 07:36:34 (edited)
    reed67
    +2
    Christians have it made in this country. They have enough power to get who they wanted elected thier laws passed that only help themselves. Anytime someone even acts like they are going to oppress a Christian all hell breaks loose & in comes the media. They got God stamped on everything from money to the Pledge of Allegence
    Yet some of them whine like little children when people push back.
  • deathby... reed67 2009/09/18 17:57:50
  • reed67 deathby... 2009/09/18 19:05:52
    reed67
    +1
    I love the cartoon!
  • Death 2009/09/16 20:16:28
    Death
    +2
    You were born with a sense of indulgence for everything you do.

    Christianity teaches abstinence, going against your carnal instincts.

    Theres also the whole thing about how doubtful the bible is, that probably contributes too.
  • deathby... Death 2009/09/18 19:51:24
  • Death deathby... 2009/09/18 19:52:09
    Death
    +1
    Aw, thanks.
  • deathby... Death 2009/09/19 03:39:52
  • Frosty Snowcone 2009/09/16 06:39:04
    Frosty Snowcone
    +1
    God is entertained by our suffering.
  • Gary 2009/09/16 06:01:36
    Gary
    It's not hard to be a christian, so long as you focus on Christ and not self or the world.
  • Captain Seriouspants (AKA H... 2009/09/16 00:24:28
    Captain Seriouspants (AKA Halloween Man)
    +1
    Because humans are pricks.

    I suppose it's because it became a war. This next bit will sound one sided--and this is only regarding America and whatever other countries used to be heavy on Christianity-- but I believe it went something like this:
    I'll tell this from the perspective of an American atheist.
    Atheists got sick of being Christianized. It became a war for equality, but Christians saw this as another attack, which is why there are more atheists who argue and more Christians that bitch.

    That, or Christians see it as a rebellious uprising; a fad that'll pass, rather than a atheists growing balls and renouncing their faith in public.
  • Captain Sticky 2009/09/15 22:44:01
    Captain Sticky
    +1
    " Christianity is more about passing judgment and establishing superiority over nonbelievers..."

    That's because Christianity has become a religion of intolerance and arrogance. If they simply tried to live as Christ did, there would be more Christians. But folks see how they do NOT "walk the walk" and want no part of them or their faith.
    Most Christians don't think they're better than non Christians; they know it. And that's a big problem. Why don't YOU show them the way?
  • seathanaich 2009/09/15 20:36:41 (edited)
    seathanaich
    +4
    Hi Luxury.

    I think a big part of the problem is the incompatability of the teachings of Christianity. They're mutually contradictory.

    People point out the things that the "Jesus" character "said" that are "nice". Aside from the fact that they were neither novel nor terribly exceptional, they are fundamentally opposed to the "nasty" things attributed to Jesus.

    Before Jesus, there was no "hell". At least Yahweh left people alone after he smote them. But not Jesus. He introduced eternal torture, thus marrying Hellenistic concepts of Hades to existing Judaic afterlife concepts, and using them as a weapon to enforce obedience. And hell is probably the nastiest invention in human history, when you think about it.

    It's hard to live out a philosophy which professes to be loving but is essentially based upon fear.
  • deathby... seathan... 2009/09/15 21:02:48
  • seathan... deathby... 2009/09/16 00:15:56
    seathanaich
    The most "progressive" Christians are moving towards that. Read Gretta Vosper's With of Without God. She calls herself a non-theist. And she's a church minister in Toronto. Very interesting book. Cheers.
  • Shalehr... seathan... 2012/09/17 01:03:14
    Shalehrandro
    +3
    Yahweh and Jesus are the same people.
  • seathan... Shalehr... 2012/12/23 06:19:25
    seathanaich
    Neither is a "people". One is a fictional Jewish god, and one was a character used to sell a religion that even 2000 years ago was outdated.
  • XXMr.Sc... seathan... 2013/01/11 02:06:18
    XXMr.Scare99XX
    i'll provide historical evidence for Jesus now

    CORNELIUS TACITUS (55 - 120 A.D.) Tacitus was a 1st and 2nd century Roman historian who lived through the reigns of over half a dozen
    Roman emperors. Considered one of the greatest historians of ancient Rome, Tacitus verifies the Biblical account of Jesus' execution at the
    hands of Pontius Pilate who governed Judea from 26-36 A.D. during the reign of Tiberius.

    "Christus, the founder of the [Christian] name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius. But the
    pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, by through the city of
    Rome also." Annals XV, 44

    What this passage reveals and how it confirms the Biblical account:

    Jesus did exist

    Jesus was the founder of Christianity

    Jesus was put to death by Pilate

    Christianity originated in Judea (With Jesus)

    Christianity later spread to Rome (Through the Apostles and Evangelists)


    Skeptic Interjection: Could Tacitus have taken his information from Christian sources?
    Answer: Because of his position as a professional historian and not as a commentator, it is more likely Tacitus referenced government
    records over Christian testimony. It is also possible Tacitus received some of his information f...





























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































    i'll provide historical evidence for Jesus now

    CORNELIUS TACITUS (55 - 120 A.D.) Tacitus was a 1st and 2nd century Roman historian who lived through the reigns of over half a dozen
    Roman emperors. Considered one of the greatest historians of ancient Rome, Tacitus verifies the Biblical account of Jesus' execution at the
    hands of Pontius Pilate who governed Judea from 26-36 A.D. during the reign of Tiberius.

    "Christus, the founder of the [Christian] name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius. But the
    pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, by through the city of
    Rome also." Annals XV, 44

    What this passage reveals and how it confirms the Biblical account:

    Jesus did exist

    Jesus was the founder of Christianity

    Jesus was put to death by Pilate

    Christianity originated in Judea (With Jesus)

    Christianity later spread to Rome (Through the Apostles and Evangelists)


    Skeptic Interjection: Could Tacitus have taken his information from Christian sources?
    Answer: Because of his position as a professional historian and not as a commentator, it is more likely Tacitus referenced government
    records over Christian testimony. It is also possible Tacitus received some of his information from his friend and fellow secular historian, Pliny
    the Younger. Yet, even if Tacitus referenced some of Pliny's sources, it would be out of his character to have done so without critical
    investigation. An example of Tacitus criticising testimony given to him even from his dear friend Pliny is found here: Annals XV, 55. Tacitus
    distinguishes between confirmed and hearsay accounts almost 70 times in his History. If he felt this account of Jesus was only a rumor or
    folklore, he would have issued his usual disclaimer that this account was unverified.

    Skeptic Interjection: Could this passage have been a Christian interpolation?
    Answer: Judging by the critical undertones of the passage, this is highly unlikely. Tacitus refers to Christianity as a superstition and
    insuppressible mischief. Furthermore, there is not a surviving copy of Tacitus' Annals that does not contain this passage. There is no verifiable
    evidence of tampering of any kind in this passage.

    Skeptic Interjection: Why is this passage not quoted by the early church fathers?
    Answer: Due to the condescending nature of Tacitus' testimony, early Christian authors most likely would not have quoted such a source
    (assuming Tacitus' writings were even available to them). However, our actual answer comes from the content of the passage itself. Nothing in
    Tacitus' statement mentions anything that was not already common knowledge among Christians. It simply provides evidence of Jesus'
    existence (a topic not debated at this point in history) and not his divinity.

    Skeptic Interjection: Does the incorrect use of title procurator instead of prefect negate Tacitus' reliability?
    Answer: No. Evidence is provided in both secular and Christian works which refer to Pilate as a procurator:

    "But now Pilate, the procurator of Judea... Antiquities XVIII, 3:1

    "Now Pilate, who was sent as procurator into Judea by Tiberius..." The Jewish Wars, Book II 9:2

    "Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea, in the times of Tiberius Caesar..." First Apology XII

    It has been suggested by both Christian and secular scholars that Tacitus was either using an anachronism for the sake of clarity or, since
    Judea was a relatively new and insignificant Roman province, Pilate might have held both positions.
    GAIUS SUETONIUS TRANQUILLUS (69 - 130 A.D.) Suetonius was a prominent Roman historian who recorded the lives of the Roman
    Caesars and the historical events surrounding their reigns. He served as a court official under Hadrian and as an annalist for the Imperial
    House. Suetonius records the expulsion of the Christian Jews from Rome (mentioned in Acts 18:2) and confirms the Christian faith being
    founded by Christ.

    "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, [Claudius] expelled them from Rome." Life of Claudius 25.4

    Skeptic Interjection: Because Suetonius misspells Christus as Chrestus, is it possible he was referring to someone else?
    Answer: Because Chrestus was an actual Greek name, critics speculate Suetonius may have been referring to a specific civil agitator. I would
    like to present a few arguments as to why I feel this is a reference to Jesus. In order to get as close to the author's intent as possible, this is
    the passage as it exists in the original Latin:

    "Iudaeos (The Jews) impulsore (the instigation) Chresto (Chrestus) assidue (upon) tumultuantis (making a disturbance) Roma
    (Rome) expulit (were expelled)."

    Suetonius seems to imply the word Chrestus as a title- not as a reference to a particular rebel. Though I have seen critics cite the
    passage as "a certain/one Chrestus" we can see this is incorrect by the lack of the word quodam in the original Latin.

    Suetonius uses the word instigation- not instigator. The Latin word referring to an instigator is impulsor but the term referring to an
    instigation is impusore- and this is the word Suetonius uses, thus affirming the belief he is using the word Chrestus as a title and not as
    a name.

    It was common for both pagan and Christian authors to spell the name using either an e or an i- and we know the Christian authors
    were obviously referring to Jesus when they spelled the name as Chrestus.

    Tertullian criticises pagan disdain for Christianity and points out the fact they can't even spell the name correctly. He implies the
    common misspelling of Chrestus by their use of the term Chrestians: "Most people so blindly knock their heads against the hatred of the
    Christian name...It is wrongly pronounced by you as "Chrestians" (for you do not even know accurately the name you hate)... But
    the special ground of dislike to the sect is, that it bears the name of its Founder." Apology, Chapter III

    We also see Justin Martyr (a Christian apologist, nonetheless!) using the incorrect spelling of Chrestian. First Apology IV

    Lactantius repeats the lament of Tertullian with his statement, "But the meaning of this name must be set forth, on account of the error
    of the ignorant who by the change of a letter are accustomed to call Him Chrestus." Fathers of the Third and Fourth Centuries

    Chrestus was a Greco-Roman slave name but Suetonius tells us "foreigners" were not allowed to adopt such names. Knowing the Jews
    were a close-knit community, the idea of them following the revolt of a gentile slave to such an extent to get them (and only them!)
    expelled from Rome is quite a stretch.


    Skeptic Interjection: How could this passage refer to Jesus. He was never said to have travelled to Rome.
    Answer: If Chrestus does refer to a title and not a specific name (as we are asserting), there is no need for Him to have been in Rome. A
    leader can still be "an instigator" for a cause without being in the vicinity. There are many causes that survived long after the lives of those
    who initiated certain movements.

    THALLUS (~ 52 A.D.) Although his works exist only in fragments, Julius Africanus debates Thallus' explanation of the midday darkness which
    occurred during the Passover of Jesus' crucifixion. Thallus tries to dismiss the darkness as a natural occurrence (a solar eclipse) but Africanus
    argues (and any astronomer can confirm) a solar eclipse cannot physically occur during a full moon due to the alignment of the planets.
    Phlegon of Tralles, a 2nd century secular historian, also mentions the darkness and tries to dismiss it as a solar eclipse. He also states the
    event occurred during the time of Tiberius Caesar.

    "On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness. The rocks were rent by an earthquake and many places in Judea and other
    districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the
    sun. For the Hebrews celebrate the passover on the 14th day according to the moon, and the passion of our Savior falls on the day before the
    passover. But an eclipse of the sun takes place only when the moon comes under the sun. And it cannot happen at any other time... Phlegon
    records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth-manifestly that one
    of which we speak. Chronography XVIII, 47

    Skeptic Interjection: Why doesn't Pliny the Elder or Seneca mention this event in their writings?
    Answer: Pliny focused his writings on natural astronomical events that had physical, scientific explanations. It is doubtful he would have found
    it necessary to record an event of supernatural origin. I can also find no mention of him being in Judea at the time so it is doubtful he would
    have mentioned it if he did not witness the event first hand. Seneca focused his writings on dramas, dialogues, and tragedies but also wrote a
    meteorological essay, Natural Questions, composed of theories pertaining to ancient cosmology. However this was by no means a complete
    scientific almanac of events- it was a literary work. And like Pliny, it is doubtful Seneca was in Judea during this event.

    Skeptic Interjection: Because Thallus' and Phlegon's works exist only in fragments, can their testimonies be considered reliable?
    Answer: This is something the reader will have to determine on their own. Africanus was an honest, qualified author who did not alter the
    quotes to serve his own purpose. This is very likely considering what we know about Africanus (See: here). Africanus' methods were highly
    respected by his peers, he was often quoted by other authors, and he even chastises his friend and fellow Christian, Origen, for citing
    information from a spurious/unreliable source! (See: Africanus' letter to Origen). It also must be noted that Thallus never said this eclipse did
    not happen but instead was trying to actually come up with a scientific explanation to the eclipse instead of assigning it divine origins.

    PLINY THE YOUNGER (63 - 113 A.D) Pliny the Younger admits to torturing and executing Christians who refused to deny Christ. Those who
    denied the charges were spared and ordered to exalt the Roman gods and curse the name of Christ. Pliny addresses his concerns to Emperor
    Trajan that too many citizens were being killed for their refusal to deny their faith.

    "I asked them directly if they were Christians...those who persisted, I ordered away... Those who denied they were or ever had been
    Christians...worshiped both your image and the images of the gods and cursed Christ. They used to gather on a stated day before dawn and
    sing to Christ as if he were a god... All the more I believed it necessary to find out what was the truth from two servant maids, which were
    called deaconesses, by means of torture. Nothing more did I find than a disgusting, fanatical superstition. Therefore I stopped the examination,
    and hastened to consult you...on account of the number of people endangered. For many of all ages, all classes, and both sexes already are
    brought into danger..." Pliny's letter to Emperor Trajan

    Though Pliny states some of the accused denied the charges, a recurring theme in the correspondence between Pliny and Trajan is the
    willingness of the true believer to die for Christ. This would hardly be reasonable if they knew He never existed!

    Skeptic Interjection: How does dying for one's belief verify the actual existence of Jesus? The sincerity of a belief does not necessarily
    make the belief true. How does this passage specifically confirm a historical Jesus and not just the existence of Christians in Rome?
    Answer: Pliny states the Christians worshiped Christ as if he were a god. This indicates one who would not normally be considered a god,
    such as a human who was exalted to divine status. Also, the early Christians would have been in the position to know if Jesus was a historical
    figure or not. Though critics can claim these martyrs took Jesus' existence solely on faith, common sense tells us there would have been a lot
    more evidence of a historical Jesus at this time than what has been preserved until today. According to early historians, Jesus' great-nephews
    and other relatives were still alive as well as the associates of the original apostles. Such individuals could easily verify His existence. Also,
    documents which have been lost to us were still in existence (such as Jesus' trial records and the census records of His birth) and were even
    referenced by early authors who wrote about Jesus. These individuals had every reason to be certain of Jesus' existence and were willing to
    die because of it.

    Skeptic Interjection: Pliny also states some recanted their testimony. Perhaps they did so because they knew Jesus was a myth.
    Answer: There are several rational explanations as to why some would recant their Christian beliefs:

    Pliny readily admits to torturing some of the accused (are admissions/denials really credible under torture!?).

    The accused knew if they did not recant they would be put to death (fallible human rationalization: confess and go home [and work out
    the hard feelings with Jesus later] or suffer crucifixion?).

    Some of the accused could have been lackadaisical Christians who half-heartedly accepted Christianity because of a spouse, parent, or
    friend (and would have had no problem reverting back to paganism upon facing persecution). There were half-hearted Christians 2,000
    years ago just like there are half-hearted Christians today.

    New Christians may have recanted to escape persecution if they were not familiar with or did not understand the severity of Jesus'
    warning regarding those who deny their Christian beliefs).

    The correspondence between Pliny and Trajan implies many of the accused were being turned in falsely by their enemies. Some were
    never Christians to begin with while some had already left the faith prior to their interrogation.

    Just because there were some who may have recanted out of fear or poor judgment doesn't dismiss the deaths of the other individuals
    who were certain of Jesus' existence and died because of their knowledge.


    CELSUS (~ 178 A.D.) Celsus was a second century Roman author and avid opponent of Christianity. He went to great lengths to disprove the
    divinity of Jesus yet never denied His actual existence. Unfortunately for Celsus, he sets himself up for criticism by mimicking the exact
    accusations brought against Jesus by the pharisees which had already been addressed and refuted in the New Testament. There are two very
    important facts regarding Celsus which make him one of the most important witnesses in this discussion:

    Though most secular passages are accused of being Christian interpolations, we can accept with certainty this is not the case with
    Celsus! The sheer volume of his writings (specifically designed to discredit Christianity) coupled with the hostile accusations presented
    in his work dismiss this chance immediately.

    The idea of Celsus getting his information entirely from Christian sources (another recurring accusation against secular evidence) is
    wholly absurd. Though he is obviously aware of his opponents' beliefs (as anyone who is engaging in a debate should be), Celsus wrote
    his exposition in the form of a dialogue between a "Jewish Critic" and himself. This gives us cause to believe he used non-Christian
    (probably Jewish) sources.


    On Jesus' Miracles: "Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain [magical] powers... He
    returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god... It was by means of
    sorcery that He was able to accomplish the wonders which He performed... Let us believe that these cures, or the resurrection, or the feeding
    of a multitude with a few loaves... These are nothing more than the tricks of jugglers... It is by the names of certain demons, and by the use of
    incantations, that the Christians appear to be possessed of [miraculous] power..."

    Not only does Celsus confirm Jesus' existence, he also tries to debate the source of Jesus' miracles. Like the pharisees of Jesus' day, Celsus
    tries to dismiss these miracles as both demonic possession and cheap parlor tricks. However, he is clearly grasping at straws: On one hand
    Celsus accuses Jesus of performing magic learned in Egypt, then later states it is by the power of possession, then states the miracles were
    not really miracles at all but were illusionary tricks performed by a deceiver, then finally states the miracles never occurred!

    On the Virgin Birth: "Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her
    hands. His mother had been turned out by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a Roman soldier
    named Panthera]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, fatherless."

    Celsus acknowledges Jesus' birth and existence but does not accept the concept of a virgin conception. He tries to dismiss Mary's premarital
    pregnancy as the result of an affair she had with a Roman soldier. Strangely enough, there is a very similar passage in the Jewish Talmud
    which makes the same accusation. This gives us reason to believe Celsus might have referenced Jewish sources for some of his arguments.

    On the Apostles: "Jesus gathered around him ten or eleven persons of notorious character... tax-collectors, sailors, and fishermen... [He
    was] deserted and delivered up by those who had been his associates, who had him for their teacher, and who believed he was the savior and
    son of the greatest God... Those who were his associates while alive, who listened to his voice, and enjoyed his instructions as their teacher,
    on seeing him subjected to punishment and death, neither died with nor for him... but denied that they were even his disciples, lest they die
    along with Him."

    Celsus' intentions were to argue that if the disciples really believed Jesus was the Son of God, they would not have forsaken Him at His arrest.
    Instead, he only ends up confirming the Biblical account! The Bible tells us when Jesus was arrested, the apostles denied being His followers. It
    was only upon Jesus' resurrection they understood the spiritual principles concerning Jesus' crucifixion and boldly went out to preach the
    Gospel. Celsus is also wrong with his statement, [they] neither died with nor for him. We are told by early historians all but one of the
    remaining apostles were killed for their faith.

    On Jesus' Divinity: "One who was a God could neither flee nor be led away a prisoner... What great deeds did Jesus perform as God? Did he
    put his enemies to shame or bring to an end what was designed against him? No calamity happened even to him who condemned him... Why
    does he not give some manifestation of his divinity, and free himself from this reproach, and take vengeance upon those who insult both him
    and his Father?"

    Celsus ridicules Jesus for the exact same reasons the pharisees of His time ridiculed Him- if Jesus was the Son of God, why didn't He save
    Himself from the cross? Neither Celsus nor the pharisees understood the spiritual implications of Jesus' death to atone for sin. Celsus also asks
    why no judgment came upon the Jews but history shows shortly after His death Jerusalem was invaded by the Romans, the Jewish temple was
    destroyed, and the Jewish people were dispersed for almost 2,000 years!

    John the Baptist "If any one predicted to us that the Son of God was to visit mankind, he was one of our prophets, and the prophet of our
    God? John, who baptized Jesus, was a Jew."

    Celsus confirms Jesus' baptism by John but asserts that John was the only one who actually prophesied His coming- not the Old Testament
    Messianic prophecies.

    On the Crucifixion: "Jesus accordingly exhibited after His death only the appearance of wounds received on the cross, and was not in reality
    so wounded as He is described to have been."

    In this statement, Celsus confirms Jesus' death by crucifixion although he claims the only wounds Jesus received were those inflicted by the
    crucifixion (thus denying any previous torture had taken place). But not even history offers Celsus the benefit of a doubt as floggings were the
    standard form of torture given to victims prior to crucifixion (See here). Celsus contradicts himself yet again when he later states Jesus was
    probably never even crucified but instead had an impostor die in His place!

    Skeptic Interjection: Celsus also states, "It is clear to me that the writings of the Christians are a lie and that your fables are not well
    enough constructed to conceal this monstrous fiction." How do we know Celsus is referring to a historical Jesus and not just debating myth?
    Answer: Evidence which shows Celsus to be refuting aspects of a historical Jesus is as follows:

    Our answer can be found in Celsus' own words: He was therefore a man, and of such a nature, as the truth itself proves, and reason
    demonstrates him to be. Satisfied with his presentation of evidence, Celsus offers his conclusion that Jesus was only a man- not a myth
    (or a God, as the apostles had claimed).

    Instead of denying the alleged events, Celsus offers alternative theories to the early Christian claims (like the virgin birth being a cover-
    up for an illegitimate pregnancy and the miracles actually being works of sorcery). If he was discussing a mythical character, he would
    not have needed to go to such lengths but merely to have dismissed Jesus as a myth. After all, there is no easier way to discredit a
    religion than to assert its founder never existed! Of course, this is an argument Celsus never makes.

    The "fables" Celsus refers to is his belief that the claims such as a virgin birth and resurrection were embellishments created by early
    Christians- not that Jesus was Himself a myth. Celsus was debating the claims of Jesus' divinity, not His existence.


    LUCIAN OF SAMOSATA (120 - ~180 A.D.) Lucian was a second century Greek satirist and rhetorician who scornfully describes his views of
    early Christianity. Though he ridicules the Christians and their Christ, his writings confirm Jesus was executed via crucifixion and that He was
    the founder of Christianity.

    "The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day- the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that
    account... It was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers from the moment they are converted and deny the
    gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws..." The Death of Peregrinus 11-13

    What this passage reveals and how it confirms the Biblical account:

    Jesus did exist

    Jesus was the founder of Christianity

    Jesus was worshiped by His followers

    Jesus suffered death by crucifixion


    Skeptic Interjection: Can we consider Lucian's testimony reliable due to the source being a literary work?
    Answer: Lucian's commentary revolved around historical events. In Lucian's work The Way to Write History, he openly criticises his
    contemporaries who distort history to flatter their masters or those who fill in the historical gaps with personal conjecture:

    "The historian's one task is to tell the thing as it happened... He may nurse some private dislikes, but he will attach far more importance
    to the public good, and set the truth high above his hate... For history, I say again, has this and only this for its own. If a man will start
    upon it, he must sacrifice to no God but Truth. He must neglect all else." The Way to Write History


    Skeptic Interjection: Is it possible Lucian received his knowledge from Christian sources or that this passage is an interpolation?
    Answer: Seeing how adamant Lucian was in regards to historical accuracy and critical investigation, our answer is an emphatic no. As to the
    passage being a Christian interpolation, chances are the reference to Jesus would be far more favorable if this were so. Lucian refers to Jesus
    only as a man, a lawgiver, and a sage (human- not divine- descriptions). He never once refers to Jesus as a God. Furthermore, there isn't
    anything in the above statement that reveals what wasn't already known- it merely asserts that Jesus lived, preached, and died. Remember, at
    this time Christians were trying to prove Jesus' divinity- not His existence.

    MARA BAR-SERAPION (Post 70 A.D) Mara Bar-Serapion of Syria penned this letter from prison to his son. Though it is obvious he does not
    acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God, he does mention aspects of Jesus' life. There is some criticism regarding this passage but it must be
    noted nothing in Serapion's letter contradicts what we know about Jesus.

    "What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as a judgment for their crime.
    What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burning Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the
    Jews gain from executing their wise King? It was just after that their kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: The
    Athenians died of hunger. The Samians were overwhelmed by the sea. The Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete
    dispersion. But Socrates did not die for good. He lived on in the teachings of Plato. Pythagoras did not die for good. He lived on in the statue of
    Hera. Nor did the wise King die for good. He lived on in the teaching which He had given." Source

    Skeptic Interjection: How do we know this passage is a reference to Jesus?
    Answer: There are several references in this passage which imply Serapion is referring to Jesus:

    He was a wise King (Jesus was mocked by the Romans as The King of the Jews, the messianic prophecies fulfilled by Jesus referred to
    the coming Messiah as a king, Christian believers believed Jesus was their promised spiritual king, and Jesus was born from the royal
    line of King David).

    He was Jewish (Jesus was a Galilean Jew).

    He was executed (Jesus was crucified after the Jews appealed to Pilate to have Him crucified).

    After His death Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed (This occurred in 70 A.D., after Jesus' death).

    The Jews were dispersed after His death (The Jews abandoned Judea after the Roman attack of 70 A.D.).

    He was a teacher (Jesus was a rabbi/teacher).

    He lived on after death in His teachings (Jesus and His teachings founded the Christian faith).


    Skeptic Interjection: Is it possible Serapion was referring to another person?
    Answer: Though critics mention other possible candidates, the timing is off as Serapion specifically states just after that their kingdom was
    abolished. Only Jesus fits into the appropriate timeline as Titus destroyed Jerusalem a mere 36 years after Jesus' crucifixion. The others lived
    approximately 170-250 years prior to the desolation.

    Skeptic Interjection: Didn't the Romans technically kill Jesus, though?
    Answer: As I mention towards the bottom of this page, The Jews were under Roman domination which restricted their ability to execute
    capital punishment. The Jews rallied the Roman government to crucify Jesus for the crime of blasphemy as they did not have the legal power
    to do so. Even the Bible mentions Pilate's reluctance to punish an innocent man but that he allowed it to take place to prevent a Jewish revolt
    in an already hostile environment.
    ARGUMENTS FOR AUTHENTICITY

    1: The vocabulary found in the Testimonium is consistent with
    the vocabulary used in other passages in Antiquities. The phrase
    Now about this time is used at the beginning of this passage as
    well dozens of other passages. It's also doubtful a Christian
    forger would have referred to Jesus as simply a wise man but
    then go on to assert claims of His divinity. Yet, Josephus uses
    this word to refer to many other notable (and purely human)
    figures. Josephus also uses the description of Jesus' miracles as
    wonderful [astonishing, surprising] works. Lastly, Josephus
    refers to Christianity as a tribe- just like he does many other
    times in reference to both major and minor sects.

    2: Once the disputed words (printed in regular font in the above
    passage) are removed, Josephus' though process flows just as
    well. This lends credence to the possibility the passage wasn't
    wholly interpolated but perhaps altered. When we omit the
    disputed words, the passage seems consistent with what an
    orthodox Jew would say concerning Jesus:

    "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, for he was a
    doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the
    truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews
    and many of the Gentiles. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of
    the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross,
    those that loved him at the first did not forsake him. And the
    tribes of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this
    day."

    3: Greek and Arabic translations of the Testimonium contain
    disclaimers preceding the suspicious declarations such as "Jesus
    who was believed to be the Christ" and "It has been
    reported that He appeared to them alive again on the third
    day." If anything, this could lead to the speculation that
    Christian authors did not add to the text but edited it by deleting
    the disclaimers!

    4: The earliest versions of Antiquities contain the passage as it
    is presented above. Objection: The earliest surviving copy
    dates from 10th century A.D. (plenty of time from the
    publication of Antiquities to alter or interpolate the passage).
    Answer: This is true. We do not have an extant copy of
    Antiquities dating from before 10th century A.D. What we do
    have however, is several citations of this passage by other
    authors prior to the 10th century).

    5: Many defenders of the Testimonium's authenticity speculate
    that if it had been wholly interpolated by a Christian, they most
    likely would have inserted the passage next to the John the
    Baptist references. Though I understand their reasoning, I feel
    this argument is based on conjecture instead of evidence. The
    alleged Christian forger could have had just as much reason to
    insert this passage next to the John passage, the Pilate passage,
    or the James passage.
    _____________________________...

    ARGUMENTS AGAINST AUTHENTICITY

    1: This passage seems to interrupt the continuity of Josephus'
    thought process in the previous and subsequent verses.
    Answer: Interruptions are frequently found in Josephus' works
    since he composed his histories during different sittings.
    Furthermore, Josephus was known to use the assistance of
    scribes during his writings which could easily resolve this issue.

    2: The passage contains proclamations an orthodox Jew would
    not make such as Jesus being the Christ. Answer: In other
    translations (Greek and Arabic) the suspicious statements
    contain disclaimers such as "Jesus who was believed to be the
    Christ" and "It has been reported..." This presents the theory
    Josephus was recording the beliefs regarding Jesus and not
    necessarily his personal opinion (as a responsible historian
    should do).

    3: Early Christian authors like Origen and Justin Martyr do not
    mention this passage in their writings. Answer: I'm not sure
    what the motive is behind this objection because Origen does
    reference the other passage by Josephus yet critics claim the
    reference is "too late" to be reliable! But, for argument's sake if
    we assume this passage did exist in the form most scholars
    believe it did, the early church fathers might not have felt the
    need to refer to it. The [original?] passage serves as evidence
    for the historicity of Jesus- a topic not hotly debated at this point
    as the burden of proof revolved around His divinity. Objection:
    Origen attests to the historicity of John the Baptist in his work
    Contra Celsus when it wasn't even being debated. He could have
    cited this passage too. Answer: In Origen's Contra Celsus the
    divinity of Jesus was being debated- not his existence. Though
    Josephus allegedly admits to Jesus performing miracles, he does
    not state how. It would have made no sense for Origen to cite
    the Testimonium since it doesn't either dispute or confirm
    Celsus' claims. Furthermore, even if the original Antiquities still
    existed in Josephus' own handwriting, critics would say he either
    drew his information from Christian sources or was to late to be
    considered reliable!

    4: Josephus' Jewish Wars also contains this passage so it must
    be a forgery. Answer: This is false- the Testimonium is not
    found in the Jewish Wars. To the contrary- Skeptics criticize that
    the Testimonium is not found in The Wars but should have
    been!

    5: Josephus should have written more regarding Jesus if the
    passage was genuine. Answer: What topic or how much an
    author writes about a topic is their prerogative. Also, since
    Josephus believed Jesus was just another messianic pretender
    and false prophet, it would have made little sense for Josephus
    to have written volumes concerning His life and actions. It would
    be similar to a modern a Christian author exhaustively recording
    the life of Jim Jones or David Koresh. Josephus most likely held
    Jesus in the same regard and felt he warranted little mention.

    After weighing the evidence for myself, I personally agree with the consensus of scholars that Josephus did make some mention of Jesus in
    this passage but that the text was later altered. Because opinions differ so greatly, I will leave the final conclusion up to the reader. For a more
    in-depth discussion on this topic, I suggest reading this non-biased article which details both sides of the on-going debate (although this author
    believes the passage was wholly interpolated).

    We'll now examine the second passage given to us by Josephus. Fortunately, it is not surrounded in as much controversy!

    "So [Ananus] assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together
    with some others, and having accused them as lawbreakers, he delivered them over to be stoned." Antiquities XX 9:1

    Skeptic Interjection: Is it possible this passage was interpolated by early Christians?
    Answer: It must be noted that no copy of Antiquities has ever surfaced without the above text quoted as it is above. Critics are suspicious of
    the so-called Christ statement yet this reference (rather than the Christ) shows Josephus was not condoning the belief but simply
    documenting it. Also, this passage concerns the actions of the priest Ananus- Jesus and James were not even the primary focus of this verse!
    Lastly, this passage is cited in other early works which attests to its authenticity.

    Even if we dismiss the disputed words in Josephus' Testimonium, we still see he testifies to a number of things in the above two passages:

    Jesus lived in the first century

    He performed wonderful works (miracles)

    Some believed Jesus to be the Christ

    He was a teacher

    He had many followers

    He was tried by Pilate

    He was crucified

    He was the founder of Christianity

    James was the brother of Jesus


    THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD The Babylonian Talmud is an ancient record of Jewish history, laws, and rabbinic teachings compiled throughout
    the centuries. Though it does not accept the divinity of Jesus, it confirms the belief He was hanged (an idiom for crucifixion) on the eve of the
    Passover.

    "On the eve of the Passover Yeshu (Jesus) [Some texts: Yeshu/Jesus the Nazarene] was hanged [crucified]. Forty days before the execution, a
    herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can
    say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favor he was hanged on
    the eve of the Passover."

    Skeptic Interjection: How can we know the Talmud is documenting Jesus' existence and not only stating the rumor surrounding a myth?
    Answer: In the above excerpt the Talmud mentions Jesus' ability to perform miracles but tries to dismiss it as sorcery. If the writers were
    simply refuting myth, they would most likely have dismissed the tale as a rumor- not assign alternative theories to defend their position.

    Skeptic Interjection: How can we know this passage is a reference to Jesus and not another individual with the name Yeshu?
    Answer: Though it is possible this passage could refer to another individual, we know Jesus was killed during the Passover, we know He was
    crucified (a Jewish idiom for hanged), we know He was accused of practicing sorcery by the pharisees (for His miracles), and He was ultimately
    arrested for the sin of blasphemy (enticing Israel to apostasy). Furthermore, there are other translations which read Yeshu the Nazarene which
    give us even more reason to believe this passage pertains to Jesus. On the other hand, a very thorough article which debates the Talmudic
    passages believed to refer to Jesus may be read
    (more)
  • seathan... XXMr.Sc... 2013/03/20 01:07:45
    seathanaich
    Whoop-de-doh. The Jesus character who performs magic tricks - there's no evidence for that guy. This is someone with the same name, who that magic guy may have been based on.

    It's like saying that Allan Smith can fly, and then providing evidence that someone named Allan Smith was real. You haven't proven that Allan Smith can fly, just that someone with that name once existed. Mohammed was real - that doesn't mean the god he made up (Allah) is.
  • XXMr.Sc... seathan... 2013/01/11 02:07:24
    XXMr.Scare99XX
    oh and provide 100% proof and evidence that atheism is accurate and correct.and why is atheims the only truth out of all the others
  • seathan... XXMr.Sc... 2013/03/20 01:08:44
    seathanaich
    "oh and provide 100% proof and evidence that atheism is accurate"

    Do you not believe in Thor? Zeus? The reasons you don't believe in them are the same as the reasons I don't believe in them. I just add your god, Yahweh of the Jews, to that category, for the exact same reasons.
  • XXMr.Sc... seathan... 2013/01/11 02:03:37
    XXMr.Scare99XX
    Jesus is not a character He has been recorded in history.And the Old Testament has mentioed hell a couple times in psalm 83.and the concept of eternal damnation has been around far longer then Christianity.And how do you know that hell is an 'invenyion and not real...you don't just like i dont know that it is,if you make absolute claims you better prepare to prove them
  • seathan... XXMr.Sc... 2013/03/20 01:10:04
    seathanaich
    A character is someone in a story made up by someone else. That's what the Jesus character is, just like the Yahweh character, the Allah character, the Zeus character, etc.
  • XXMr.Sc... seathan... 2013/03/20 21:05:24
    XXMr.Scare99XX
    prove that they are made up with 100% evidence instead of acting all macho and cocky
  • seathan... XXMr.Sc... 2013/03/23 01:17:01
    seathanaich
    I can't prove anything about fictional characters. That's the beauty of them - they're fictional, and therefore cannot be disproved, much like the afterlife that religions are all selling. Applying logic and reason to a subject is nothing to do with being "macho" or "cocky".
  • XXMr.Sc... seathan... 2013/03/23 04:54:24
    XXMr.Scare99XX
    Ha! coward.If they are fictional prove it but if you can't do anything but babble like a little baby then stop calling them fictional.

    You must think your God or something because you actually believe that you can choose what is real and what is not when all you can do is make up biased claims on a keyboard.

    Unless you can prove that they are fictional then you can't know if they are fictional or not.All you can do is THINK that they are fictional but what is your opinion compared to millions of others.

    You are trying to be macho by claiming to know the truth when you don't so you just sit back and pretend that everything you think is completely true.
  • seathan... XXMr.Sc... 2013/03/23 22:52:17
    seathanaich
    "If they are fictional prove it"

    Prove to me that unicorns are fictional. Go on, prove it. Heck, while you're at it, prove to me that Zeus isn't real. Or Thor. This should be entertaining. You won't be able to do so. And I can't disprove your Jewish god, Yahweh, for the same reason you can't disprove unicorns, Zeus, or Thor: something that doesn't exist cannot be disproved.

    Your post displays many of the usual half-thoughts that people rationalise their religious beliefs with. I guess the question is: why is the existence of people who don't share your religion such a threat?
  • XXMr.Sc... seathan... 2013/03/24 03:56:03
    XXMr.Scare99XX
    its not a threat its just people like you who think that they can choose what is real and what is not.

    by the way unicorns DO exist in fact here it is
    God

    rhinocerotis unicornis.

    And like if you know that theres no God then prove it because it is pathetic to claim knowledge yet can't back it up.


    You are not a threat to me but you assume that you are absolutely right and everyone else is wrong.

    a wise man admits he knows nothing while a fool claims knowledge.


    If you know that they are fictional then prove it and if you can't then you are just a moron who thinks that he controls reality.
  • seathan... XXMr.Sc... 2013/07/15 00:08:12
    seathanaich
    Using a picture of rhinoceros to prove the existence of unicorns is typical of the calibre of debate that the religious provide. Why am I not surprised that you couldn't do better? I'm not.

    "a wise man admits he knows nothing while a fool claims knowledge"

    Yes, religious fools claim that a god for which they have no evidence exists. You have perfectly defined everyone in history who has ever claimed that their "god" exists and their religion is real. Too bad you're not bright enough to figure out how your post confirms my points and completely undermines your own.
  • Pete 2009/09/15 19:19:52
    Pete
    When Jesus spoke in all Synagogues some did not believe that he was the Messiah or the Son of God. While other they had Faith in him. It's not easy being a Christian but with Faith we can withstand anyone and at any time. A True Christian is not of the world and neither was Jesus. John 17: 16. We Christian no longer want to follow the world, we want to follow Jesus Christ. It's not easy but it's worth it..Without faith it is impossible to please God. .I hope I made some senses to your question..
  • deathby... Pete 2009/09/15 19:39:07

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/07/28 17:54:39

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals