Atheist Nexus Logo




We debate origins of the Universe, life, Earth, humans, religion, atheism, using common sense, evolution, cosmology, geology, archaeology, and other sciences, to repel biblical creationism and other religious beliefs.

Location: Oxford University, England
Members: 4170
Latest Activity: 16 hours ago

The portrait is Charles Darwin, age 31, in 1840

We welcome comments and the opening up of new discussions in this busy group. So join us if you are not already in the group.

N.B. At the end of every discussion page is a box that you can tick if you want to be notified by e-mail about the arrival of fresh comments.

Discussion Forum

Evolution is a FACT, not a theory.

Started by Idaho Spud. Last reply by Joseph P yesterday. 11 Replies

L'homme "blanc" n'existe en Europe que depuis 6500 BC

Started by Dr. Terence Meaden. Last reply by Gerald Payne Apr 16. 1 Reply


Started by Dr. Terence Meaden. Last reply by Gerald Payne Apr 15. 196 Replies

Chimps Seen Making and Using Spears

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Apr 14. 3 Replies

Why sex? The evolution of sex

Started by Rick Springfield Apr 12. 0 Replies

Scientists Say not all Traits are Directly from DNA

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Apr 5. 6 Replies

Coffee Lowers Risk of Liver Cancer

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by John Jubinsky Apr 4. 20 Replies

Ice Age Floods - Columbia River Basalt Group

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Mar 27. 5 Replies

2.8 million year old jaw

Started by Patricia. Last reply by Patricia Mar 25. 22 Replies

Pill Makes People More Compassionate

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Idaho Spud Mar 23. 3 Replies

Mystery of strange mammals

Started by Patricia Mar 19. 0 Replies

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN to add comments!

Comment by Mark M on November 17, 2010 at 4:51pm
*surprised, *interment
Comment by Mark M on November 17, 2010 at 4:50pm
well, the absence of evidence certainly isn't evidence of absence, so i would say the fact that we don't have a lot of archaeological evidence of crucifixion victims doesn't necessarily mean that we can assume that it was their policy to never allow the family to bury them. for the record, all I know about Roman practice regarding the bodies of their executed comes from your previous post and from having seen a few movies and history channel documentaries about Rome, so if your knowledge of these matters makes my argument a weak one I would not be surprisd. it might help to know how common intermet was in the various communities under roman rule. also, I would find it difficult to believe that mid-level legal authorities taking bribes was anything but common.
Comment by Bryon on November 17, 2010 at 4:04pm
conceivable perhaps but unlikely. If he existed, he would most likely would have been executed for insurrection or some such thing and would not have been allowed a respectful burial. not to mention that the archeological evidence would indicate that the Romans were not in the habit of taking bribes for such things.
Comment by Mark M on November 17, 2010 at 2:08pm

Just saw this post while dicking around at work, so I ran it by a Christian colleague of mine. He pointed out that Joseph of Arimathaea came to Pilate the day after the crucifixion and paid Pilate to have the body removed to his custody. This is concieveable, as it would represent a bribe. In the case of Vercingetorix, it makes sense that a bribe wouldn't be honored as he was an enemy of the state, but for a petty criminal to be removed from the cross isn't outside the realm of possibility.
Comment by Tony Davis on November 17, 2010 at 10:47am

Thanks so much for taking the time to read, and comment on, my articles. It is one thing for me to blather on about what I think on certain topics, but to have others like you commenting really adds a lot to it!

Comment by Bryon on November 17, 2010 at 10:43am
Here is my post on your article. It is there as well.

Another thing that seems to very rarely if ever come up when discussing the crucifixion is how quickly the body was removed upon death. The whole point of crucifixion is the terror inspired by seeing such gruesome, tortuous execution and the lack of respect for the remains of the "criminals" killed. The body of Vercingetorix, had to be stolen back by his Gallic followers after being dumped in a mass grave for executed criminals and he was a King. So what are the chances of the Romans turning the body of a criminal over to the family? They didn't even do that for Citizens. Despite the fact that the ancient Jewish historian Josephus, as well as other sources, refers to the crucifixion of thousands of people by the Romans, including 6,000 survivors of the Spartacus revolt captured by the legions of Crassus were crucified, lining the Appian Way from Rome to Capua, there is only a single archaeological discovery of a crucified body dating back to the Roman Empire around the time of Jesus.This is because a crucified body was usually left to decay on the cross and therefore would not be preserved. Again, Rome was ruled by terror.
Comment by Tony Davis on November 17, 2010 at 8:26am

Correct, not Jurgen. I have to admit that I'd never heard of Jurgen until I started working on this article, but had heard of Gary many many times since I started debating apologists because (and DAMN I forgot to point this out!) the "beauty" of the minimal facts argument (from the apologists perspective) is that since it relies on "historical facts" and not the Bible saying God is real, they are not bothered by all the errors in the Bible.

I remember once pointing out a number of errors in the Bible and asking a apologist if that concerned him. To my utter amazement he said "No, not at all. I don't need the Bible to be accurate. I've got more than enough evidence without the Bible." and he introduced me to the minimal facts argument. I normally try really hard to be respectful even when I disagree but I think my reply was something like "are you f'ing HIGH? How would you even know about these so called facts without the Bible???"

Thanks so much for the feedback!

Comment by david perry on November 17, 2010 at 12:57am
@Tony- You aren't talking about Jurgen Habermas. He would not espouse such a flimsy idea. Are they related?
Good article though. I especially like the idea about the incompatibility of the miraculous with the commonplace, I never thought of it that way. It just always seemed obvious to me that if there were evidence of miracles, they would leave even a tiny trace. The thing about science that makes the theists nervous in my opinion is that it is repeatable and verifiable, if miracles were as commonplace as they suggest the laws of physics would necessarily have to be quite different. I think it was Einstein that thought that was the miracle so to speak, that the laws of physics work everywhere, all the time. They would then, if they're smart, point out that quantum physics says such occurances are possible, indeed have happened. They conveniently then leave out the observer part of it.
It's an easy argument to poke holes in as you point out, and as Ron did before.
Comment by david perry on November 17, 2010 at 12:33am
@Tony- You areI presume referring to Jurgen Habermas? I've never seen him called Gary. Good luck with an interview. He's an extremely old man. I'll see if I can finish the article now, it's getting late.
Comment by Tony Davis on November 16, 2010 at 11:28pm
OK, here it is:

I am sitting here, on my third glass of wine, thinking to myself that in the morning I will read it again and wonder "what the hell was I thinking when I hit the "publish" button. ;-p

Again, criticism is more than welcome. I have a thick skin and it is the only way I will get any better.


Members (4170)


Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today



Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon


Nexus on Social Media:

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service