Yes it does. As I say its the first step of the shahadah. Its too long to explain on here tbh Christaianity is not a religion of abuse, some of the clergy who allege to be christian are Islam is not a religion of war, neither does it advocate turning the other cheek You dont know what your talking about
OK and I quote: Jesus/God/Holy Spirit is a fictional person/entity made up for sad dreamers who cannot handle the harsh reality of reality. There is nothing out there and I pity any delusional fool who thinks otherwise. you can be as pedantic as you want
Why do you miss the point so often? Is it intentional? In order for him to claim that Jesus is fictional, there has to be a claim that Jesus is factual in the first place. The burden of proof is upon those making that claim. I assume that you believe that Jesus was a real person and that you believe that you can prove it? I'm not talking about whether he was in any way connected to any supernatural claims, either.
and here we go. This is where your bullshit really comes to the fore. the burden of proof lies on whoever makes an assertion. not what is factual etc If I say the tooth fairy exists, because it is not factual does it not require a burden of proof? The problem with people like you is that when proved wrong you change the boundaries. Bottom line this was an OP about Muhammed a poster put up the non existence of jesus. Burden of proof is with the one making the assertion
The assertion that Jesus exists has to happen in order for someone to claim that he doesn't. Fictional characters clearly don't have to be proven to exist, as they exist purely from a claim. As usual, you've missed the point and tried to shift the burden of proof, as you know that you cannot meet it.
I agree with that. I was telling someone the other day that i think a high profile British Olympian has been at the magic medicine cabinet. Now I can't prove it but it is up to me to do so and prove them worng. If you think she isn't then you have no way of proving it other than giving me surveillance of her 24 hours a day over the last 10 years - and I'm a stroppy bastard but not even i would expect you to go to those lengths to prove me wrong
sorry both wrong burden of proof = When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a claim In this case the topic was Muhammad. The assertion was jesus doesnt exist prove it, simples
But we're not wrong though - you might think we're worng but that's an opinion and not actually fact.
The claim that Jesus existed was already made prior to the start of the debate. Your faith, for example, claims that he existed. Prove it.
No, it's dishonest. It also dodged the original point, which you were clearly wrong about. In order for people to claim that Jesus was fictional, there had to be people claiming that he was factual in the first place. Christianity and Islam both claim that he was a real person, so the burden of proof is on them.
Mick/Mods please close this thread. As usual people are not interested in genuine debate but forcing their opinions on others without recognising the rights of others to their beliefs
I know, but I thought I'd better make the point clear. I'm not sure claiming anything about Mohammed is racist either, to be honest.
I dont agree. The only dishonesty is from you This was a thread about muhammad. The first person t make ANY assertion carries the burden of proof. The starting point is the OP. Not centuries of X Y and Z. Its the same with christmas and the athiest excuse for celebrating it, based on paganry etc. CHRISTMAS is celebrating the birth of jesus. Just like gay is no longer happy
