The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
24 Points

Jesus loves science

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/24/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 853 times Debate No: 46597
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (16)
Votes (4)




Jesus loves science this I know, for god invented it so it must be so.... (lets have some fun with this. please post your opinion either in the comments or, if you think you can take me on, join the debate!!! :D)


Seeing as there are no guide-lines I will make my opening argument here.

p1. Jesus did not exist.
P2. Jesus cannot love science.

Thehistoricity of

Jesus Christ.

Every argument that attempts to show that Jesus existed, has logical or evidential fallacies. Anyone who says that Jesus definitely existed is merely giving their opinion, because the evidence clearly shows that Jesus is just a fictional character who never existed.

If you value evidence and logic you will accept the

non-existence of Jesus Christ.

The case supported by evidence
1. There is not one single writing from or about Jesus during his supposed lifetime

Like the supposed founders of other religions, Jesus left no personal writings of any kind, nor any trace of his existence. No writing, graffiti, or evidence of any kind has ever been found from the period in which he supposedly lived that establishes the existence of Jesus.

If we are to take the view that Jesus was actually the son of God, and god himself…Then it would be peculiar that he was unable to write and chose to write nothing himself. Of course the counter argument to this is that God wanted people to have faith so he intentionally didn't leave any evidence of himself.Absurd.

Even if we take the view of Jesus was just a person who was a teacher and the leader of a religious movement, then we could surely expect that this person would have produced his own writings, since others did.

Here are some of the persons who lived during the supposed lifetime of Jesus, whose works we have, and who we could reasonably expect would have mentioned Jesus had he existed, yet they do not

Justus of Tiberias, Philo of Alexandria , Pliny the Elder, Seneca the Younger, Valerius Maximus, Velleius Paterculus. These were all historians that lived during the time of Jesus yet not one of them mentions him.

All of the mentioned above lived during the same time that Jesus supposedly lived and are prime candidates for being potential witnesses and documenters of the existence of Jesus.

The overwhelming lack of commentary about Jesus in the historical sources of his supposed time has troubled Christians from the very beginning.

2.Any evidence for Jesus is fabricated.

As early as the 2nd century this lack of acknowledgement was noticed. Indeed it was not long before forgeries attesting to the existence of Jesus were produced.

There are several false attestations to Jesus that are of note, among these are:

Letters of Pilate

Letter from Herod Antipas

Letter of Agbar

Letters of Caiaphas

Testimony of Thallus and Phlegon

All of these supposed evidences from the time of Jesus are universally accepted by scholars as fraudulent or corrupted.

Josephus Flavius was Fabricated.

A native of Judea, living in the 1st century AD, Josephus was actually governor of Galilee for a time the very province in which Jesus allegedly did his miracles.

Josephus mentions every noted personage of Palestine and describes every important event which occurred there during the first seventy years of the Christian era.

In a single paragraph (the so-called Testimonium Flavianum) Josephus confirms every salient aspect of Christ.!

BUT it’s a FAKE!

Not a single writer before the 4th century – not Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, Arnobius, etc. – in all their defences against pagan hostility, makes a single reference to Josephus’ wondrous words.

The Church 'Father' Origen drew on all sorts of proofs and witnesses to his arguments in his fierce defence of Christianity. He quotes from Josephus extensively.

Yet even he makes not the slightest reference to this 'golden paragraph' from Josephus. Origen actually said that Josephus was "not believing in Jesus as the Christ."

Origen did not quote the 'golden paragraph' because this paragraph had not yet existed just like Jesus it was fabricated.

Actually the Josephus paragraph about Jesus does not appear until the beginning of the fourth century, at the time of

Constantine just when Christianity was made the religion of the holy roman empire isn’t that ironic?

Finding no references to Jesus anywhere in Josephus's genuine work because he did not exist they fabricated a brief but all-embracing reference based purely on Christian belief.

There is no real evidence for


This as many others was a forgery. A peer reviewed paper by Richard carrier proves exactly this.

3.Christianity was plagiarized from other pagan gods and myths.

Jesus was merely derived from pagan gods.

Jesus a Copy of Horus, Mithras, Krishna, Dionysus and Other Pagan Gods.1.Horus born on December 25th Horus was born of a virgin three Wise Men Came to Adore the New Born Savior Horus was a child prodigy teacher at 12 Horus had 12 Disciples Horus was crucified. Dead for three days. And Resurrected2.Mithras.

Mithras was born of a virgin

Mithras was attended to by Shepherds

Mithras was born on December 25

Mithra had 12 disciples.Mithras was crucified. Dead for three days. And then resurrected Here are all of the Pagan “savior gods” that Jesus was derived from.

The "Parallel Pagan" Gods

  • Adonis
  • Attis (and Cybele)
  • Baal
  • Bacchus
  • Balder
  • Beddru
  • Devatat
  • Dionysis
  • Hermes
  • Horus
  • Krishna (or Krsna)
  • Mithras
  • Orpheus
  • Osiris
  • Tammuz (or Dumuzi)
  • Thor
  • Zoroaster
Absolutely everything in the Christian religion was derived from previous Pagan myths.First century critics of Christianity voiced accusations that Christianity was nothing but another copy of common religions.3.Jesus Christ was concocted from a conglomeration of these Gods.

Jesus was not really not new, he's just a new version of old ideas.

Jesus came from Heaven. To Earth Via a magical God-mortal birth. In fulfillment of prophesy. Heralded by magic God-sent dreams. He did miracles. He brought salvation.

Jesus was a new Pagan God.

To sum up.

Jesus was new—like the first Honda Civic was a new car and the first Pepsi was a new soda.

However we know that Honda didn't invent the car when they built the Civic and Pepsi didn't invent soda when they made Pepsi.

The Civic and Pepsi were new arrangements of old ideas. Some new stuff, but mostly old.

the gospels make claims that are against the known historical record

Here are a few examples of claims that are made in the Gospels.

  • Star of Bethlehem - No record of such a celestial event
  • Roman census in Jesus birth storyNo record of any census that matches this description.

Massacre of the Innocent - No record of this event

  • John the Baptist – Killed early in the Gospels, died in 36 CE according to Josephus.
  • Death of Jesus – Accompanied by blackout of sun, earthquakes, and raising of the dead
  • Absolutely not a shred of evidence of any of the above.

jesus' crucifixion on passover defies historical believability, yet makes perfect sense metaphorically

Jesus was crucified the first day of Passover.

This itself defies reason, as Passover is considered the holiest of Jewish holiday.

Jewish authorities would have never held a public execution of someone at this time is itself completely beyond belief.

But when you add to this the fact that in the story the members of the council slap Jesus and spit in his face the implausible borders on the impossible.

Here are rules of the Sanhedrin.

  • 1) No criminal session was allowed at night.
  • 3) No capital crime could be tried in a one-day sitting.
  • 4) No criminal trial could be held on the eve of a Sabbath or festival.

The Gospels violates all.

However considering the symbolism of the story it becomes apparent that the story is theological, not historical.

On Passover, at the time that this story is supposedly taking place, the Jews provided manysacrifices, most of them as burnt offerings, meaning animals that were slaughtered and then burned on a fire.

This special lamb is a sacrifice specifically for the forgiveness of sins…

The crucifixion of Jesus on Passover is a metaphor for this sacrificial lamb.

The idea of Jesus Christ as a sacrificial lamb is recorded in the letters of Paul from 1 Corinthians 5, 1 Corinthians 5:
7 “For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed

.”We can see that the symbolism of Christ as a sacrificial Passover lamb was a part of the Christian tradition prior to the writing of the Gospels.

Nazareth did not exist during

the time of Jesus

No source that confirms that the place even existed in the 1st century AD.

Nazareth is not mentioned even once in the entire Old Testament.

The Book of Joshua (19.10,16) records twelve towns and six villages and yet

NO Nazareth

Talmud, names 63 Galilean towns, never names Nazareth,

St Paul knows nothing of 'Nazareth'.

Rabbi Solly's epistles mention Jesus 221 times, Nazareth not once.

• No ancient historian or geographer mentions Nazareth.

No ruins exist.

4th Century Map – NO NAZARETH!

4th century map

The whole world known to the Romans is represented

named more than 3000 places no Nazareth!

There where many belifes that jesusnever existed on earth in the flesh

During the first 300 years of Christian belief many held different views.

· Marcionism – Christ was a purely spiritual entity not a man


  • Nestorianism – Jesus and Christ were two different entities
  • Docetism – Jesus appeared physical, but he was really incorporeal
Conclusion .

Jesus Christ never existed and it relies on much more than simply stating that we don't have evidence for his existence or that the Gospels are unbelievable.

It rests upon mountains of evidence.

We have sources and traditions that not only provide all of the material for the Jesus story, but it is clear that the Jesus story is developed from these sources, and this fact undermines the possibility that the stories are based on observed historical events.

Not only can Christianity be explained without a real historical Jesus but the historical facts that we do have are best explained if

Jesus never existed .

IF you value evidence and logic

I urge you to vote Con.


Debate Round No. 1


Well, sir, since you completely decided to not read the comments (not being mean, just sayin, take a looksy) im going to use a theoretical jesus. Hell, i call mine jebus, because i completely acknowledge your lack of evidence for Jesus Christ. So, for peoples sake, lets call my Jesus, Jebus Crist. Thats right, we are no longer needing evidence of his existence. And, Jebus here, would love science. He loves making fun of the people that insult him by reading the Bible. This explains his lack of return to save us from ahem *Sin* (laughs slightly). And, since you also lack to acknowledge the Bible as a credible source of existence, Then i also guess that we can talk a little about that as well. Bible, written by so many people over so many years before being compiled into a legit book. Two, not all the books were in the Bible at the time of its original compilation. Revelations was left out. The main reason why Jebus loves science is because most of his followers disregard its existence, and since he died for our again "SIns" (emphasis on the quotes) which included the theoretical apple, the most irrelevant fruit on the planet to choose to have a beings brain be unlocked to them (this is from the bible, not what i believe), included that very same gift of knowledge which allows us to discover science. God stated in the Bible (again, its in the Bible, yet again a non-credible source, but since this theoretical person is from it, we must use it) He would kill us over the Apple (now re-created by Steve Jobs XD). So, If we are forgiven for using knowledge, why the hell wouldnt we use it? So, jesus loves science, because he loves to laugh at the people that dont use it? So... bring it ooowwwnn.. XD


Pro has conceded.

I quote PRO.
"Jesus loves science this I know"

Pro has yet to provide any evidence for his fallacious assumption.

This debate is about "

Not the other equally fictional charter that Pro just fabricated "jebus"

Pro may use whatever imaginary friend he desires.

However this debate is clearly about "Jesus" having a alleged passion for science.
Pro cannot change the rules.

Pro MUST first prove that "Jesus" existed.

Pro has yet to make one argument for his proposition.
Jesus never existed .

IF you value evidence and logic

I urge you to vote Con.

Debate Round No. 2


Its okay. You can keep reposting the same thing over and over again in big huge letters as if it makes any difference, since you wanna talk some smack. And so far, Im proposing a theory. A theory is astoundingly logical. And thus, I was trying to help you imagine a theoretical jesus, since clearly your imagination is somewhat lacking along with your reading skills. When i say my jesus, im clearly talking about the one that i believe would exist if say he did. So, i call him jebus, because he is not the Jesus that christians believe him to be. And im surprised that you didnt catch that as part of the song, "Jesus Loves Me," a popular christianity song that has been sang by children in the religion for dang near a millenia. you can not say what i must prove and disprove because you can not order your opponent to use logic in a certain way, and that is your way. If you can not accept a theory of something, than you lack scientific courage, and scientific imagination. If you value evidence and logic? Id stop saying that since you are the one running out of that son.. I do not need to prove his existence if he is a theory, which still leaves it open to discussion. Hell, like i said, when you said that he didnt existed, and that there is no evidence for it, I AGREED WITH YOU... herp derp dude. Slow down and read... it might help you in the near future. Havent made an argument for your proposition? you havent started something for me to argue against yet except to get you to understand how to argue with something like this!!! Id have made this bigger knowing id have to bs with you just to understand the topic. Read the friggin comments. If you wish to continue to debate and not lose, assume his existence for the time being. You, as of right now, are being as stupidly stubborn and stuck-up as a general devoted christian.


I will refrain frompersonal insult and fabricating a huge run on sentance as Pro just did.

As the voters will surely see PRO certaintly said" Jesus loves science".

He has yet to prove that he existed. Much less that he "loved science".

However this debate is clearly about "Jesus" having a alleged passion for science.
Pro cannot change his own rules.

Pro MUST first prove that "Jesus" existed.

Pro has yet to make one argument for his proposition.
Jesus never existed .

IF you value evidence and logic

I urge you to vote Con

Debate Round No. 3
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by imsmarterthanyou98 2 years ago
That's why I do it :p
Posted by Sagey 2 years ago
Hey YouAreSmarterThanI, I think you were being a little too assertive/agressive, I forgave Pro for the little bit of bitching about your style, your style is so aggressive it likely annoyed Pro enough to bring that reaction.
I could imagine it doing that to almost all your opponents.
Posted by imsmarterthanyou98 2 years ago

That's too good sagey.
Posted by Sagey 2 years ago
Maybe Jesus did have some scientific knowledge and used it to fool his followers into thinking he could perform miracles. The Resurrection was just his biggest illusion that he pulled in order to escape without them following him.
I had the Jeus/Life of Brian experience and got followed around everywhere by clowns who thought I was something special. Wish I had a magic trick like Jesus used to lose his hangers-on.
Posted by SNP1 2 years ago
Technically Con never addressed the issue.I can prove Harry Potter went to Hogwarts, yet neither Harry or Hogwarts are real. I can prove that Star Fleet has a base on Earth, but Star Fleet is not real while Earth is. Even if Jesus is not real he can still love science. Even though Pro did not actually do much to prove his point, Con never addressed the actual debate topic.
Posted by demonlord343 2 years ago
For all the readers, i take it as an insult when someone doesn't read the others argument. You want to argue with me, fine... just dont be ignorant. I usually dont insult people, but this guy has yet to debate. Im still waiting, if hed still like to post something for me to debate against....
Posted by SNP1 2 years ago
Actually, I once saw ONE episode where Kirk did have to pilot the Enterprise for a short time. I will look for the episode again if I have to (been a while since I have seen Star Trek), but that does not stop my point from going across. Theoretical/fictional characters can make theoretical actions and/or have emotions. Just because Jesus did not exist does not mean that he does not love science.

PS. George Takei is awesome
Posted by missmedic 2 years ago
SPN1 you know your proof is false, Helmsman Sulu piloted the Enterprise. And the show was filmed entirely on location in outer space.
Posted by SNP1 2 years ago
Con, you can prove a theoretical position about a theoretical person. I can prove captain Kirk piloted the Enterprise, yet neither Captain Kirk or the Enterprise are real. How can I prove this? Theoretical positions about theoretical people.
Posted by Jifpop09 2 years ago
Con should be taking an assumption that Jesus is real.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were backed by sources. Most of the arguments presented by Con went without contest.
Vote Placed by Sagey 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's debate and argument remained an assumption, though pro was less aggressive, Con lost conduct on rudeness, though his attacks on Jesus were a little unwarranted, but, science did not exist either in those times, unless Jesus developed it and used it to fool his followers. Pro had no sources, though it would be unlikely that Pro could find any to support the debate topic.
Vote Placed by Finalfan 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed to give any reason whatsoever to back up his claim! I'm not sure why he even started this debate!
Vote Placed by TF2PRO 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Easy win for Con. Pro had no arguments and threw insults. Also had many errors and not even 1 source.