Could Jesus have been an alien?

[sport_122]

One of the funniest things is how some people (quite a few actually), come up with bullshit excuses on behalf of god, allah, whatever fictional book of bullshit it may be; bible, torah, koran, wicca, dianetics, pinocchio, etc.

Never a straight honest answer backed up with evidence, only a belief.

Believe their own lies and others' which have been passed on for hundreds of years.

Modify their beliefs and adjust accordingly so that it fits their current lifestyle and comfort zone.

Are guilty of all their "sins" which they themselves invented but passed off as "laws from god"

Now that is real unbiased truth about believers in imaginary beings.....whether they are..... christians, muslims, jews, satan worshippers, whatever, they all have these things in common!

Why don't you man up and tell us something you believe in?

Science, tell me one scientific theory you believe in and I will tell you why your belief is unsubstantiated.

My point is that your concept of proof is illogical. You don't understand how philosophical and theoretical proof work. I mentioned some of the rules in a previous post which you have not read or did not understand.
But simply put, nothing that comes from "X-object or idea" can be used to define "x" as real. When people belive that ALL things come from God, then what is suitable to make proof.

A person can only present evidence for their faith. Just like in science. You can only present evidence for your conclusions. That does not mean that your conclusions are proven or accepted.

If you can't get that, then I think you need to go find a collegiate professor because that is a very juvenile concept on discussion.

And like I said, why don't you tell me any one thing that I cannot argue its very existence by dismissal of evidence? I mean what is real to you? I don't think you understand the place that you put your very own arguments when you run the dismissal of evidence racket.

[d993s]

Why don't you man up and tell us something you believe in?

Science, tell me one scientific theory you believe in and I will tell you why your belief is unsubstantiated.

My point is that your concept of proof is illogical. You don't understand how philosophical and theoretical proof work. I mentioned some of the rules in a previous post which you have not read or did not understand.
But simply put, nothing that comes from "X-object or idea" can be used to define "x" as real. When people belive that ALL things come from God, then what is suitable to make proof.

A person can only present evidence for their faith. Just like in science. You can only present evidence for your conclusions. That does not mean that your conclusions are proven or accepted.

If you can't get that, then I think you need to go find a collegiate professor because that is a very juvenile concept on discussion.

And like I said, why don't you tell me any one thing that I cannot argue its very existence by dismissal of evidence? I mean what is real to you? I don't think you understand the place that you put your very own arguments when you run the dismissal of evidence racket.

I believe in everything that had been proven to exist. Evidence.
Your beliefs are not evidence, its as simple as that.

[sport_122]

I believe in everything that had been proven to exist. Evidence.
Your beliefs are not evidence, its as simple as that.

What? All evidence is based off of belief.
what has been proven to exist? Name something...don't be scared. Historical data is not evidence...? Philosophical principles are not evidence? Laws of physics, not evidence? What is then.

I mean based on your reasoning the only thing YOU can believe in is what is in your hand or right in front of you. You don't believe in any history, you don't believe in any writings, you don't believe in other peoples testimony, so you only believe in what is right in your hand? And even then, how can you prove to me that what is in your hand is in your hand?

My point is if you are going to ask for evidence the only thing you can reasonably do, is decide whether or not someone has come to there conclusion based on a compilation of evidence. There is no proving anything to anyone who really does not want something proven to them. What you don't know is that I was a nonbeliever first. It took a very long time for me to really start to understand things the way I do now. I didn't set out to disprove, I set out to validate. i wanted to find validity in the things that people of different faiths believe. I found validity in the person of Christ, the Bible (because of the historical links to secular writings) and in the sciences. If I wanted to make arguments for non belief I could only do so by ignoring evidence that I have come across which I believe is valid. But believe me. there had to be a very strong case for Christ for me.