I don't wish to make an attack on you personally, but would like to see more of the contradicting evidence shown on your site. Having said that, I don't want you to convert to Mithracism, but would like to see a more true and fair assessment of your argument.

bye.

I have just visited your site about the Mithraic influence on christianity and would like to say this: It's complete crap. You're one seriously ignorant and misguided individual. If you think Christianity influenced Mithraism, not vice versa, then you need to open your eyes to the evidence.

Gladly. Where's the evidence?

Like most people of your religion, you are blind to any evidence that contradicts the ideal that "Christianity is the true and ultimate religion."

Nope. First of all, I don't believe that "Christianity is the true and ultimate religion". I believe that there are varying levels of truth in most, if not all, religions. But I also believe that Jesus Himself was unique and is the only one I feel is worth following.

Second of all, I welcome whatever evidence anyone wants to offer and will even post it on my website. But I want the actual evidence, not what someone claims the evidence is. If someone claims that Mithra was crucified, that's not enough. I want to see an actual mythology text, be it in a book or on a website, in which I can actually read that Mithra was crucified.

Although it is undeniable that Christ did exist, the probability that he was a divine entity is near 0. It is almost certain that he was a mortal prophet.

And what's the evidence of this? There's lots of evidence saying that Jesus was resurrected, which would (in my humble opinion) mean that He was a divine entity. Where's the countering evidence? Certainly if someone is an atheist, it's understandable that they would refuse to believe that Jesus was resurrected, since it would be impossible for such a thing to happen if there is no God. But if it's even possible that God exists, then it's possible that Jesus was resurrected, which means we have to consider where the evidence points.

You make numerous references to the new testament yet you do not inform your readers that many books were omitted from the bible because they contradicted the "Perfect Religion" model desired by the Vatican.

No, they were rejected because their authorship could not be verified and the sources appeared to be people who had no real knowledge of Jesus, which is a valid reason to reject them, in my opinion. That, or they didn't really add anything that made their inclusion necessary.

These books, had they been included in the bible, would have confirmed the above assessment.

Sure, people who know next to nothing about a subject aren't going to have their writings included in a book about that subject. Not because they don't confirm some assessment, but because they know next to nothing about the subject.

Yet again, the ignorant christians dismiss the evidence as "fraudulent" and "false", but fail to see that their own religion is fraudulent and false.

Evidence, please?

I don't wish to make an attack on you personally, but would like to see more of the contradicting evidence shown on your site.

Give me the evidence, and I'll gladly put it up. I only reserve the right to respond to it. That's all I've been asking. Most people I ask this of don't respond. Wonder why?

Having said that, I don't want you to convert to Mithracism, but would like to see a more true and fair assessment of your argument.

If anything I've said is untrue, show me the truth.

bye.

Bye.

David