Atheist--What makes you, as a Christian, think that your version of god is any more valid than the versions of other various gods and goddesses in other religions, such as Mithras, Krishna and Dionysus for example?
Christian--The simple answer is that if Mithras, Krishna, Dionysus were real historical figures, you would have a case. Alas, they were not. Jesus, however, is a real person.
There are plenty of extra-biblical references to Jesus in the works of noted historians such as Tacitus Josephus, and others, let alone the account of the NT itself. None of the others have any historical support, and thus all of them are mere mythological figures.
Atheist--First of all, it is well known that Jesus is but a "copy" of the earlier aforementioned gods. This is even noted in books used in seminary such as "Bible Myths and Their Parallels in Other Religions" by TW Doane (you can download it for free at books.google.com)
Secondly, there is no historical proof or evidence of Jesus having "god-like" attributes. If you count the bible, then we get to count all the other holy books and references, and reported experiences of followers of the aforementioned gods.
Thirdly, Josephus was a known forger, and Tacitus and Pliny wrote a few sentences which are not considered "proof" of anything, especially since the Romans, who were in charge of the area at the time have NO RECORDS at all of Jesus ever existing.
Many great writers wrote about Dionysus, Attis, and all the other gods.
Buddha WAS a historical figure. He was written about in MANY countries, from India to Japan. Buddha has far more historicity than Jesus. Buddha is also said to have the "god like" attributes in question. Therefore, Buddha is god...following your logic of course.
They are no more "mythological" than Jesus is. Everyone claims their god is unique and offers no proof......you are no different.
And the list goes on.....
"From the Sumerian King List, we do know there was an historical Gilgamesh"
The Epic of Gilgamesh is also where the story of Noah was plagiarized.....and much more.
Gilgamesh too is said to have "god like" attributes.
Here is another link:
So Gilgamesh too is "god"...according to your logic.
Jesus MAY have been an actual person, whereas there is documentation that Buddha WAS an actual person. The account of Jesus is hearsay, which does not count as evidence. It was written much later that the supposed events took place.
I have already given you evidence to show the historicity of Krishna and Gilgamesh, which is as much a proof as the fact that people in the bible make claims, which is no more valid than any other religion that makes similar claims.
Christianity is NOT special......in fact it is the least special of all of them as it contains nothing unique or original.
Where do you think the reports of Buddha and Krishna and all the rest came from, if not from "eye witnesses"??
----------------------
And that was the end of that. Mere assertion on the part of Christians does not prove the existence of their deity. Various other religions in fact have much more "evidence" than they do. But they keep trying.....
