1) As believers, we understand that there are more spiritual forces at work than just God. There are also fallen angels, demons, etc. In Exodus, it's very clear that the Phaero's magicians worked 'miracles' with the help of some other spiritual force. God is not the only spiritual being in existence.

2) Just stating that Jesus was not resurrected with no evidence does not make it so. Stating that the Christian Movement was an offbeat cult for 400 years is a rediculous assertion. In the book of Acts, written shortly after Jesus' death, many thousands were added to the Christian faith, very soon after his resurrection, many would have known if it was faked at this point. Several other books of the Bible (Hebrews, Romans, Corinthians, etc) were written to large, regional churches throughout the known world. In addition to this, if the disciples had known the resurrection was faked, they would not have been tortured or died for this 'lie', and the Christian movement would have been destroyed. The Church may have not been mainstream, and may have been persecuted, but it was by no means just an 'offbeat cult', your statments show your glaring lack of knowledge on this subject. Making up your own "facts" does not in any way prove your point.

3) The Bible records where many of Jesus' miracles take place. These miracles were very well recorded by multiple individuals, including the locations of many of them. One problem is that, the City of Jerusalem of that time was absolutely destroyed by the Romans in 70AD (a fulfillment of Jesus' prophesy), this makes finding exact locations somewhat difficult. In addition, persecution scattered the Church, so they were not able to set up 'shrines' to locations. Stating that 'Nobody but a few followers believed it for centuries' is one of the most uneducated and totally false statements I've ever seen on these forums.

4) Even if they had wanted to, the intense persecution of the early church means that they would not have been able to set up a holy shrine to a particular location (though Christianity is not supposed to be based on 'shrines', 'holy places', etc, but a direct relationship with the Creator). The Bible says the Church was scattered by this persecution and Jerusalem was totally destroyed in 70AD, so It's perfectly logical that the Church of today would not know the exact location of the Tomb, it's just been lost.

Trying to disprove my belief system without even bothering to have any knowledge of it, or put in the effort do any real research is pretty sad.

Actual places have no meaning in Christianity because they were not given meaning in any of the Gospels. The New Testament makes no distinction of any place being Holy, but is very clear that 'Your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit'. The entire point of the New Testament is that God no longer desires to live in a certain place, temple, or specific location, but He wants to make his dewlling with Man, and communicate directly with Him. The early Church understood this, which is why they did not set up shrines to Jesus tomb, or the places He performed miracles.

The Catholic Church, on the other hand, made locations and objects sacred, but this is clearly a distortion by Man, and is not backed up by the scriptures. Once again, you show your complete lack of knowledge on this subject.

I LOL'd when I read this. Yes, with the 24/7 news cycle and the internet, I'm sure we would hear about this. However, in ancient Egyptian times, nations were very isolated, so Egypt's neighbor would likely not even know about the plagues, or maybe just hear romors. Even when they did hear, it's not a definite that they would record this in their History (if they were recording their history at all), or that their Historical texts would survive until the present. There were not any international historians back then either. In addition, great kingdoms such as Egypt were known to write their own History as they wanted it to be remembered. This includes destroying the hyrogliphs of pharos that were considered failures, traitors, etc. Do you actually think they would record the details of a humiliating defeat by a Slave God? Because of the selective recording of History, our modern record of national defeats from early time periods comes from the historical records of the victorious nation in most cases. That is why The Bible (the record from the Isrealite's perspective) is the only place where this is recorded, this is very common.

But there is record that seems to be of the Plagues in spite of this. The Lieden museum in Holland houses a Papyrus that seems to describe the effects of the plagues. http://ohr.edu/yhiy/article.php/838 . This papyrus describes turmoil and plague on the land, including 'The river has been turned to blood' 'Forsooth, gates, columns and walls are consumed by fire.' 'Gold and lapis lazuli, silver and malachite, carnelian and bronze... are fastened on the neck of female slaves.' It has been widely debated whether this applies to the Plagues, but it makes sense that it very well could.

I presume then that the tide there is extremely variable considering it drowned the entire Egyptian army!

With regards to pryamids I'm pretty sure we have worked out how they were built, what we don't know is why there is very building thousands of miles away in South America. Also, things like Stonehenge and Easter Island, are still pretty much guesses.

Your knowledge of the matter is way off.  Egypt was a trading power in ancient times, there was a major trade route through the Sinai Peninsula connecting Egypt with Asia.  Travelers and traders visited Egypt and other nations quite often.  There are numerous records of nations making records of other people during this time, the Armana letters of Egypt (around the suspected time of Moses) gave precise details about Egypt's neighbors.  The Habiru people, expected to be the Hebrews, were talked about and recorded by several ancient civiliations.

Its utterly ridiculous to think that other people would not heear about the Nile River would run red with blood and over a hundred thousand people first born children dying.  The Bablyonians recorded how much grain they traded with Egypt and and what characteristics a group of nomads had in the desert, but you claim that they and other civilizations didn't bother or even heard about such a huge supernatural event.

Re-tagging this post.

Also, I doubt those pyramids and buildings were to your god at all. Stonehenge is believed to be an ancient calendar while the pyramids in South America were generally used as places of sacrifice.

The Hebrews "claimed" it drowned the Egyptian army, just like they claimed the sea parted for them, just like the Greeks claimed they Atlantis was swallowed by the sea, just like Muslims claim Mohammed rose to Heaven to talk with God.  Again, you are making the argument that the entire Egyptian Army and the Pharoah drowned by some miraculous event but nobody but the Hebrews bothered to record it.

And what Pharoah was it that drowned?  There is a near complete record of ruling Pharoahs of Egypt, even minor ones like Tutenkhamen and hated ones like Ahmenotep (the one who switched religions and fired all the priests).  Yet there is no record of the Egyptians were a pharoah drowned in the Red Sea or disappeared chasing a band of slaves.

Stonehenge and Easter Island were made by humans, not God, gods, or aliens.

This thread is filled with more (edited for content) than Facepunch's General discussion. Makes me wonder why the other thread that inspired this is dead. *Rolls Eyes*

I never said those things were built by things other than humans, you're just reading too much into my post!

What do you mean by complete, exactly?  I mean, that every time period is covered, or that there are several Egyptian and non-Egyptian records that agree?  Because, I think I've read somewhere (inquiry, not position, may it be noted) that many ancient kingdoms didn't like to record military failures and the like.

Besides what amount of Grain they traded with Egypt (something they kept for their own records), what great interest did these other nations have of recording the history of their neighbors?? We have incomplete records of all these civilizations, so the nonexsistence of this event in these civilization's records does not disprove it. you still fail to prove your point.

And I still don't understand why you keep cutting parts of what I say out of your replies, kind of annoying.

EDIT: If you're going to keep cutting up what I say so you only have to reply to 10% of it, you're not worth my time. I honestly don't know why I even bothered replying to you on this.