Hamas legalizes Crucifixion

[Final-Fan]

Avinash_Tyagi said:

Final-Fan said:

Avinash_Tyagi said:

Kasz216 said:

Avinash_Tyagi said:

Kasz216 said:

Avinash_Tyagi said:

Kasz216 said:

Avinash_Tyagi said:
Not so KasZ, what you are stating is that there are many who accept the theory that he exists but theory isn't necessarily fact

Just like evolution?
Find me a credible expert who disbeleives in the evolution of man.
Then i'll believe there is a credible expert who disbelieves in the existence of jesus.
The problem is your definition of a "certantity" is untenable.
There is no reasonable reason to believe jesus did not exist.
I mean, i may as well claim there is no proof anyone exists.

Evolution is different, you can see the evidence in the fossil record, the genetics, and even some species and how they adapt

You have not shown me any bones, any records, or even first hand accounts of christ, nothing that supports his existence outside of second hand writings

Oh?  You have first hand bones of humans evolving from apes?  I thought it was called "The missing link" for a reason.

You also have genetic evidence of our relationship to apes, in addition you can see other species, like finches and insects adapting to environmental changes
[...]

How does DNA prove anything?
We share 50% of our DNA with Bannannas.
All that proves is we are more like Monkeys then we are Bannannas.
DNA is a "Second hand" source of pure conjecture and you've yet to show any first hand proof people have evolved from anything.
In fact we only have first hand proof of evolution in bacteria.  There is no first hand proof at all of anything past microscopic size evolving.
I mean... have you ever seen something written by someone who saw something evolve?
I haven't.
Pretty suspisious.

Ah but the question was whether evolution exists, as you yourself argue we've seen it first hand in bacteria, so then we can add in what you call the "second hand" stuff since there is something to support it.  We've seen things evolve at the cellular level and we've seen evidence that infers evolution at the multicellular level.

With Christ we only have the stuff that is second hand, nothing first hand to support it, plus the second hand stuff isn't as scientifiaclly rigorous as the fossil evidence and genetics in evolution

No, actually he said "the evolution of man", so bacteria aren't good enough.  Nor worms, which I can cite a document for.

Wrong again, his first comment was evolution, then he asked about man, like I said, once you have the evidence for the lesser organisms, then you have some support for what you guys are referring to as "second hand" the fossil evidence and genetics

You're just blowing smoke in a pathetic attempt at misdirection.  The second sentence of that post clearly was intended to clarify the parameters of the general question.  I'll leave the rest of your post to Kasz.