I agree that one either exists or they don't, but perceptions of existence vary tremendously. Also, is a universal consiousness needed for universal existence? One question that I have always had trouble with.
What is amazing is the continuous ignoring of the logic I present in my arguments. The "I have the experts on my side" argument is like the "bandwagon" argument, totally fallacious.
One can exist and be unconscious i.e. quite unaware of your own existence.
More importantly, people go along in the daily rat-race barely aware of their own existence, caught up in the nuances of survival.
You simply are throwing out red herrings. Of course we can point to SPECIFiC men in history and say they were a specific person. There are many pictures of Lincoln, volumes of comtemperaneous historical data and his own writings that PORTRAY a specific man in history that really existed. Even...
I don't know about this thread's veracity, but it is true that Christian churches in general are taking a dimmer view of Halloween, and downplaying its celebration.
99 percent of all "scholars" have a built-in pre-existing bias that a supposed Jesus existed, and everything they write is based upon that assumption.
Not exactly scientific.:confused:
So a supposed god is illogical? God-like logic could only be ascertained by knowing the big picture, which by definition we are not privy to (as of yet).
Agreed, actually the pattern of writing of the gospels suggest all are fictional, as the stories of the supposed Jesus get embellished upon greatly with each successive writing in time sequence. Also, there so many conflicts and omissions between the stories, due to the personal "taste" of the...
Their real problem is they cannot point to a real man in history and say that was the historical Jesus. Inflating the importance of second or third-hand hearsay evidence is the only tactic they have that can succeed in confusing the situation.
:D
Uh, maybe for Biblical historians with a bias who have no OTHER means of justifying their claims. Most of us require REAL evidence to believe something happened, not second or third hand writings from unknown authors with dubious motives. LOL:D
An omnisicent god is helpless, as it knows all of its own future actions, which it cannot change, i.e. omniscience by necessity really is impossible. If it doesn't know its own future actions, it is not omniscient.