HAPPY NEW YEAR! Its 2008!

[Game_boy]

thetonestarr said:
It is historical fact that Jesus did exist. There are a number of secular sources that refer to Him. Additionally, from dating of the Scriptures and from the fact that nobody ever stood up in those days (when Christianity was an infant faith) and disputed Christ's existence, we can rest assured that it is 100% solid fact that He was born (likely around 4 B.C.), and we also know for a fact that He died (likely around 29 A.D.).
We also know that there is solid evidence that someone believed to be Jesus walked the earth after Jesus' death. This, I won't say is 100% provably Christ (although I most certainly believe so), but I will say that evidence will most likely lead the objective one to believe so.

There is a huge amount of probable evidence that shows that Jesus was born, did teach as a Rabbi, did face opposition, and did most certainly die a death of crucifixion. It is absolutely foolish to say He didn't live.

Anyways, yes, "Christmas" is obviously not when Jesus was born. We've known that for centuries. The early church chose December 25 to celebrate Christ's birth because (1) we don't know when He was born for sure, (2) there were a number of pagan practices that governmental and church leaders were trying to squash that celebrated Dec. 25 for various reasons, and (3) this was decided during the "Dark Ages", when people in general didn't do the most intelligent things.

By existence, I mean existence with special attributes like being the son of a god. There is some evidence to suggest he was a human being, yes.

It does not even matter what arguments or evidence you can come up with, basic principles like Conservation of Energy/Matter cannot ever under any circumstances be violated, and the existance of the Christian god and Jesus as his son irreconcilably do so.