A greater being inspired the bible that is why the great majority of it is "weird". If a text contains any of that bullshit all of it should be discarded immediately.
Nooooooooooooooooooo
This is where your argument falls apart (yes, as soon as it started). If there's evidence in the bible which can only be there if it's inspired by a greater being, just because anything else is portrayed in there DOES NOT eliminate the existence of a greater. The evidence is in independent of any other assertion you make.
LOL!!!!!!!!!
You still haven't provided any evidence, any scholarly dating, anything which says they predate Jesus. That's like saying to the mcdonalds guy "can I have a big mac" and he gives you fries.
And that's greatly exaggerated. Horus wasn't born of a virgin. IIRC, it was something to the effect of Isis hovering over a self-created erect penis and conceiving Horus. Even with my little research, your assertions are greatly questionable. Horus also had four disciples and a group of 16 followers or something like that, not 12 disciples. Lol...
Divine powers do not make sense and are not natural, there has not been any scientific experiment or reasoning verifying the supernatural. Believing in god makes as much sense believing in the tooth fairy, monsters, flying unicorns and santa claus. All of these creatures are existing are impossible just like god.
|
hahahahahahahahahahahhaha
> We can't create a god through science or a being who can manipulate physical laws (obviously that rejects the whole idea of God anyway because he resides beyond the metaphysical dimensions of the universe and can thus control it)
> Therefore God doesn't exist because we can't create supernatural powers ourselves
> Let me throw in the tooth fairy for maximum rhetorical effect
> My argument still makes no sense
> Fuck
> It's also valentines day. That somehow disproves the existence of God.
> Fuck
The only part I said I might be wrong about was if they were alive during the time of Jesus, they might have been 5 years old or something. There is lots of proof that the gospels were written decades later.
That's all circumstantial. Even if I were to believe what you're formulating of thin air, a five year old can still understand a story.
> There's lots of circumstantial proof that the gospels were written decades later
> Therefore, let's just treat it as conclusive
> If we don't, my argument has no weight and we're back to square one