 | The Sauciest Duck on Chauvin and Rittenhouse |
 | Michael on Chauvin and Rittenhouse |
| Stephen Moreton on Chauvin and Rittenhouse | |
 | Mele Kalikimaka | Fo… on Merry Christmas |
| Mele Kalikimaka | Fo… on Mele Kalikimaka |
 | somdeblahiriyahoocoi… on Thought of the day |
| Michael on Wuhan virus and one last… |
| Quick correction | F… on The A-Unicornist, Bernie Bro… |
| The A-Unicornist, Be… on When I know I’ve beat… |
 | Somdeb Lahiri on Thought of the day |
The further and further removed from religion I become, the more and more ridiculous religious celebrations appear to me. I mean, Easter? The entire concept is utterly ludicrous. No man died and rose from the dead, much less for himself because he was his own father-son. Moreover, he wasn’t divine. He was just a good, charismatic liar.
Honestly, grow up.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Easter, Thought of the day |
For the Sake of Science 
Agreed. I was wondering, though, what your take is on the historical existence of Jesus? Although it doesn’t really matter whether he actually lived or not, it still wouldn’t make me think he was the son of God or that he performed miracles even if he did, but I’ve heard some people suggest that he may not have actually lived at all; that his story may just be a myth. From what I can tell there’s no definitive answer either way, but I was wondering what you personally thought? Is it more likely that he existed but wasn’t divine or more likely that he never existed at all? From the literature I’ve read I’d have to say that I think it’s just a bit more likely he never existed at all (maybe 60/40 odds against), but I’d be very interested to hear what you think.