You lost already, game over, case closed. In logic, reason, argumentation and debate failure to deal with the evidences and arguments given is to concede and you have already conceded this debate. Pedantic denial doesnt change this. You dont decide what is and isnt evidence so your glassy eyed, blind faith, emotion based denial just reveals your ignorance and bias. Historical evidence of the Resurrection given using secular historiographical standards which you know nothing about, have never heard of in your ignorance so you just stupidly deny. And learn something else, look up the universal negative logical fallacy, your denial is not only just pedantic, pathetic ignorance and bias but is a classical logical fallacy. And not only the universal negative logical fallacy, it’s classical question begging and circular reasoning. So at a minimum you have committed at least three logical fallacies and debate concession with one glassy eyed mantra repetition. And just as predicted you stupidly cannot deal with the evidence, historical evidence you knew nothing about so you just idiotically deny. Learn something child, denial is not refutation. Even when your pedantic, ignorant, glassy eyed responses are predicted, refuted you mindlessly repeat them. Go ahead, be predictable and expose your adolescent atheist angst based on your emotions and bias, say it again, ‘there is no God, therefore there can be no evidence of God.’

Gootchie-goo-goo scag, gootchie goo-goo. Grow up. Ignorant, lazy, biased and uneducated is no way to go through life son.

Can you not understand that if non christian historians actually accepted the resurrection that they would then become believers. The lack of belief by these individuals makes your cut and paste efforts an exercise in futility.

None of your stuff works without evidence for your god. Come back when you have that evidence, not a moment before. Your resurrection crap does not need refuting as the prerequisite condition, the existence of god, has not been proved. Your answer does not match the question. It is up to you to provide the evidence for god, not me. You haven’t even come near on the god issue, you are presupposing god, which I do not accept. You are acting in a most childish way.

So where is the evidence for god? It appears that you have none. I’m stating the fact that you have not provided evidence for your god. I’m offering you the opportunity to provide that evidence, but you refuse to do so. Shut up about the resurrection till you have overcome the main hurdle.

So put up or shut up you condescending twit. I’m not the one who believes fervently in an imaginary friend, a friend for whom you have no evidence.

So you can keep being a pathetic idiot, stupidly repeating, ‘there is no God, therefore there can be no evidence for God’ which changes nothing, the fact is you have been given evidence you cannot deal with so you just lie and claim it doesnt exist. Historians including non-Christian historians disagree with you. Grow up. Learn something. Being an intellectually stunted, emotionally wounded adolescent atheist who confuses his angst for a valid position is no way to go through life son.

So go ahead, beg for more negative attention, repeat your emotion based, a priori bias mantra of ignorance, ‘there is no evidence of God, there is no evidence of God. I can reply gootchie-goo-goo scag, gootchie-goo-goo all nite.

How many children has your god killed today? None, because there is no god.

Christianity tells us to ‘test all things hold fast that which is good’ in 1 Thess 5:19-22.

God told us in Isaiah 1:18, ‘Come let us reason together though your sins are scarlet they shall be as white as snow.’

We are told to test those who claim to be prophets and apostles in Duet 13, 18 and Revelations 3.

In Acts 17, the Bereans were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica because they tested what Paul told them while the Thessalonians w/o testing, just outright denied Paul based on their ignorance just like cag and ubi do

That’s why cag et al have no clue what they are talking about, they are glassy eyed fanatics who are ignorant of the facts, evidence and logic, instead they have the biased a priori presuppositions based on their emotions and keep childishly repeating, ‘there is no God therefore there can be no evidence for God’ and when clear indisputable evidence is provided even from non-Christian historians they lie in their ignorance and claim ‘those are just biased Christians’ etc.

You are not doing anyone any good by enabling them. There is a point at which Christians hold scoffers accountable. Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees liars and snakes in Matthew 23, Paul said of the Judaizers who tried to add circumcision onto salvation, ‘I hope the knife slips.’

So there is a point at which pedantry is rebuked. We are to destroy speculations against the knowledge of God in 2 Corinthians 10:5 and punish disobedience:

” 3For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. 4The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 6And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your obedience is complete.” 2 Corinthians 10:3-6

Cag and ubi are simply emotionally wounded, intellectually stunted adolescents who are here to express their angst in their inexcusable ignorance. They have been easily refuted and cannot even begin to respond to the historical evidences of the Resurrection verified by secular methodology that historians apply to ancient accts to authenticate them.

All they do is predictable, they are ignorant, uneducated and simply deny and even when this is exposed and predicted they cannot stop, they just keep on denying because they have nothing else, their positions are based on their emotions which are refuted by the evidences already presented. So all they will keep doing is pedantically repeating, ‘there is no God, there is no evidence for God’ in their glassy eyed, ignorant zeal. They are atheist zealots, products of their environment, incapable of not being products of their environment. They dont use logic and reason, they are ignorant of the facts and evidences.

So, winning the debate here, which has already been done and conceded, logic demands that,evidence unrefuted, arguments unrebutted are necessarily considered conceded and cag and ugi, could not and did not deal with the historical evidences of the Resurrection which is simply the truth which has been verified. So recognize that cag and ubi are not here for the truth, but to scoff in ignorance. They crave negative attention, so give them what they want. Hey cag and ubi, ‘gootchie-goo-goo, gootchie-goo-goo.’ There ya go, you got what you want, feel better?

Putting your faith in god to do the converting seems to be a foolish thing. How has it worked so far? Able to create anything but unable to convince more than half of the world’s population of its mere existence. Not very impressive.

Living my life according to a fairy tale is not for me. I’ll pass on the slavery, misogyny, stoning to death of disrespectful children, stoning to death for a variety of petty offences and mass genocide. The only comfort I get from the bible is the relief I feel in knowing that it is just the most awful, crappy book ever assembled, and I don’t believe any of the bullshit that it contains. My morals are not grounded in killing the children and domestic animals of the Amalekites. My morals do not include killing all the men, boys and non-virgin women but keeping the virgins for my amusement. My morals do not prevent me from eating shrimp or pork. My morals do not prevent me from wearing poly-cotton.

I reject vehemently the warped “morals” of the bible. I reject the bible as anything but a sadistic mishmash of text without any significance to modern life. I have no use for the family values in the bible. I reject wholeheartedly the love in the bible. I have no problem rejecting the bible as anything but the product of a group of control freaks codeifying their method for subjugating the masses. I reject the bible, which is the “proof” of jesus, therefore I accept jesus as being just as real as Betty Crocker.

So my question is this, what is one de-converting from? It may be from religiosity, it might be from extremism, it might be from people that see things as black and white, it might be from legalism. . . But, It’s hard to fathom that one can “find” Jesus and then decide one day that maybe in the end they didn’t “find” him. I put that in quotes because can we really put Jesus in a box? We dont “have” him. So how can we “lose” him. Also, we all have our own lense of seeing the world and typically we all feel that our way is the right way. In most cases, people have never drawn close to or experienced a personal relationship with Jesus, but instead we sign up for something that we really don’t know much about and then when it turns out to be something that we don’t like we leave.

So Jesus, he didn’t come to set up some exclusive religion for the “right” kind of people, he didnt come to make us become “Christians”, he didn’t come to give us all the right answers to the most challenging theological questions. I believe that he came to “dwell” among us and “draw” us to him so that we would seek Him in all that we do. In doing that, we become more like him (we’re for others first when our natural inclination is to think of us first), we ask Jesus to restore the world around us by using us to “make things right” (Jesus was for restoration & taught how to pray for healing, to care for the needy, and to stand up for justice), and finally which to me is where a lot of people get hung up, through him we experience the “new creation” after we leave the earth.

Now, to me arguing about salvation and life after death is close to pointless. Who even knows about it? Instead, living a life that brings a taste of heaven to earth is much more in line with what Jesus had in mind for all of us. So, there isn’t much of a need to defend Jesus and there isn’t much need for asking others to believe something that they don’t believe in. That’s the “crazy cycle”. Let’s find out what really makes us tick. Why are we who we are? What is it, really, that is drawing someone into a de-conversion mindset? Whether or not we “believe” in Jesus, how can we be more like him? Sorry this was so long!

Amazing isn’t it that this god who wants our adoration only appears to those who are already adoring. Talk about preaching to believers. Wouldn’t it make more sense for this love starved god to appeal to those who are unbelievers, but no, just to the suckups.

The resurrection has no meaning if there is no god. rr, until you prove that god exists, the rest is just verbiage. rr has not figured out that if historians “researching” jesus and the resurrection remain atheists, the “evidence” is less than compelling.

Until there is evidence for god, belief in god is just wishful thinking. You talk about ignorance, rr. How about providing evidence for any god, something that has evaded theologians for all of written history.