@aterseraph Go ahead, I'd love to hear what they have to say. By the way, what makes you think that I have done no research?

@gentro101 I refer you to my comment to munky000527. It IS irrelevant. Do what you want with your life, but making ignorant comments about something that you obviously have done NO research yourself on, is self-delusional and just stupid. I'd be happy to point you to various historians and scientists a great deal smarter than you or me, that are Christians. Have a good day.

@munky000527 Wrong. This is a common misconception about the various manuscripts contained in what we call the 'bible.' That the contents 'widely differ' as you so ignorantly put it. When in fact they do the very opposite. A few that are written about the same even have different perspectives about the event, but ALL concur about the event in question. Another fact is that more manuscripts exist today on the bible than any other book of antiquity. Period. So your argument and logic is invalid.

Now I understand what my teachers really mean when they say 'good bull****' - that is bull**** that sounds good and stylised convincingly, but ultimately its still bull****.

What an idiot this is. When people talk about the bible and "evidence" I kinda shut them off. There's no evicdence in the bible to speak of.

does the bible predict the creation of the catholic church, and its death and rebirth ?

@MRfullon wtf are you talkin about to me? i watched those movies, i am not dumb to see the inaccuracies

@Rockstafeller Oh boy don't tell me your defending "The secret". It's a joke, based off of bogus quantum mechanic assumptions. No we don't understand why protons behave the way they do when we fire them through two slits, but it sure doesn't mean that we create reality. "What the bleep" is just as bad, so don't go there either.

@d00df00d I disagree. I don't think he can do better. This is the extent of his self-brainwashing.

Proof that it was good evidence please.

There is a vast body of physical, objectively verifiable evidence explained by the existence of Alexander the Great (or someone like him), wholly apart from the textual evidence, which can be compared against it. Moreover, the generally accepted claims about him -- e.g. his conquests and rulership -- are entirely believable and comparable to many similar known phenomena in history before and since his time. None of the above is true of Jesus. Come on, Dr. Craig. You can do better than this.

And if you performed just a bit effort, you would discover the letters than early fathers of Church were writing to Rome. You know what they said? Please stop persecuting us, because we can PROVE that we can do miraculous things!

@luiselmonster every religion is watered down for masses to understand or keep in line

@luiselmonster WHAT? DUDE, DO YOU HEAR YOURSELF? The whole premise of Bible is to make people aware that they do have mental powers within themselves that will allow them control of conditions. How you think "The Secret"/Law of Attraction works? And I believe in a Bible Jesus says "what you lookin at? you can do that as well", yet do you see most devoted Christians performing miracles? no, because they are ****in dumb and blind................

I´m not trying to disagree that Jesus may have had existed like any other important man in history. Just like Alexander the Great, he could have been a real person. The only difference is that Alexander, with all his achievement, never walked on water, or heal the sick by the touch of his hand. This magical attributes does not belong to the real Jesus. This attributes came up after years and years of campfire stories being told from generation to generation. " They said he was the son of God"

Eye witness accounts of a time where technology, science, mathematics, medicine, archeology, astronomy, astrology and any other form of study was in it most prehistoric phase. Most important of all, without any electricity. How can someone attribute all this magical powers to someone who stood up against the norm? Well, the answer is years and years of camp fire stories that transformed from a man a man who was different, influential and fought for a change to a holy man who walked on water.

...that William Lane Craig is trying to claim that miracles and resurrections occur because it says so in a book. We can all determine that the supernatural stories are mythology. It doesn't take a lot of brain power to arrive at that conclusion...for most of us anyway. Now I have a challenge for you: go out to your nearest bar and start talking to grown men the way you talk to people on message boards, unless you're a dickless coward.

@DazedSpy2 Ooh, a message board tough guy. Learn to read and argue intelligently instead of calling me a moron. Of course there's mythology about Alexander. We know from the mark he left and the great influence on multiple cultures, and the spread of his empire that he was almost certainly real. A story like the Gordian knot, for example, while it doesn't entail the supernatural, may very well be just another tall tale, like Washington and the cherry tree. The problem is...

@AntiFaithNY theres a ton of mythology around alexander the great you ****ing moron

The crucial gap is the one between your ears, Craig.

No one claims Alexander the Great walked on water, turned water into wine, healed the blind, crippled, or diseased. No one claims he died and was reborn, or had a virgin for a mother, or was the son of the creator of the universe, or can decide where you go when you die. No one claims you can communicate with Alexander through telepathy and be forgiven for what you've done wrong, and if someone did, we'd all agree it was MYTHOLOGY. That's why people take it more seriously. This man is a fool.

@munky000527 My goodness you didn't listen you bafoon!

@munky000527 true - of course Willaim lane craig will conviently ignore all of them and find the one obsure post which is absurb

@badpanda84 There are to many problems with using the Bible as evidence to list here in this comment.

you have to question how the bible was put together - the catholic church probably altered what was orginally written. Not only that but the catholic chruch actually decided what went in the bible in the first place.