Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?


  • Music Lovers Movie Buff Freedom Writers GSP Patrol | The Proofreaders

    @pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

    @Kaneki-kun said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

    @pe7erpark3r

    I said kjv cuz compared to niv, nlt, and some translations there's no omission of verses. But yeah, when you experience Jesus and the Spirit of God personally into your life you don't need any philosopher, google, pastor or whatever to give you proves.

    Yes, you should always get a translation that is close to the original! And if you want to compare biblehub.com's interlinear translation is a good place to get a feeling of what's really written in the original greek or hebrew text.

    And just a note for @Vex-Man who always claims that we have no orginal of the bible: We have texts (in and out of the bible) that are 3000 years old and have been copied over the centuries. And the mistakes that are introduced over so many years are minuscule. So we can rely around 99.9% on the Greek texts we have of the bible.

    You did not provide any evidence for your belief. Original books were never present with Greek words. In the third century, a team of Jews translated it into Greek. Original Bible was Hebrew Bible, not Greek one. Greek language is far different from Hebrew. There was never ever first Bible. By the way, The Bible has 500 contradictions, omissions, errors and most important changes.

    Even if it is granted, there was a first edition of Bible, it does not justify someone's existence because whole Bible is full of lies and foolishness-

    Premise no.1- Whatever the Bible says, is true
    Premise no. 2- The Bible says pigs fly
    Conclusion- Pigs fly, is true
    alt text


  • Music Lovers Movie Buff Freedom Writers GSP Patrol | The Proofreaders

    @adolf-lim said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

    umm there are also historical texts aside from the Bible that supports the existence of Jesus. Some of these authors are non-Christians like the Roman Senator Tacitus. He recorded the execution of Jesus by Pontius Pilate.

    And yes, The first edition of Bible never ever existed on this earth. The whole book is interpolated more than 1000 times. This book is full of contradiction, errors and most important changes.

    Recorded ? Jesus died on AD 30 and Tacitus was born on 56 AD. That means he was not even born when Jesus died. He wrote Annals in 116 AD. 116- 30= 86 years gap wow !

    Edited- Tecitus wrote about “christos” (in 117 CE) and christos were being executed by Pilate. He could have used name ‘Jesus’ but not his religious title ‘Christos’. The second point you could note is, the reference of Tacitus’ was never mentioned by Origen, Eusebius, Tertullian in 3rd century. Tertullian was the one who quoted Tacitus’ great deal. I have a strong evidence https://web.archive.org/web/20190723132715/http://www.textexcavation.com/documents/zaratacituschrestianos.pdf which shows the tacitus’ oldest copy was modified to change “Chrestianos” (i.e. "Chrestians" - the followers of Chrestus) to Christianos" (i.e. "Christians" – the followers of Christ). Generally, it was modified or manipulated in 1468 because there was no mention prior to it.
    Copy-pasted. Enjoy !

    And here is a proof how christian term came into existence-
    https://relevantmagazine.com/god/where-christian-name-really-came/
    Earlier followers of churches, never be called Christians. It was most often used as "saints", not as Christians.


  • Music Lovers Movie Buff Freedom Writers GSP Patrol | The Proofreaders

    @pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

    @Kaneki-kun said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

    😂y'all searching for Jesus on the internet 😂🤦🤦🤦. When you can just get on your knees (even if you don't at least believe) and ask Him to show himself to you.

    YOU WANNA SEE JESUS CHRIST? Well then PRAY and WAIT ON HIM the truth is in every single humans heart but y'all too deaf to hear it.

    For those of you who believe, believing is good but it's not enough, get to seek Him. Get to know Him!! The internet is just a confusion device, Jesus Christ is in everyone's heart knowing constantly for you guys to open the door. Me personally I Know Jesus Christ is real, He brought heaven to man, He is God (I Am) made man, Jesus Christ is God in the flesh. God was with man in the flesh! but man was too filthy to recognize Him, too blind and too Deaf! I know God doesn't exist but He IS . God IS (you need to meditate on the Bible (kjv) to be able to make sense out of this)

    Y'all looking for prove of Jesus and God is real? Just search your hearts respectively, not google (lol).

    I've been trying to get this point across to Vex too 😁

    You wouldn't be worrying for lack of Jesus found in some registry, if you had direct experiential contact with Him. You can indeed find Him in your heart, and indeed, as not just the kjv points out, but even many philosophers note that God does not exist: the verb existing is only valid for anything other than God. Instead God is.

    There is a three year studies on prayers which are enough to show prayers do not work. In a hospital, there were two groups were kept. First who did not pray. Second who prayed. Doctors never prescribe any type of prayer for those patients who suffer from various diseases. Their conclusion was prayer makes people thoughts' negative. Prayers make people more anxious and it caused higher rate of postsurgical heart arrhythmias for second group. This experiment was done on total 1800 patients who were going under bypass-surgery.

    Last point- proofs and evidences come from two different realms. Burden of proof implies on someone who claims about someone's existence. Here is a whole article for positive, negative claims and burden of proof fallibility.
    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof

    I gave you one fossil evidence article in this debate. Here is a quote of that article-
    I think because of the powerful appeal of a silver bullet, knockdown argument that would destroy Christianity if true. And it’s even better than true from the perspective of a habitual debater; it’s supremely defensible in argument. The two are not always the same.
    "The “YOU prove to ME Jesus existed” stance, as with “Atheism is the default” puts the other guy on the defensive and makes him do all the work." When really, “Jesus never existed” is a positive claim, even if it can be phrased as “Show me evidence Jesus existed”. Of course, that evidence does exist. It’s called Christianity.

    Ofcourse I sent you wrong article. Sorry. As he says he thinks it is a positive claim. I had another article which I wanted to send you. There was a missing copy-paste of weblinks. Below one was actual weblink-
    https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/did-jesus-exist/

    I don't think you have a proof of his existence. Therefore, there is no reason to debate on this topic anymore.



  • @Original-Satan said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

    I agreed to make a new debate, and now you spam this here with a flood of information, I cannot possibly answer, because I do not have the time... You really seem to have a lot of time. I think you could use it in better ways.

    If you ever want a real debate you can join in on the other one.



  • @Original-Satan said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

    I also think you really missunderstand the idea of a negative claim, as a surefire way to win this debate...

    A negative claim requires as wikipedia says "the absence of reliable sources to assert their validity".

    Of course this now I will counter with giving evidence to why the sources we have are indeed reliable. Bit by bit we can argue this through, if you want. For I do have the arguments to convince people. I might not be able to convince you, but I don't have to convince my opponent to win a debate 😋



  • @Original-Satan said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

    So to say it clearly again: If you want to debate with me, we can do it slowly, argument by argument, after agreeing on a set of rules.

    If you just want to spam a huge load of information as to why you are right... well have fun alone 😋



  • Ofcourse I sent you wrong article. Sorry. As he says he thinks it is a positive claim. I had another article which I wanted to send you. There was a missing copy-paste of weblinks. Below one was actual weblink-
    https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/did-jesus-exist/

    I don't think you have a proof of his existence. Therefore, there is no reason to debate on this topic anymore.

    You seem to believe everything as long as you find an article that fullfills your criteria for reliable. However that article is simply wrong. Your other article was right.

    I hope you do know that many authors of articles are wrong, even the reliable ones? I hope you do know that many scientists and historians are wrong? I hope you do know that believing an article or a scientific paper because it conforms with your opinion cannot be called rational, right?

    Applying the "burden of proof" to history just simply does not work. You can only apply the "burden of evidence" to history and then weigh up the propabilities. Thus our new debate positions are actually better.

    So to say it clearly, this is my last post in this debate. You do not need to answer what I wrote here. If you want to debate, come to the new one, and we'll look at all the arguments I just touched.

    If you do not want to debate but instead be right, then do not debate and most importantly do not learn from those who are of other oppinion than you, no matter how rational their reasons 😁.



  • @Vex-Man Julian as Emperor rejected the newly dominant religion of Christianity and fiercely sought to discredit and to reverse its influence. He wrote and/or commissioned an entire treatise rather savagely disparaging Christianity and its founder Jesus, with intent to discredit the religion, using the extant historic record from the first century to his time.
    But in doing so he never disputed Jesus’ historical existence and even somewhat separately offered to prove it.


  • Music Lovers Movie Buff Freedom Writers GSP Patrol | The Proofreaders

    @GhősT-RiDeR

    @GhősT-RiDeR said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

    @Vex-Man Julian as Emperor rejected the newly dominant religion of Christianity and fiercely sought to discredit and to reverse its influence. He wrote and/or commissioned an entire treatise rather savagely disparaging Christianity and its founder Jesus, with intent to discredit the religion, using the extant historic record from the first century to his time.

    Julian II was born on 330 AD and Mr. Jesus supposedly died on 30-34 AD. I take 34 AD for you. 330-34 = 296 years. He was certainly not an eye-witness of Jesus because he was born after 296 years of jesus' alleged death. Second, he did just collect Christian belief system, heresy from 2nd century and repeated in his writings. Third, some of his writings have been already lost while some are not. Fourth, there were 30 contemporary roman and jew writers who did not give a damn about jesus. Their books were even more popular than the Bible. Fifth, none of the independent writer, theologian or king recorded earthly jesus' history in 1st century. How can you say he collected their writings from 1st century ? Could you name one of them ?

    But in doing so he never disputed Jesus’ historical existence and even somewhat separately offered to prove it.

    Appeal to authority- person 'A' does not believe in 'X' religion. 'Y' is the founder of 'X'. Person 'A' thinks Y historically existed, even tho he is a non-believer of 'X' religion.


  • Music Lovers Movie Buff Freedom Writers GSP Patrol | The Proofreaders

    @Zhyper777 @Zhyper777 said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

    @Vex-Man The historical evidence for Jesus of Nazareth is both long-established and widespread. Within a few decades of his supposed lifetime, he is mentioned by Jewish and Roman historians, as well as by dozens of Christian writings. Compare that with, for example, King Arthur, who supposedly lived around AD500. The major historical source for events of that time does not even mention Arthur, and he is first referred to 300 or 400 years after he is supposed to have lived. The evidence for Jesus is not limited to later folklore, as are accounts of Arthur.

    Your analogy is bit absurd here. King Arthur was not a historical figure. He is declared a fictional character by all the historians. In contrast to Arthur, the most (not all) historians concur Jesus was a historical person. We do have a fossil evidence of Julius Caesar but we do not have any fossil evidence of Jesus. Eh ? As far as I know "historical consensus" word does not exist but "scientific consensus" does. I chose my thesis "Jesus was a fictional character" and went against the majority of historics. But majority can be wrong and minority can be true. Our history is full of those examples and even our democracy where "the guy chosen by majority" is often corrupt and biased. I would add 2 more points here- 1. Arthur was not a contemporary man of jesus. However, moses certainly was. And the first follower of moses came out after exactly 20 years of jesus' death. Luddite movement was started after 18 years of Ludd's alledged death, yet ned ludd is a fictional character.
    Therefore you have just done composition fallacy.

    What do Christian writings tell us?

    Christian writings are not independent at all.

    The value of this evidence is that it is both early and detailed. The first Christian writings to talk about Jesus are the epistles of St Paul, and scholars agree that the earliest of these letters were written

    Paul did not write about Jesus’ life and teachings in the epistles. Peter, Paul and other epistle writers did not write Jesus’ bio-geographical details and the time of his existence. They do not even mention Bethlehem, Nazareth, Galilee, Calvary or Golgotha or any other pilgrim or any other holy site, his miracles, his moral teachings, his virgin birth, his disciples, his empty tomb. Btw Paul himself never met with an earthly Jesus and he knew Jesus thru scriptures and revelations.
    2 Corinthians 11:5 and 12:11 – Paul asserts he is not inferior to the super-apostles
    Gal 2:11- He apparently opposed peter
    Gal 2:6- he stated no one (including apostles in Jerusalem) added anything into his message. This gave a chance to skeptics to say peter and James never met with Jesus. Paul himself accepted that his revelations did not come from an earthly man but from a saviour.
    Paul in Galatians 1:11,12 — “I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

    within 25 years of Jesus’s death at the very latest,

    True

    while the detailed biographical accounts of Jesus in the New Testament gospels date from around 40 years after he died.

    There was no such word like gospel till 140CE. Papias was the first guy who mentioned the word Gospel. Yet he referred to Mark and Matthew only. All four gospels were not mentioned before 180 CE. That means there is no evidence out of the bible for term gospel before 140 CE.

    These all appeared within the lifetimes of numerous eyewitnesses, and provide descriptions that comport with the culture and geography of first-century Palestine.

    Mark was an earliest gospel, his author was not local to Palestine because he had lack of knowledge of Palestine's social situations and geography. Luke copied error of mark in Luke 8 but Matthew changed the men’s number and location in Matthew 8.

    It is also difficult to imagine why Christian writers would invent such a thoroughly Jewish saviour figure in a time and place – under the aegis of the Roman empire – where there was strong suspicion of Judaism.

    Because Pilate was a cruel king and he became like a tire to fix air like Jesus. All four gospels contradict one-another numerous times. Either it is birth of Jesus or the death of him, all 4 gospels try to rule out one-another. i.e. Matthew 2:1 states Jesus was born before 4BCE but Luke 2:1-4 states he was born after 6BCE. Matthew, Mark and John did not know about the census. A preposition must be true if it does not contradict itself. Therefore you cannot even decide when he was born or resurrected. Mark says Jesus died on the 9th hour on the afternoon of Passover, the 15th of Nisan by the Jewish calendar. But John says he didn't even die on that day. John tells us (three times) that Jesus is tried and executed the day before, on the Preparation Day for the Passover, the 14th of Nisan (19:14, 31, 42). To make matters still worse, all four Gospels insist this happened on a Friday. But was it Friday the 14th or Friday the 15th?

    What did non-Christian authors say about Jesus?
    As far as we know, the first author outside the church to mention Jesus is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who wrote a history of Judaism around AD93. He has two references to Jesus. One of these is controversial because it is thought to be corrupted by Christian scribes (probably turning Josephus’s negative account into a more positive one), but the other is not suspicious – a reference to James, the brother of “Jesus, the so-called Christ”.

    First, Josephus was not even born when jesus existed. Josephus was born on 37 but Jesus died on 34. He was not an eye-witness.
    Second, the term ‘who was called Christ’ was a forgery too. This term was awful and was inserted by a transcriber. There was a christian (Eusebius) who tried to prove his existence and it was interpolated by him in 325CE. This text is completely out of the context and it interrupts the story line. The next passage begins from “About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder.” it was explicitly referred to prev paragraph when Pilate did a massacre of mob of Jews in Jerusalem. The style of these texts was not same but different from other writings. P.s. Josephus did write minor-minor people extensively but he did not write about Jesus extensively. I made a proof aka logical conclusion on that-
    P1- Josephus wrote extensively about minor-minor people
    P2- He did not write extensively about Jesus
    C- Jesus was not even a minor guy.
    PPS - Mr. Vossius who had found original manuscripts of Josephus, has said there was no such word like "Jesus" in it.

    Neither Acts nor James the just did mention an event like this passage did.

    In the last of this passage, jesus was referred to
    the son of damneus and he was decorated as a high priest by Ariappa.

    Jews were so angry (due to stoning of James) that they requested Ariappa to fire Ananus. Since christians were supposed to be a sect of Jews, why would they get angry over Christians ?

    About 20 years after Josephus we have the Roman politicians Pliny and Tacitus, who held some of the highest offices of state at the beginning of the second century AD. From Tacitus we learn that Jesus was executed while Pontius Pilate was the Roman prefect in charge of Judaea (AD26-36) and Tiberius was emperor (AD14-37) – reports that fit with the timeframe of the gospels. Pliny contributes the information that, where he was governor in northern Turkey, Christians worshipped Christ as a god. Neither of them liked Christians – Pliny writes of their “pig-headed obstinacy” and Tacitus calls their religion a destructive superstition.

    1. Tacitus woo was not born when Jesus died.
    2. Tacitus wrote ‘christos’ were executed by the pilate. He could have written Jesus but not his religious title ‘Christos’. The second point you could note is, the reference of Tacitus’ was never mentioned by Origen, Eusebius, Tertullian in 3rd century. Tertullian was the one who quoted Tacitus’ great deal. I have a strong evidence https://web.archive.org/web/20190723132715/http://www.textexcavation.com/documents/zaratacituschrestianos.pdf which shows the Tacitus’ oldest copy was modified to change “Chrestianos” (i.e. "Chrestians" - the followers of Chrestus) to Christianos" (i.e. "Christians" – the followers of Christ). Generally, it was modified or manipulated in 1468 because there was no mention prior to it.

    How controversial is the existence of Jesus now?
    In a recent book, the French philosopher Michel Onfray talks of Jesus as a mere hypothesis, his existence as an idea rather than as a historical figure. About 10 years ago, The Jesus Project was set up in the US; one of its main questions for discussion was that of whether or not Jesus existed. Some authors have even argued that Jesus of Nazareth was doubly non-existent, contending that both Jesus and Nazareth are Christian inventions. It is worth noting, though, that the two mainstream historians who have written most against these hypersceptical arguments are atheists: Maurice Casey (formerly of Nottingham University) and Bart Ehrman (University of North Carolina). They have issued stinging criticisms of the “Jesus-myth” approach, branding it pseudo-scholarship.

    Well, there are many skeptics (not only Michel Onfray) who had published their books to argue Jesus’ non-existence. Bart is a scholar of new-testament but he lost the debate against a mythicist (should I write down his name ?). Bart is a former christian and now he is an agnostic atheist. I do not know about Casey.

    Nevertheless, a recent survey discovered that 40% of adults in England did not believe that Jesus was a real historical figure.

    True

    Man, you have copy-pasted an aticle- https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/14/what-is-the-historical-evidence-that-jesus-christ-lived-and-died 😂. I was thinking first why you were asking questions to yourself first and then answering them yourself too.

    Did ancient writers discuss the existence of Jesus?
    Strikingly, there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.

    Argument from silence is a nice trick for defence 😉.

    You dont know one important point here- Christianity was a jewish sect before 395 AD. Many roman and jew writers wrote a lot about jesus' non-existence. All of those books were burnt in 3rd-4th by Christians because they gained a lot of political power at that movement.


  • Banned

    This post is deleted!


  • @Vex-Man I too have my confidence + reason, and @Zhyper777 has – despite not giving his source – pasted a good article about why most educated people (christian/atheist/other religion) think that Jesus was historical...

    Those are really good arguments and thus I declare that @Zhyper777 has won this debate 😋

    And no thank you, really. I do not find a discussion meaningful that does not go through its arguments one by one.

    Sorry about posting those 6 words from the PMs...

    You know, I've said before, that faith is something very different from thinking that God is... God is infinite mercy. When you sin against him, and you repent and ask forgiveness, he will never mention it again, except sometimes to remind you to stay humble. God Himself is meek and humble, which is why he always speaks so gently, and asks you to open the door of your heart. This is why He does not force you to believe by allowing anybody to proof His existence to you. However his Voice resonates clearly within your soul, when you only so much as utter a word of repentence, of leaving your evil and irrational ways. He will not force you to believe. But He will come by Fire, a purifying Fire of the Holy Spirit raining down on humanity to teach them the meaning of Peace and Reconciliation. You will see your Saviour face to face, the Holy of Holies, who invites mere children into His kingdom, because they have no malice, no evil in them. And they are ready to forgive, because they themselves have been forgiven.


  • Music Lovers Movie Buff Freedom Writers GSP Patrol | The Proofreaders

    @pe7erpark3r

    @pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

    @Vex-Man I too have my confidence + reason,

    Abusive confidence+Faithful reason*
    Lets check how much reason you really have. I will bring all fallacious arguments since the starting of this debate-

    1. Alt_check
      Ad-hominem argument+ strawman argument
    2. Alt_text
      Straw-man argument
    3. Alt_text
      Strawman argument regarding to tacitus
    4. Alt_text
      Argument from ignorance for shifting the burden
    5. Alt_text
      Argument from popularity
      First post and 5 faithful falllacious arguments!

    and @Zhyper777 has – despite not giving his source

    You accept "absence of evidence", yet you argue he is the winner- argument from ignorance

    – pasted a good article about why most educated people (christian/atheist/other religion) think that Jesus was historical...

    Most educated people think Aliens really exist.. But they have no proof of aliens' existence.
    Most educated people do think vs most educated prove- 2 different statements.
    Education is different from knowledge. Knowledge does not come from education. Plus he has just repeated old arguments of the debate and nothing else. Forget about the winner, he is not even a debater because a debater does not give a speech he argues and counter-argues. Your guy did not counter-argue with me. He has no proof anyways.

    Those are really good arguments

    If argument from silence, argument from ignorance and argument from repetition were good arguments, the logic could become a religion itself. A true debater is the one who makes new argument, who scrolls up old argument and their replies. Thus I say the best argument was posted by someone else.

    and thus I declare that @Zhyper777 has won this debate 😋

    I do not care what your faith declares. PPS. He could not even touch my logical proof.
    Here was the logical proof- Alt_text.
    Here I declare I am the winner. Do whatever you can do.

    And no thank you, really. I do not find a discussion meaningful that does not go through its arguments one by one.

    True but you are talking about yourself. Scroll up and say how many arguments you collectively posted otherwise I'll post their screenshots on here.

    Sorry about posting those 6 words from the PMs...

    You know, I've said before, that faith is something very different from thinking that God is...

    I will replace some words for you-
    "you know, I've said before, that faith is something very different from thinking what @Zhyper777's arguments are"- this is how you your faith declares

    And here I quote some texts which you wrote to me in PMs- think, learn, understand and whoever does not do that he should kill himself. The world will be better without them. No offence! 😂.
    Now I say theists like you do not even try to read what their opponent has written. They love to sing their own song. This is why I repeat myself more than once.

    1. Thinking what 'A' is- reasoning. You may reach to false or true conclusion. But at least it is so-called reasoning.
    2. Not thinking what 'A' is, yet claiming he loves you, he forgives your sins, he sends you into heaven/hell etc.- faith.

    God is infinite mercy.

    Ad nauseam. Nothing is infinite except of numbers.

    When you sin against him, and you repent and ask forgiveness, he will never mention it again, except sometimes to remind you to stay humble.

    Christians often think their all sins are forgivable. Do sins as many as you can do. This is why South Africa (a christian country) is the home of many rapes.

    God Himself is meek and humble,

    A non-existence entity has no emotion.

    which is why he always speaks so gently, and asks you to open the door of your heart.

    Open your Bible and read Matthew 17:17
    Then Jesus answered and said, O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him here to me.

    This is why He does not force you to believe by allowing anybody to proof His existence to you.

    If there is a proof, it is rational to believe in him. If there is no proof, it is not rational to believe in him. You can believe in anything, I do not bother with your beliefs.

    However his Voice resonates clearly within your soul,

    There is no soul. The soul can neither be perceived nor be detected. People who claim to hear his voice have schizophrenia, obsessive compulsive disorder, mutiple personality disorder.

    when you only so much as utter a word of repentence, of leaving your evil and irrational ways. He will not force you to believe.

    If he doesnt force someone to not believing in him, why does he show his terror on non-believers ?
    John 3:18- Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son

    But He will come by Fire, a purifying Fire of the Holy Spirit raining down on humanity to teach them the meaning of Peace and Reconciliation.

    Your statement contradicts the Bible.

    Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Matthew 10:34)

    You will see your Saviour face to face, the Holy of Holies, who invites mere children into His kingdom, because they have no malice, no evil in them. And they are ready to forgive, because they themselves have been forgiven.

    I am not taking hallucinations drugs nor do I have brain injuries. I wished that I could save all the children from those religions. A baby is born atheist. All trash is inserted into his brain by his family.



  • @Vex-Man Let muslims say Allahu Akbar
    Kaboom 💣







By using TalkWithStranger, you are accepting our privacy and usage terms . You must be 18+ or 13+ with parental permission to use our online chatting site.