VALIS
Double Edge that's the second dumbest thing I've heard today. According to your logic, you just have to have faith that you have an ancestor. You are the historical record dummy, however it might be easier for you to believe your family tree is the result of immaculate conception...now go do some goddam geneology, disprove your own point and come back when you have something to say.If mine was the second dumbest thing you've heard today, than I KNOW that the DUMBEST has got to be your ANY one of your so called LOGICALLY thoughts. Resorting to name calling only weakens ones argument. (And why is geneology damned by god?) Your psychological retort game of playing the "parent" isn't becoming.
Sincerely,District Overbeer
You state that there is a very real debate about the existence of Jesus. You're on one side of that debate that claims there is NO evidence, I'm on the other side. My point is, (now be careful, don't come unglued) that "physical" evidence doesn't stand alone as the all encompassing indicator of existence. Of course I'm the historical record of my ancestor...duh! But you know what, there's nothing written down of that distant relative, know one knows anything about them. In my opinion, (I know yours differs) the Christian movement itself is a "physical" proof that He existed, whether He was divine or not. You choose not to believe the records of eyewitnesses, just because they don't have a stamp of approval by a well known "publisher" or historian. Perhaps Mohammed didn't exist as well, because those records weren't written until 150 years after his death.