I call BS on Christianity".

I thank the opposition for providing enough material to get this debate back on course (its OP), of which I apologize for allowing the way to broad of definition to run amuck. Summary to this point: Values (Christian values) has been offered for a reason to have NOT called BS on Christianity in general. Pro brought up Jesus teachings and the Christian history that he believes proves that Jesus taught these values. I"ve pointed out many historical discrepancies that exist within the bible, its gods", popular doctrine and the even within the mindset of Christians. Once I"ve addressed (Danns") responses, I will provide a restatement of evidence and valid sources that contradict ALL Christian historical as they apply. I will do this also because Dann uses completely undisclosed (example: most believe this, or that) and otherwise uncited sources. Chases" OP: You state openly that you are not a Christian which means you personally do not place enough value on Christian values in order to cause you to believe." Dann states: I am not black which means I personally do not place enough value on civil rights in order to cause me to believe in civil rights. I am not homosexual which means I personally do not place enough value on homosexual equality in order to cause me to believe in it. I am not a scientist which means I personally do not place enough value on science in order to cause me to believe in it. Dann, good, now let"s look at Christian values concerning race, homosexuality and science, you know the things you DO NOT attest to or believe in and otherwise deny so we can dismiss them".see what I"ve done here? Blacks are salves, they are not really human. The servant of Noah, Ham is used to support the ownership of slaves in this Country. The value placed by Christians is very clear here"is it not? What"s that, it was oh so long ago? Well that really doesn"t make a difference because this Christian value still plays out here in the U.S. Still crying about how it was then and how it is now? Okay Dann, Adolf Hitler and his Christian final solution".what"s that Dann? Sorry dann but Adolf Hitler was a devote Christian, a member in good standing with the Church until the day he died. Still crying foul? Okay Dann what about the Catholic Church that agreed with and supported his final solution. http://youtu.be... http://www.fantompowa.net... http://en.wikipedia.org... PS, the Nazi Church is still alive today as is the KKK. Conclusion, you as a non-believer do NOT hold to the values of Christianity. The rather long list of evil from the Old and New Testament was enough to give the green light to these Christians and god"s will. The teaching of Jesus supported their every move so your attempt at apologetics for the bible as it concerns their behavior fails you here as well. Let"s look at some history further back concerning Jesus, Satan and even god. Archeology finds nothing that remotely even suggests that Jesus ever lived. Archeology and valid historical accounts even show us that the city of Nazareth (the city were Jesus was supposedly born) never existed outside of the bible. Does popular doctrine also claim Jesus was born elsewhere, sure it does, but how does contradictions in the doctrine or the bible validate a historical record? So let"s look at Bethlehem then, the city where Jesus lived. Bethlehem was indeed the city described in the bible, unfortunate for believers it wait only just became a city at the time the bible was written"and NOT during the lifetime of mythical Jesus. When Jesus was said to live, it was still a tent community with very few fixed building and just exiting a semi-sedentary existence. Ironically, the name Bethlehem means (breaking) bread, I wonder where the idea of breaking bread which is of my body came from? http://www.nazarethmyth.info... http://ancienthistory.about.com... If multitudes saw Jesus, they never talked about it. ... There are even discrepancies about Jesus between the Gospels themselves making even less likely to have existed. "Luke told a tale of angels and shepherds, bringing some of the humblest people in society to Bethlehem with news of Jesus" future. Instead of shepherds, Matthew brought Wise Men, following a star in the East and bringing gifts"In one version, there are simple shepherds, the other, learned Wise Men: the contrast sets our imaginations free, and perhaps like the Wise Men we too should return by "another way." [The Unauthorized Version: Truth and Fiction in the Bible (Knopf, 1992), pp.35- 36]. Luke has Joseph and Mary living in Nazareth from where they traveled to Bethlehem for the Roman census (Luke 1:26; 2:4). After Jesus was born, Joseph took his family from Bethlehem to Jerusalem for up to 40 days (Luke 2:22), and from there straight back to Nazareth (Luke 2:39). But Matthew says Jesus was born in a "house" where Joseph"s family lived in Bethlehem. And after the birth of Jesus they lived there for up to two years (Matt 2:16)! After the Magi leave them, Joseph is warned in a dream to flee to Egypt and stay there until Herod died (Matt. 2:15). After Herod died, Joseph was told in a dream to return to the land of Israel, and he headed for his home in Bethlehem of Judea. But since he was afraid to go there, he settled in Nazareth (Matt. 2:21-23), for the first time! Dann mentions Moses, Moses never exited and the Great Exodus never happened. Archeology says no, Science says no, and even other Christians and Jews in the citation below say no""and I agree. And as I already stated, the discrepancies in the bible offer no allowances here as well. http://www.topix.com... http://youtu.be... http://globalfire.tv... Dann states: See above riposte. Will my opponent accept that there are no exclusive copyrights on values? That it is quite possible to hold similar values or be empathetic with the values of another group without being a part of that group? Chase answer: NO!!! Not when this group claims that their god alone holds title to these very same values. For a Christian to offer a lie to aid the comfort of a falsehood held, is not a proper moral value. Will my opponent accept that they may have jumped the gun with this statement?} Chase answers: Note that I see a smoking gun". Dann: The burden of proof in this regard lies with the minority of scholarly opinion surely? Chase answers: Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence, I am not arguing against that (many more) believers do not actually believe, I am arguing that what they believe is irrelevant to the facts concerning the assumptions that you just made. ["Chase answer: God rapes a little girl".. Dann states: I don't think this tact is worthy of my opponent, and certainly not worthy of a serious debate.] Chase answers: It isn"t a tact, it is a fact according to the bibles storyline, big difference, I didn"t create this filth, I am merely posting it, and the storyline sucks as does their god! ONE MORE POST in the comments section.