@The_Dudg@tagreene3@DrcharlieWardQ I explained both points already. Votes matter on the aggregate, illegal immigrants voting for what they want mean they get what they want, there's a lot of illegal immigrants. To the last point, many states have near zero enforcement on illegal voting.
@The_Dudg@tagreene3@DrcharlieWardQ Okay, never vote, and also tell people that think like you to stop voting. Votes don't matter. Since to you, there's only one illegal immigrant in the country that would illegally vote.
@truestdonk@Rallen6788@MiercaDoDo@ChristiansSTDT Oral tradition often produces exaggeration. But exaggeration of a person doesn’t necessarily imply invention of that person. King Arthur’s surviving accounts are centuries after his supposed lifetime. Paul wrote within decades of Jesus’s death and personally met Peter/James.
@truestdonk@Rallen6788@MiercaDoDo@ChristiansSTDT The only people attested for better, are almost exclusively people with political offices. For a person of his low status, he may be one of the best, if not the best attested person of his time compared to that status.
@truestdonk@Rallen6788@MiercaDoDo@ChristiansSTDT Are you unaware that most historical figures of a similar age or older are accounted for this way? It's a low bar, evidence that he existed. Not evidence of magic, miracles, or more. I'm an atheist. Of historical evidence for a person this old, he's one of the best supported.
@Rallen6788@truestdonk@MiercaDoDo@ChristiansSTDT Anonymous authorship also discredits nothing, jewish history focuses on oral tradition, what matters is presence, and given the presence and acknowledgement of Jesus orally in addition to the documentation of the tradition via the gospels is highly sufficient.
@Rallen6788@truestdonk@MiercaDoDo@ChristiansSTDT We have no manuscripts written by Plato's hand. All fragments are copies from a later date, most are medieval period. If referencing a person near the time of their life counts as evidence they existed, we have significantly more references related to Jesus than we do Plato.
@Rallen6788@truestdonk@MiercaDoDo@ChristiansSTDT Non-Christian writers with no incentive to promote Christianity, like Josephus and Tacitus, also mention Jesus or his execution. They are later, non-eyewitness sources and don’t validate every Gospel claim, but their neutral or hostile perspective corroborates evidence.
@Rallen6788@truestdonk@MiercaDoDo@ChristiansSTDT If Aristotle counts as evidence, then so do the gospels and Paul's documents, as they are preserving the testimony of those in the region during the time. Also, self attributing works are not usually considered a historical proof, a byline could be pseudonymous or misattributed.
@truestdonk@MiercaDoDo@ChristiansSTDT We have significantly stronger historical evidence for the existence of Jesus, as an important figure, than we do Plato.
@The_Dudg@tagreene3@DrcharlieWardQ Yes, that's how voting works you fucking idiot. Every single vote counts. It's literally the aggregate of individual votes that changes elections. So yes, there is reward obviously, and guess what? In some states, almost no risk! Solved your problem for you.
@The_Dudg@tagreene3@DrcharlieWardQ Why would they illegally immigrate if it's illegal? It's due to lack of enforcement. Same with illegal voting, retard.
@Pvt_Hinges I've seen LLMs generate a lot of code that is redundant and incorrect, even the top SOTA (I pretty much only use them). You have to have an understanding of your own architecture, minimum, if you want to make anything with a degree of complexity.
@Iheartbiggovt@memeticsisyphus I agree, I don't think any reasonable person would agree that a bad Christian would disprove God.
I don't know of a valid disproof of God, but I don't know of a valid proof either, and in such circumstances, it is reasonable to assume the negative position, until otherwise.
@Baisketeball@memeticsisyphus For your sake, I would avoid that comparison, the entire reason Schrödinger came up with the hypothetical experiment (Schrödinger's Cat) was to point out the ridiculous nature of it, not to prove it as a reasonable or viable concept. He objected to it, that's the whole point.