remember when? if someone believed in 'aliens. like little green men? people thought they were kooks.
now "aliens are the explanation for creation (life) lol 'atheism
gets kinda boring watching addone flounder around making excuses. so lets watch one of the top 'athesits flop around for a while
lol 'evolution didnt happen here.......................... it happened somewhere else and it was those 'aliens that created life here............. but not God
curious thing about dawkins. he knows his biology. he knows that 'evolution aint happening. so he whips out that 'atheist magical imagination

so professor dawkins was not against intelligent design
1:27 just certain types of designers such as God
Richard Dawkins admits you might find a signature of design in the cell - interview with Ben Stein


This post was edited by TiStuff on Apr 25 2026 11:48am

Stop bible simping its not good for you. The only evidence you thought you had I debunked in like 5 mins. Without demonstrating how what I said isn't correct you going to have to accept it was a failed prophecy and you got suckered into believing a lie.

Universe didn't come from nothing it was already here, there is very little evidence a person jesus ever existed and there is even less to no evidence of magical jesus. So the only rational conclusion is that Jesus never existed and if he did he wasn't magical in any way and was deified by bronze age grifters to sell people hope and to make them obedient. Religion is a long running scam time to stop simping.

What other basis do we view history through aside from written accounts up until the modern era? By your logic, in terms of the historical accuracy aspect of your statement, history could never be true until the modern age when we could physically record things.

I thought you were going to provide me with material I can study and examine?

We already know the universe was already here and we already know everything inside of the universe have been intelligently designed and science, math, and physics all point to creation.

We have multiple early sources, independent mentions outside Christianity and consistency with core details through multiple accounts that all align with Jesus existing and what he did. You have got to get past this modern day brick wall and understand how many years ago this was and all documentation we have to go off of verifying his existence.

Idk how you can trust any history books with your way of thinking.

That is correct written history cannot be accurately 100% confirmed unless there is absolutely overwhelming amount of written evidence from all sources that lines up.

History is often written through the lense of the victors. It is only through different accounts and physical evidence we can trully corroborate if something did in fact happened. Or did you naively think that all history is correct because its in a book?

Since the only independent accounts of Christianity are a handful of people who weren't even born in the same century making a foot note in their diary about christians not jesus or the miracles he is claimed to have done. We cannot take this religion seriously.
Then there are numerous contradiction in the bible and failed prophecies when taken as a whole give even less reason to believe it.
Couple this with the fact religion has motive to lie or lose financial gain and power over obedienct acolytes. Religion makes people go kill other people for free, religion makes people donate all their fortunes to the church. Its a massively profitable scam. Why would they want to give that up?

This is why we have modern methods to separate bullshit from reality.
When police put on the body cams we can see exactly what happened not rely on stories.
People lie all the time even unintentionally people cannot recollect the event 100% even if they witnessed it themselves.

This is why I try to verify the bible where it can be verified. If you say there is a global flood at this time period there better be physical signs of a global flood at that time from all around the planet. If there isnt the bible is full of shit.

This post was edited by addone on Apr 25 2026 03:29pm

Still waiting to see any contradictions in the bible. You have been corrected on 100% of your copy and pasted sources.

You also can't claim prophecies haven't been fulfilled. There have been many

This post was edited by D_urRRR on Apr 25 2026 03:35pm

wow you believe the universe is whats eternal, your practically a antique. despite what almost everyone else thinks.
most people since the hubbel telescope say the universe had a beginning. as science progress it becomes harmonious with scripture.
the only time things are not harmonious is when it conflicts with mans imagination



deeeeaaammmmmm we finally getting some where

No—claims aren’t accepted or rejected based on ‘equal weakness.’ The person making the claim has the burden to support it, and alternative explanations have to account for the same evidence just as well or better.

When it comes to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the question is which explanation best fits the available evidence—not who can throw out the weakest argument.

As for contradictions, a ‘clear contradiction’ would be two accounts that cannot both be true in any reasonable way, not just differences in detail. If your examples don’t reach that level, rejecting them isn’t ‘conjecture’—it’s just not accepting weak arguments.



Do you want to get into the Grand Canyon debate now? I don't think you're ready for that.

Remember you are making the claim of resurrection i am denying it. So why should I give you strong evidence when you cant even provide weak evidence for it.
You are making an unreasonable to impossible ask. Thats like saying prove that there isn't a cosmic turtle floating in space if you can't then magical crab people created the world.

My proof becomes disproving your claims and poking holes in the entire story. If your proof is weak I have no reason to give you more proof than required. If you build your house on faulty or weak foundations I have no obligation to dismantle your house from top down (even though I could) all I have to do is take away one or two dodgy supports (your faulty arguments) and your entire house collapses under its own weight.

If I said the testimonies are unreliable therefore we cannot say jesus cannot have resurrected. You would just say yes they are reliable and it becomes my word against yours. Without strong evidence for me to disprove I can freely say there hasn't been a resurrection. If you say there was I would have to ask for a extraordinary proof or give similar examples to give precedent that it can happen. Instead you are making exteaodinary claims with very weak no proof at all.

Another layer here is that this is your mental house we are breaking. You built this mental house on weak logical fallacies but you don't recognize them as such. If you want me to demolish this house for you then you cannot run to a different house built on more logical fallacies. We must meet in a common neutral house where we can both watch as I bring the wrecking ball to your mental house. You must put that house (religious belief) to scrutiny, test it against logic reality, probability and other methods. If your house still stands you get to live there if it cracks under pressure in any way you must abandon it and either replace it with a house with strong foundations or become a nomad.



Notice how I said global flood with physical markers all around the planet not just one spot proving only regional floods of a grand canyon. I don't think you are ready for flood debate yourself.

Still nothing?

Jesus remains our savior and God still loves you addone.