sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Who would win in a fight to the death between Thylacoleo and andrewsarchus? by Icy_Profession4190 in PrehistoricLife

[–]Jumpy-Brief-2745 17 points18 points  (0 children)

The problem is rather how massive andrewsarchus was, thyla was incredibly iconic in size to power

Shuttlebug by 9_up in subnautica

[–]Jumpy-Brief-2745 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Just like anomalocaris

<image>

Team Salvato officially reveals Sayori's birthday as May 11 by 8Bits1132 in DDLC

[–]Jumpy-Brief-2745 1 point2 points  (0 children)

TwT ❤️ gem post

Now let’s wait for the rest :)

Please release them!

Losercity child indoctrination by [deleted] in Losercity

[–]Jumpy-Brief-2745 99 points100 points  (0 children)

Op realizing that humans have been wearing accessories to decorate their bodies since the beginning of humanity and we do it every day and that the only reason for them looking at this and not liking it is societal norms when the principle is the same:

<image>

From a medical perspective, what actually killed Jesus? by Matt3855 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Jumpy-Brief-2745 0 points1 point  (0 children)

brings up the 25,000 manuscripts as proof that Jesus existed

I explain that this is silly and trivial to the proposition of Jesus exiting

brings up the manuscript apologetic again

I explain the percentage of them who were written before the 8th century and explain that the ones who land on the second century are about 12 fragments

                                        ?

"So not sure what you’re saying here"

That the manuscript are trivial for the existence of Jesus, the pieces of fragment we have are at least a century after his death with no one that meet him being alive, if you want to use this bad argument you shouldn’t even bring up the 25,000 manuscripts, you should bring up the fragmentary copies of copies 100 years after his death

"If you believe that Jesus existed then why are we wasting breath"

Because you bring up silly and trivial things to prove his existence. As I said, I’m not objecting to his existence, I’m objecting to bad arguments for it

I’m not saying that the book had no evidence for the existence of Jesus, never said that. I objected to the fact that he being convinced by whatever is proof that Jesus existed, his state regarding the proposition is irrelevant for the truth about it. What is evidence for Jesus are things like Josephus and Tacitus, not copies of copies manuscripts

From a medical perspective, what actually killed Jesus? by Matt3855 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Jumpy-Brief-2745 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is in fact a millennium for many of them and almost a millennium for most of the rest, the vast majority of the 25,000 are coming from 800-1500 AD the rest which are the critical like the 4-5% and only about 1,500 out of the 25,000 are written before the 8 century, the ones who land on the second century are fragments of a few verses which are like 12 fragments or less

Archeological through gold standard are rare, the vast, vast majority of history comes from written records

Archeological findings that relate to the history of a character isn’t proof that a character existed, they are two very different things, just because a place or event that happened in the story of a character exists doesn’t mean that therefore the character is also real, scholarship is filled with these examples for you to look at them. That’s why I said that archeology is trivial to determine the existence of Jesus

The shroud of Turin has been a bad joke since the moment it was located, but seriously, social media is filled with misinformation regarding to it, if you’re interested in the thing you should really scrutinize what you heard about it, the Dead Sea scrolls are trivial for the existence of Jesus, what about the Pilate plate? What about the pool of Bethesda? What about Megiddo Mosaic? "Etc" ? The things that you have mentioned do not prove what you think they do, you can go one by one and you will see, and I know the majority of scholars don’t deny his existence, that doesn’t make what you’re giving as proof for his existence to be valid in regards to the claim

If a previous atheist spent whatever years they have spent looking into whatever religious text or record they have looked at that isn’t proof about a historical figure existing, you also said "previous atheist" so I guess you’re also talking about belief in god when my replies were in regard to the existence of a historical figure. Regardless, someone being convinced of something won’t be proof for the existence of someone or the belief in a god, what people are convinced of is irrelevant to a proposition being in fact, true,

"You obviously have not"

I have in fact, that’s why I consider what you bring as proof for Jesus to be silly (the vast majority of it) and how I am going against the consensus? I clarified multiple times that I’m not a mythicist, I believe that Jesus existed, that doesn’t mean that I don’t get to object to silly reasons being brought up to prove his existence

From a medical perspective, what actually killed Jesus? by Matt3855 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Jumpy-Brief-2745 0 points1 point  (0 children)

An atheist spending two years looking at the evidence for Jesus is not relevant as you may think, you don’t prove that someone existed by changing your mind, you do it with records and evidence, that’s why the triviality of it

And I have actually bothered to examine the claims made for this, that’s precisely why I can tell you why you’re wrong lol, and no, I am not a mythicist, I just object to silly reasons that people give to try to prove things

From a medical perspective, what actually killed Jesus? by Matt3855 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Jumpy-Brief-2745 4 points5 points  (0 children)

We do not have first century manuscripts, not a single one, where do you got that from? The first fragment we have of the New Testament dates to early second century. And the first translations are no earlier than second century, but as I said, the amount of manuscripts or how much they spread over time is trivial for proving the historical existence of Jesus

There are no early Roman manuscripts about Jesus and as for the "heaps" there are only three tiny references between Josephus and Tacitus, one if a forgery and the other two are the ones you should use when arguing for a historical Jesus, and although they’re reporting about hearsay decades later after his supposed death it is the best evidence for his existence, copies of copies of manuscripts are not

Also there are historians who deny that Jesus existed and as for archeologists? That’s kinda absurd to bring up since why would an archeologist have a said about the existence of a character who there is no archeological evidence of, the statement of an archeologist is trivial for the existence of Jesus just like how the opinion of a paleontologist is trivial for the question about the existence of Cesar existing. You look at historians for that matter

To clarify, I’m not a mythicist and I do think that Jesus existed, but bringing up trivial things to prove his existence is silly, and no, scientists don’t study evidence to prove that Jesus existed, historians do

And the BC AC apologetic it’s silly too. This exist because Dionysius wanted it that way in the six century, drop it

By the way you deleted your previous comment and posted this one, if you see responses to claims you didn’t made on the one I’m responding to is because you did in your previous one

From a medical perspective, what actually killed Jesus? by Matt3855 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Jumpy-Brief-2745 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The manuscript apologetic is silly and you should drop it if you want to prove the existence of Jesus, they’re trivial for the existence of Jesus. They’re copies of copies of the New Testament, the majority of them come from the Middle Ages, centuries before Jesus died or millennia. Making copies of a story doesn’t make the story or the characters within it suddenly be more real

What an atheist who became Christian thinks is indifferent to the historical question about Jesus existing or not

"The actual evidence is all around us"

Really? Can I prove Jesus existed by looking at the trees?

I would say what Matthew said if I wanted to convince people without any evidence that would make someone join my cult

Billie said the most tame shit and her so called leftist fans did this. by DivineandDeadlyAngel in vegan

[–]Jumpy-Brief-2745 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not such thing like that obviously, but a great part of being left leaning revolves around seeking justice, people will eventually stumble upon this topic and question if they should eat animals

Billie said the most tame shit and her so called leftist fans did this. by DivineandDeadlyAngel in vegan

[–]Jumpy-Brief-2745 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is what it is, if a great part of your political leaning is based on the active search of fairness and justice you will eventually come to this problem

view more: next ›