Omnidevil

plus, the boat would have to accomodate up to 70 million different species of animals (including species that are not visible to the eye ) Did God also create microscopic animals?
Well, that aside, it has deviated from the original topic.

Nah, some must have gotten on without Noah knowing. There's no way he wanted to have termites aboard his boat. Those things are so damn hard to get rid of... Unless he housed them in fish tanks. Next to the roaches and lice.

You guys don't have to quote people that are right above your post you know. XD

Which again is not possible, there are like as I know, several types of termites, not to mention several hundreds of types of monkeys.
If God was to accomodate all animals (at least one pair of each so that there could possibly be a breeding pair), or say as a save game thing (where you can load the data of one animal to make another one...) that means averagely, Noah's ark would have to have a good all climate area, which is technically not possible. As we know, certain species of animals can only live in extreme weather, like Seals for example, if Seals were to be on the ark, which means, a section of that ark would have to have northern or southern arctic wheather.

Not to mention how big it must have been (say the ark must be at least the size of America of Modern day...

again... off topic.

Ok, so did anyone found a better source? I came across this one:
http://www.webjesus.co.uk/exist/historical.htm

I probably am an idiot for posting this.
cause i wanted to believe he exists, but if that is also denied, I wonder how?

Is it not possible to denounce the fact that christianity did not come from Jesus? rather a group of wise men, who used an image of a divine being to spread the culture?
Would it have changed if this was proven to be true? What if the twelve disciples are the one that created the culture, and Jesus was the medium of the people to spread the culture? Possible?

I am not a Christian but I believe that Jesus did exist. I know that some people will find what I say to be somewhat offensive. But in my religion Jesus is a messenger from God, to spread his word.

Jesus was sent by God to put Jews back on the right path.

Omni it is a hard question… But do not forget what is important in religion is the message behind it.

do not forget what is important in religion is the message behind it.

exactly what I meant, but this message would not have been the same would it if the figurehead was never there to begin with.
Which is why so many challenge the belief of his existence, do you perhaps realize the implications if it was proven?
Well of course, again , faith is always the essence, but I have faith in the teachings, not the figurehead that is Jesus. Rather, the ways being taught, cause in the end every religion teaches good, and to follow anyone would be the same, to do good. However, without the figurehead, the power would have swayed I presumed.

Hmm. Isn't Christianity the only religion that promotes the use of war to spread? Soldier of God, blah blah... Somehow the teachings have been skewed a bit no? Or was that part of the original teachings? Seems it's a nice tool for people in power no?

puppychow16

Hmm. Isn't Christianity the only religion that promotes the use of war to spread? Soldier of God, blah blah... Somehow the teachings have been skewed a bit no? Or was that part of the original teachings? Seems it's a nice tool for people in power no?

True, many have exploited what the bible says about being "soldiers of God" and used it as an excuse to go to war against anyone not christian. The Crusades are glaring examples of such exploitation, and it is hard not to imagine that Bush's war is based around that theme to a certain degree (he did use the word "crusade" to describe his little war, but had to backtrack because of all the negative feedback he got). I do not think that the use of violence to spread the religion was in the original teachings; Several non-believers think that violence is a tenant of Christianity because so many hypocrites have killed "in the name of God." The other stupid crap that "Christians" pull cause much doubt of the credibility of their religion in the eyes of non-believers, and it gives the genuinely good Christians a bad rap.

Anyways, back to the original question: I personally believe Jesus existed and that He is the savior of the world. While it is understandable one could doubt the Bible's account of his existence, one cannot fully declare that the teachings are complete bullcrap as well. They are lessons that can really make the world a better place. Why not put stock into the person that made these teachings? And then there are the conspiracy theories and such; if you look at the debate of the authenticity of Christianity and Jesus's existence in an objective manner, I think the evidence and reasoning that support that Jesus is real or is not are equally convincing and unconvincing; and if there is this 50/50 uncertainty, why do I support one over the other? I am one of the lucky (hopefully, many) people that got to witness God's power in action in today's world several times. No amount of logic or "it was just a coincident" cop-out methodology can explain the things I have seen and experienced. Why would God do that for me, the God who was originally and exclusively the God of the Jews? Because Jesus presented God to the rest of the world; Jesus made salvation possible for those of non-Jewish descent.

The Crusades are glaring examples of such exploitation

I would have thought otherwise, they were defending their religion in hasardous times, if anything without them, christianity would prolly be a minority even until today. Remember the fall of Jerusalem? That is a turning point.

Why not put stock into the person that made these teachings?

the problem is as I stated, no accounts of even witnesses even recorded him ever creating these teachings, and well, I mean, if that is the case, he is no greater than william churchill, he is no greater than a man, who has found or perhaps potrayed an image of leadership, and somehow, through blowing up of porpotions by those around him with power ended up with more and more crazy stories of legends and so on.

He possibly exists, as a man, who gave rise to a new religion (we all know it has to start somewhere and someone needs to come along to do it), so he was that man, the root. But I highly doubt the rest of him being son of God can be all that trusted.

Of course, again, faith means everything, you must believe in order to believe.

The same thing works with the Egytians, if no one at the time believed in the great temples, and worshipped the Sun and their godly representative the pharoah, there would have been no great empire.
Many great empires in the pass rose from the embrace of religion and through those, moral understanding developed, which is wh y I think religion is good, however, the people practicing it can always forget the root of it all.

Even when they praise the lord, the direct teachings passed down from the bible, everything about it, was more than ever practiced no? IIRC, the actual teachings are really morbid, anyone who has read the first few testaments in actual would know that the bible changed faces over time to become smoother and mellow.

Which is why also a reason to doubt his existence, the contents of the bible can change to match the taste, does religion then cannot change to match the tastes of those who are indeed wishing for it? Who believed?

lol, you just dont get it. of course, society would probably collapse if they knew Jesus didnt exsted for sure, but for me it's exactly as i stated -- you cannot prove to me He existed or not if i believe in Him, thats the definition of the word 'belief' -- so, i just believe. ;]

wow society collapsing because one religious leader is proven not to exists? I think not. As far as christians go-they are only a part of the population-there are other religions out there that have other beliefs and dont believe jesus was anything special-some believe he was another profit or saint and some believe he was a very charasmatic person. If your faith is so strong to believe in jesus being the son of god then yea! If you believe that Buddah is the one for you then great. Personally I am with you omnidevil on this topic. I think there is beginning to be and has been info swinging the other way to show jesus was just a guy but when this info has come out the fundamentalists have disregarded it and said it must be made up or untrue like the whole judis scrolls and the bloodline of christ, etc. It is about faith-obviously not science or proof-because faith is what has kept this religion going and growing--well that and the inquisition :)

I think jesus forever existen even the science prove that is not true the world in the first forever try to explain thier existence and the answer is the same in all the world the religion God "and the cientist explain the existence of jesus so that are the two big reason of you never try to erase jesus in the history
Have you ever see DaVinci Code : That is a book a novel and vaticaion feer of that movie but i dont see any movie any book who wants erase jesus in the history
The humaniti need jesus or god forever, because the humanito never explain the live why we are live
that is my point (sorry for my english im mexican)jejejeje and "Catolico"

Omnidevil--that last post could start a war LOL - be careful you will end up burnt at the stake or something :)

"soldiers of God"... As far as I know, this is true about every religion.

mohtools

"soldiers of God"... As far as I know, this is true about every religion.

Nope. In some other religions it's implied, but never directly stated. Christianity states it as a good thing directly.

Omni- Damn... 0.o The peace man the peace! In a history class I took in college, the prof taught out of a version of the Bible that stated that the title "Christ" was another word for King. That's what he said Jesus was supposedly accused of. The high powered Jews feared the rise of a king. (The prof had mad tenure btw. 0.o)

As for the hippie theory.. -_- You don't need drugs to be in ecstasy you know. Music and a crowd bandwagoning will do...

mohtools

"soldiers of God"... As far as I know, this is true about every religion.

not true, Buddhism has no soldiers of God.
as far as I know, there was no war being raised in defense or offense to promote Buddhism.
so is Taoism and Confucianism (they are teachings of morals and paganism, more related to localities small time worshipping)

sabella30

Omnidevil--that last post could start a war LOL - be careful you will end up burnt at the stake or something :)

which is why I put in the spoiler, it is not my writing, I found this in some random atheist site written by someone who well... as far as I know, is also an idiot. In some way, he could be saying the truth, but again, the drugs he mentioned never existed in that time. So it is probably nothing. Nonetheless, I deleted the post.

Actually I thought it was kind of funny--I mean obviously that stuff didnt exists but the mental picture is still funny. You are right about the buddhists-that is my argument everytime a christian tells me that holy wars are a way of life for every religion. I say how many buddhists monks have you seen carrying ak47's shooting none believers??

Buddhists with ak47s? LOL! There's something you don't see every day.