Bloody flames. I've not seen a whine fest of such proportion since Godschild had his nuclear meltdown.

Take a break from the forum mate, this can't be good for your blood pressure.

(June 19, 2015 at 6:01 pm)Pyrrho Wrote:

Proof?  Hell, I'm just asking for some evidence.  Just a little somethin' somethin', hmmm? 

If god needs you to apologize for him, rather than him speaking for himself, then he is clearly not a great god.

(June 19, 2015 at 7:32 pm)Starvald Demelain Wrote: Bloody flames. I've not seen a whine fest of such proportion since Godschild had his nuclear meltdown.

Which one?

(June 19, 2015 at 8:08 am)Brakeman Wrote: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and the jesus claim is extraordinary.

A guy named Thomas thought the same way. Right up until the moment that he put his fingers into the nail wounds in Jesus' hands.

Quote:The bible paints a picture of a world in which Jesus was extraordinarily well known and was a major player of the time, yet HC'rs have trouble with evidence of even a bit part jesus.

Um...no.

Jesus was a peasant of little interest to the Romans who controlled most of the known world including the dusty little corner of their empire known as Judea. That there is any mention of Jesus at all in the non-biblical records of the day is a truly remarkable thing.

(June 20, 2015 at 11:29 am)Randy Carson Wrote:

(June 19, 2015 at 8:08 am)Brakeman Wrote: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and the jesus claim is extraordinary.

A guy named Thomas thought the same way. Right up until the moment that he put his fingers into the nail wounds in Jesus' hands.

Thomas had the right idea but he wasn't nearly skeptical enough. As proof for Thomas that Jesus was alive touching him and seeing him up close was great since Thomas knew him well. But it was not by any means proof that Jesus had ever actually been dead nail holes or no nail holes.

The problem for us is that we don't have what Thomas is said to have had, the opportunity to see and test for ourselves. What we have is a hearsay account written decades after the event. We lack evidence that Thomas saw what The Gospel of John claims he saw.

(June 20, 2015 at 11:29 am)Randy Carson Wrote: A guy named Thomas thought the same way. Right up until the moment that he put his fingers into the nail wounds in Jesus' hands.

There's that story, yes. Any evidence besides there being a story?

And as for the mentioning of Jesus - been there done that. It's your refusal to understand how the authors of old worked that makes it credible to you.

(June 20, 2015 at 11:29 am)Randy Carson Wrote:

(June 19, 2015 at 8:08 am)Brakeman Wrote: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and the jesus claim is extraordinary.

A guy named Thomas thought the same way. Right up until the moment that he put his fingers into the nail wounds in Jesus' hands.

... Assuming either of those two people existed, which you haven't demonstrated. You're looking to a bible story to prove the bible; its a circular argument, and yet you're whining about how we're just biased and won't believe you.

However, even taking what you've just said as true, what you're saying is that Thomas received evidence, and it changed his mind. So, what that means is that you need to provide evidence, which you never do. You just bandy about random accusations attacking the character of anyone who won't accept your claims without evidence.

By the way, since you're apparently back and posting in this thread, would you mind responding to the questions I asked on the first page? They're rather important to the content here.

(June 19, 2015 at 8:41 pm)Kitan Wrote: If god needs you to apologize for him, rather than him speaking for himself, then he is clearly not a great god.

Probably not even a pretty good one.

(June 20, 2015 at 11:33 am)Jenny A Wrote: We lack evidence that Thomas saw what The Gospel of John claims he saw.

Hell, we lack any real evidence for Thomas.