completely agree.  I'm still very supprised that there are people who believe these kind of stories from the Bible, but also simular stories from the Koran etc. Even high educated people believe in GOD, Alah and היה . I really would like to know how those people think! Because if you would investigate on History, you would see that older(much older stories then the bible) mystical stories from the greek, Sumer and Vedic period have almost the same story as Jezus!

Science is awesome. I love reading new discoveries and even figuring out ways to use it in my job. That said, Science has yet to figure out why humans sleep, something that we do for 33% of our lives and is completely against logical evolution. We can also barely detect what approx 75% of the universe is made up of (dark matter/energy). Like I said, science is awesome, but to use it as some basis to disprove an unknowable is....flimsy at best.

And even an overwhelming number of athiests agree that a man named Jesus existed, that was baptized by John the Baptist, and crucified. Almost nothing else is agreed upon, however. Check out Ehrman's (an atheist) book on if Jesus existed. I've read a crap ton of books on Christian apology, the fact that a man named Jesus existed is almost universally settled, other than fringe people. Just like some people believe the earth is flat, there are some who will believe Jesus didn't exist. Most have done almost no research on the subject.

He never, for to do the act he would first have to exist ;)

You shouldn't take the movie Zeitgeist / Religolous as a source. That part is completely made up.

Christians also don't believe he was actually born on December 25th, FWIW.

So is Jesus Christ.

*Person creates a post about a topic that isn't even covered on the site*
*Atheists and opposers of said idea argue against it*
*Defenders come out of nowhere and cry about how these religious threads are always "derailed"*

Really?

This is VGChartz, not ChristianCenter.com. People are allowed to argue with things said in the OP, or the basis of them, it's not like this site was set up as a safe space for particular religions.

Because the god you worship is a god of death that demands human sacrifice.

Are you referring to the Aztec religion? 

The problem with the food examples you give, comes from journalists, jumping at every chance of a story. They would often read a single study, and then proceed to write up an article for whatever magazine, or newspaper they worked for.  In reality scientists never agreed that butter, or eggs, or animal fat, or coffee was bad for us. They continue to do it to this day, much to the annoyance of actual scientists.

Science never said that the world would go into a new ice age. Can you provide a source for this claim? Climate change doesn't mean neither hot nor very cold. It means change, and scientists still say the earth is getting hotter. 

As for the disease example; Yes, that's how science works. We didn't know about something, then made a discovery, and corrected ourselves. That is how science works. 

Evolutionary theory never promoted racism. People at the time simply assumed that non-whites must be lower on the evolutionary ladder, without doing any actual research into the matter. And once actual research was done it showed that assumption to be horribly wrong. 

Just to be clear, I'm not asking for scientific proof. If you were to produce writings by three or four roman senators, alive at the time, all saying that Jesus resurrected from the grave I would believe it. If you could produce an ancient Korean text that talked about how Jesus visited the Koreans and told them all about his exploits in the Roman empire, I would accept that as evidence as well.

Sadly, there is no good evidence that Jesus resurrected from the grave. If you point to the Gospels, I will explain how the Gospel writers were deceptive, and how modern scholars have caught them in their deceit. I will explain how we know that the Gospels were not written by Mark, Mathew, Luke, or John.