A final whooping of JBs arse

We find that JB has realised that he is loosing and so acuses me of being a parody and says that after one more post he will have to duck out. I also notice that JB is trying to make out that he is a top notch scholar but i see no evidence for this. JB has also done nothing to address my arguments.
JB then shows his stupidity be responding to Fifi on his blog ... when fifi says that they dont read JBs blog.

Highly inaccurate. Mike does not wish to grapple with the fact that he carefully evaded my arguments, as any comparison of our respective posts will demonstrate.
Xians really are hipocrits.

You need to show plausibility, not mere "possibility"
Umm, hang on. you need to show that the reserection is plausable. Now a dead body being eaten by worms is fairly normal ond so possible. Dead people coming back to life never happens and is impossible. All i have to do is come up with an explanation that is better than your one. Why isnt saying that jebus rose from the dead plausable in your books? you might say 'oh wellm i know sky daddies exist and raise people from the dead' but then i can say 'well i just know worms ate jebus'

Jesus existed
Wow - what a refutation of my argument. you just state your beliefs as if they were facts

The disciples didn't go to Pompeii after the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius, Mike
you

What's a rarity
how often do people find skeletons? Couldnt we just conclude that archaologists have not found jebus skeleton yet? May James Caron has found jebus body?

No non-Christian scholar thinks that any biblical documents were intended as historical?
so they actually believe jubus rose from the dead? think again.

Oh? Who (Roman ruler? Sanhedrin?), when (immediately? 40 AD? 50 AD? 60-80 AD?), and what's your evidence?
I dont need to show that they did, just that they might have done. I dont need to show that jebus didn't rise from the dead, if there is a posability he didnt then any rational person will conclude that he didnt.

Don't project the attitudes of the stereotypical, fundamentalist uber-fideist back onto the disciples, Mike.
the disciples were fundamentalists, or at least there is no reson to assume they werent. how do you know that the diciples would change their opinions in the face of evidence?

Don't be absurd, Mike. There's ample historical evidence that Christianity predated the reign of Emperor Constantine.
which christianity? the ones who belived the gopel of thomas? the one of believed the gopel of judas? the ones who belived the secret gospel of mark? the ones who belived the gospel of barnabus?

and that link is to a summary of a book that uses "Christianity" to mean Pauline Christianity, not "Christianity" in the sense of, e.g., Jesus' crucifixion, resurrection, and Lordship.
but you are a pauline xian. But you admit that you follow paul and not jebus? why does pauline xianity and gospel xianity contradict?

If it had been revealed in, say, 50 AD? News would have spread to the capital, yes, as the opponents of Christianity would have leapt at the chance to eradicate acclamation of Jesus as the Messiah by making known that Christianity was a proven fraud
before cars it took ages to travel to rome so the news would have not got through

(that is, the disciples) firmly believed in the physical resurrection
how do you know that without getting inside their heads? maybe it was all an april fools day joke gone wrong?

Maybe who cremated Jesus, and when? Details, Mike, details are key. Vague proposals gain you nothing.
i'm showing it is possible for the reserection not to be true. A naturalist xplanation is always better than a supernatural one even if there is no evidence for it.

That's not "argumentation", it's mere assertion. The persecution of the early church is a recognized historical fact.
you seem very reluctant to give me any evidence for this so called historical 'fact'. I notice that im meant to back up all my claims with evidence and you dont. Shouldnt it be the other way around?

The comparison does not hold, since Smith went down fighting and would not have been spared by repudiating his teachings and his story.
so? Maybe the disciples would have been persecuted (assuming they were) regardless of whether thy owned up to it all being a lie.

First of all, that's false, and I ask you to substantiate the claim.
which ive already done with my photos of dionysus

I've basically co-taught courses in logic.
i mean proper logic, not xian logic

First of all, there's a distinction to be drawn between art and literature. Second, provenance would apply most properly to biblical manuscripts, not to the content of the text itself. Third, yes, I could provide a rough estimate of the date of most individual biblical documents, the New Testam
i can confirm that both those photos i gave pre date xianity. And even they didnt it seems unlikely that dionysusism changed radically after jebus

Mike refers to this post, but neither there or here does he both to actually substantiate his claim that the Vatican destroyed the evidence that would have justified his positio
I did substantiate it by giving you a link o a video by an archaologist (they is a photo of her digging in the video) who shows pictures of the vatican destroying evidence

I think that JB better stop beLIEving Jebus rose from the dead, how is his case any more convincing that this lots? Where did the belief that elvis is alive come from? what about all the eyewitnesses. Oh dear, has JB already signed up.