Firstly, let me just state that anyone is entitled to their beliefs. We are all separate entities, and because of that, suppression of said beliefs based on differences is an infectious measure to an issue. However, in no way are all beliefs of equal merit.

Now, this is just a personal rant. For every time I see someone post a copy-pasta status like this, I just get irritated. Sure, that person can believe what they want. But as a skeptic and a free thinker, I’d like to get a few things straight. Fact wize.

FIRST:

We all know that Freddie Mercury was the greatest man in history. The premise is already incorrect. (Jokes aside, there is no criteria to judge a person the greatest. And any criteria that one could come up with, Jesus wouldn’t land in that spot.)

Second:

This is somewhat contradictory. For someone to be a master, then the people claiming someone is would be subservient to that “master”. Hence the Master/Slave association. If he didn’t have servants in any sense, then he wouldn’t be a master of anything. Unless, of course, people are dumb enough to just call people things with no context behind their words. I mean, sure, I can shout at the homeless guy on the street “DAD!”, and he’s not my actual father. It only means that I’m using a word for something it does not apply.

Third:

These things are starting to show the divide between fictional first century sheepherders, and 21st century idiots. If there were degrees to have back then, I’m sure they would call others teacher too. But I’m sure that there were people without degrees who were called teacher. This is because degrees didn’t exist in that time period. At all. Teachers teach. Anyone who teaches anything can be considered and called a teacher. Saying that someone without a degree (in a time without degrees) was called teacher has no bearing on that status’ importance.

Fourth:

Riddled thru-out the last 200 years, and probably further back, we’ve had faith healers. They don’t use medicine. They don’t have medical degrees. But people call them healers. Why do they call them healers? Because faith healers are very crafty people, able to convince the helpless that they’re better. Now sure, you can go and point out this and that from the bible. “Jesus was a real healer, because he spit on the sick and they became healthy! And he rose the dead back to life!” And I’ll give you that. In the story, Jesus did such things. In the anonymously written, inconsistent stories, with no evidence supporting a single account of what was supposedly done. If you hold stories to be of such merit, then why not call me healer? One time, I licked a dead guy, and he rose from the dead. Believe me because I’m infallible.

Fifth:

I’ve seen this point made before. It goes along the lines of this.

“David Koresh had no army either, and our government feared him…does that make him more credible as the true savior?”- Methuselah on the snopes forums.

Simply put, any dangerous crazy person claiming to be divine can be a threat to a government. Even more so a primitive 1st century government. But I’ll make a separate point. This claim that kings feared him is severely belittled by the fact that hardly any kings are even associated with Jesus. Herod? Pontus Pilate? Is that it? I’m no biblical scholar, but whenever I search as to what kings were afraid of jesus, those are the only names I get.

Sixth:

I’m quite sure that there are many tribes that haven’t even heard the name Jesus. I assume the point of this sentence is that Jesus has supposedly overtaken the world, with his story and his sacrifice weighing heavily on the souls of those who hear about him. This point, however, is dashed by the immense majority that either don’t accept Jesus’ divinity, ignore him, or write him off as a fictional character. Although, I know there are some who would say that the “Good Book” is the greatest story ever written, with the most copies sent around the world. But using this line of logic, James Bond and Harry Potter have also conquered the world.

Seventh:

Even if there was any factual merit to the biblical story of the crucifixion, it would leave no credibility to Jesus being innocent of a crime. According to some christian schools of thought, (lol, I know) Jesus was accused of claiming he was the king of the Jews, which I don’t even think is remotely cannon. The only thing that can be seen is that Jesus was a political threat to the structure of government that the Romans had. When you have a nutcase making people leave their families behind to follow them around, it would be a threat to any government. It’s why cult leaders get arrested now. Because, no matter how soft the message is, there’s power in numbers. Even more so in the weak minds of gullible desert-folk.

Eighth:

Apparently, being placed on an altar-type thing with a sheet on top of you, and having a rock pushed in front of your cave-grave constitutes as being buried. But bad jokes aside, the most obvious answer to this assertion is that if he is alive, where is he? I mean, people are claiming that Michael Jackson is still alive, and we know where his grave is. You can’t just say someone is alive, and have nothing to show for it. And if you mean that he’s “Alive in spirit, and alive in the actions of his followers”, then so is Hitler. Any dead person with a set of ideals can be “kept alive” after death. Doesn’t mean they’re alive.

Ninth:

My heart does no believing. It pumps blood with ventricles and valves and whatnot. If your heart does anything outside of pump blood and/or fail to do so, then something is wrong with you biologically.