Those aren't facts. They are only found in the bible. That is only one source.

no they are not! find me someone who is not mentally insane that can prove to me that these "historical facts" have any backing outside of the bible.

another thing that irks me, you know how jesus was born of a virgin mother. why is there no other evidence of a virgin woman giving birth outside of the bible. how did the romans not know of this and keep record of it? it seems like kind of a big deal.

A non believer is lost with out God, he is stuck in his sin.
Hell will be the absence of love. You dont feel hate filled because of the work of God in your life. The feeling and emotions God has given you are important for the existence of free will.

Lewis points out, for the non believer it would be hell to be with God for eternity. Which means there is a deeper rejection going on than we may know.

We are not talking about a magical man from above. I am talking about a God who spoke the universe into existence by the power of his word.

They are believed to be historical facts by the majority of scholarship.

Heck, not even all the NT gospels write about the virgin birth.
Pretty important piece of the story to leave out of sections of the holy book, no?

so as a non-believer it would be hell for me to go to heaven? because wouldnt that mean that it would be heaven for me to pass on and spend my time with lucifer? or are we saying that since spending eternity with god would be hell, that god and lucifer are the same? you are right, i am lost. (you just got caught in your own web of lies i think)


i dont feel hate filled because of the work of god in my life? but i dont surround myself with people who believe in this nonsense and i know for a fact the people around me bring joy to my life.

to believe in your hallucinations of a god, would be the equivalent of belief in santa or the easter bunny...you know, the 2 guys jesus gets together with on poker night. because theres just as many childrens stories written about those magical beings as there are of your god.

-According to Lewis, eternity with God would be hell for the non believer.

-Hell was created for Lucifer and the angels, it was not initially meant for man. It is outer darkness, you will not see, nor be seen by anyone.

-Lucifer was a created being, his reason for existence is God. God has never ceased to be. "I AM"

-There is no empirical evidence for Santa clause or the easter bunny. There is however good evidence to believe that the Judeo Christian worldview is true.

There is a simple explanation for the rise of Xianity, it was basically the same as most Pagan religions of the time and Pagans are fairly tolerant and can easily interchange names for their different g-ds. For example, Xians used the fish symbol which was a symbol for Adonis for centuries before.

Perhaps Lucifer is nothing more than the relentless drive to get for self rather than for ALL.

Then Hell would be the utter isolation and disconnection from ALL brought on by constant want, need and demand for self.

I know... How dare I bring my mere interpretation into your belief?

"The religionsgeschichtliche approach to the resurrection soon collapsed and is today almost universally abandoned, primarily for two reasons: The supposed parallels were spurious. The ancient world was a virtual cornucopia of myths of gods and heroes. Comparative studies in religion and literature require sensitivity to the similarities and differences, or distortion and confusion inevitably result. Some of these mythological figures are merely symbols of the crop cycle (Osiris, et al.); others have to do with apotheosis by assumption into heaven (Hercules, Romulus); still others concern disappearance stories, which seek to answer the question of where the hero has gone by saying that he lives on in a higher sphere (Apollonius, Empedocles); others are cases of political Emperor–worship (Julius Caesar, Augustus). None of these is parallel to the Jewish notion of resurrection from the dead. With respect to the resurrection narratives, David Aune, a specialist in ancient literature, concludes that "no parallel to them is found in Graeco–Roman biography." Rather the resurrection narratives, like the gospels in general, are to be interpreted within a Jewish context."

"The religionsgeschichtliche approach to the resurrection soon collapsed and is today almost universally abandoned, primarily for two reasons: The supposed parallels were spurious. The ancient world was a virtual cornucopia of myths of gods and heroes. Comparative studies in religion and literature require sensitivity to the similarities and differences, or distortion and confusion inevitably result. Some of these mythological figures are merely symbols of the crop cycle (Osiris, et al.); others have to do with apotheosis by assumption into heaven (Hercules, Romulus); still others concern disappearance stories, which seek to answer the question of where the hero has gone by saying that he lives on in a higher sphere (Apollonius, Empedocles); others are cases of political Emperor–worship (Julius Caesar, Augustus). None of these is parallel to the Jewish notion of resurrection from the dead. With respect to the resurrection narratives, David Aune, a specialist in ancient literature, concludes that "no parallel to them is found in Graeco–Roman biography." Rather the resurrection narratives, like the gospels in general, are to be interpreted within a Jewish context."

Yes the only significant difference, if you read the debates with pagan philosophers and early Xians like Justin Martyr is that the pagans believe in the symbolism of their myths, not that they were actually true. According to pagan beliefs only seven people have been resurrected. According to Jewish beliefs, let me quote:

The Hebrew word Olam Ha-Ba ("the world to come") is used for both the messianic age (see below) and the afterlife (see Gan Eden, below). The world to come is important and something to look forward to. A Mishnah passage says, "This world is like a lobby before the Olam Ha-Ba. Prepare yourself in the lobby so that you may enter the banquet hall." The tractate Moed Katan teaches, "This world is only like a hotel. The world to come is like a home."

Yet it is also emphasized that this world provides the ability and privilege of doing good works and performing the mitzvot: "Rabbi Yaakov also used to say, 'Better one hour in repentance and good deeds in this world than all the life in the world to come. And better one hour of tranquility of spirit in the world to come than all the life of this world.'" (Pirkei Avos, Chapters of the Fathers)

Except for Horus, from the Egyptian Book of the Dead. Horus was born of a Virgin mother, baptized in a river, the person to baptize Horus was later beheaded, Horus also spent time alone in the desert being tempted, Healed the sick, the blind, cast out demons, walked on water, Horus raised Asar from the dead(Asar translates to Lazarus). Horus had 12 Disciples, was crucified, and after 3 days, two women announced that Horus, savior of humanity, had been resurrected.




There is no evidence the myth of Horus was circulating during the 1st century. Scholarship has never considered Horus a possibility for the creation of Christianity..

There is a simple explanation for the rise of Xianity, it was basically the same as most Pagan religions of the time and Pagans are fairly tolerant and can easily interchange names for their different g-ds. For example, Xians used the fish symbol which was a symbol for Adonis for centuries before.

There is no evidence the myth of Horus was circulating during the 1st century. Scholarship has never considered Horus a possibility for the creation of Christianity..

You do realize that versions of the Book of the Dead dates as far back as the 16th Century BC. That is 1600 years before Christ.
It really doesn't matter what your "Scholarship" thinks. Horus is IN HISTORY and PREDATES Jesus by at least 1000 years. As noted above, the earliest Book of the Dead dates back to 1600 BEFORE the most commonly accepted time frame of Jesus' time on earth.

Now, why is it "fact" when you place the name 'Jesus' in the story, but "myth" when that name is 'Horus'?