Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: September 18, 2024, 7:20 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 7 Vote(s) - 1.57 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
#51
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
(June 25, 2015 at 11:14 am)Godschild Wrote: How the same way God gave Adam life and for why, a promise to mankind that we could have eternal life. Without the resurrection there would have been a failed promise.

GC

Methinks you have a problem with the definition of the word fact. Fact is not assumption.
[Image: Bumper+Sticker+-+Asheville+-+Praise+Dog3.JPG]
Reply
#52
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
(June 25, 2015 at 2:00 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: The Sadducees were there and they didn't believe in angels, demons, spirits, ghosts, or resurrections.  If they weren't convinced maybe the events never happened.

You think they were going to give up their good life style, for something that would have destroyed it, look at the track record of the Israelites and you will see they coveted money more than their God most of the time.

GC
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
Reply
#53
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
(June 25, 2015 at 11:11 am)Minimalist Wrote:
Quote:As I understand it, when studying history we often have little information to go on. We may not be able to prove conclusively that a lot of historical figures actually existed, and some (Socrates?) we may never be sure of. Based on that, we can accept that "historical Jesus" existed, in the sense that the stories we read are based on an actual person.
The problem with that, Tonus, is that you are giving them the proverbial inch.  They cannot be given anything on the basis of their assertions or special pleading.  If Habermas wants to talk about facts then he should be forced to provide evidence for each of those "facts."  They are not "facts" until he does.

I understand that. But because the gap between "the Jesus character in these stories is based on a real guy" and "he is god and did all of these magic things and will return any minute now" is so immense as to be impossible to cross, I'm comfortable with giving that inch and seeing how they try to cover the next hundred light-years.

I suppose I'm just tired of the endless conversation that comes from such a worthless point. There were probably a few guys named Clark Kent who lived in the USA in the 1930s. Imagine spending this much time discussing whether any of them really existed, instead of getting on to the part where they try to prove that any one of them was Superman. Or put another way, we can't ask them to strap on a cape and jump off of a skyscraper until we dispense with the formalities... Angel
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."

-Stephen Jay Gould
Reply
#54
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
(June 25, 2015 at 11:17 am)Godschild Wrote:
(June 25, 2015 at 2:00 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: The Sadducees were there and they didn't believe in angels, demons, spirits, ghosts, or resurrections.  If they weren't convinced maybe the events never happened.

You think they were going to give up their good life style, for something that would have destroyed it, look at the track record of the Israelites and you will see they coveted money more than their God most of the time.

GC
Does this seem like a good being to you?

Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today. 


Code:
<iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&amp;auto_play=false&amp;hide_related=false&amp;show_comments=true&amp;show_user=true&amp;show_reposts=false&amp;visual=true"></iframe>
Reply
#55
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
I get it.  I'm in the "Fuck You and Your Fairy Tales....Grow The Fuck Up", school.  They've got shit and they know it and try to make it smell like roses.
Reply
#56
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
(June 25, 2015 at 11:17 am)Godschild Wrote: You think they were going to give up their good life style, for something that would have destroyed it, look at the track record of the Israelites and you will see they coveted money more than their God most of the time.

But it makes you wonder what god was offering them. I cannot imagine that this is what happened:

GOD: Here is the choice: eternal life in heaven, or eternal torment in hell.
Person: Well, that seems like a pretty easy choice to make, so I'll...
Devil: Hey, not so fast! I have MONEY!
GOD: LOL, that's a pretty weak offer to ma--
Person: GIMME MONEY OMG MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY!!!
GOD: Wait, what... how???
Devil: *tosses another soul on the barbie*

There really is no emotion that would favor the devil's offer. Even stuff that isn't practical would favor taking god's offer. Any story where so few people make such a clear and obvious choice has to be suspect. It goes against everything we know about ourselves as a species and as individuals.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."

-Stephen Jay Gould
Reply
#57
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
(June 25, 2015 at 11:14 am)Godschild Wrote: How the same way God gave Adam life and for why, a promise to mankind that we could have eternal life. Without the resurrection there would have been a failed promise.

GC
My bolding.

Well, good thing some one caught that and threw it in the Jesus story then!
Reply
#58
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
(June 25, 2015 at 11:17 am)Godschild Wrote:
(June 25, 2015 at 2:00 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: The Sadducees were there and they didn't believe in angels, demons, spirits, ghosts, or resurrections.  If they weren't convinced maybe the events never happened.

You think they were going to give up their good life style, for something that would have destroyed it, look at the track record of the Israelites and you will see they coveted money more than their God most of the time.

GC

So do you think it's more likely that the resurrected Jesus did not bother to make an appearance to those religious leaders who had denied his claims and who allegedly set in motion the events leading to his death and resurrection, or that he did make such an appearance to them and they refused to believe their own eyes just to preserve their gig?  Neither strikes me as plausible, even in terms of fictional literature.
Reply
#59
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
So clowns like Habermas...and his doppelganger Randy, insist that "scholars" agree on their horseshit but what about all the muslims scholars?  They too accept "jesus" as a prophet but:

http://www.islam-guide.com/ch3-10.htm


Quote:Muslims believe that Jesus was not crucified.  It was the plan of Jesus’ enemies to crucify him, but God saved him and raised him up to Him.  And the likeness of Jesus was put over another man.  Jesus’ enemies took this man and crucified him, thinking that he was Jesus.

How very docetist of them.  Kind of brings to mind the observations of Spencer that heretical xtians were driven out of the Roman Empire by crazed xtian thugs and settled in marginal areas, like Arabia.

There are literally shitloads of muslim "scholars" who would thus call Habermas an asswipe.
Reply
#60
RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
I have to admit, I get a chuckle out of the idea that Yahweh's master plan involved duping some poor schmuck who looked like him. How many buckets of popcorn did they go through in heaven as they watched the Romans flay and crucify the wrong guy?
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."

-Stephen Jay Gould
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Proving evolution? LinuxGal 24 3325 March 19, 2023 at 10:36 pm
Last Post: Ferrocyanide
  What will win the god wars? Faith, Fantasy, Facts, or God? Greatest I am 98 8342 December 28, 2020 at 12:01 pm
Last Post: Greatest I am
  In what way is the Resurrection the best explanation? GrandizerII 159 18597 November 25, 2019 at 6:46 am
Last Post: Abaddon_ire
  Travis Walton versus The Resurrection. Jehanne 61 17121 November 29, 2017 at 8:21 pm
Last Post: Angrboda
  Why do Christians believe in the Resurrection of Jesus but not alien abductions? Jehanne 72 13065 June 27, 2016 at 1:54 am
Last Post: Redbeard The Pink
  We can be certain of NO resurrection - A Response Randy Carson 136 40572 October 2, 2015 at 4:10 am
Last Post: Aractus
  Disproving The Resurrection By The Maximal Facts Approach BrianSoddingBoru4 160 28022 July 5, 2015 at 6:35 pm
Last Post: Jenny A
  Obama and the simulated resurrection professor 116 19770 April 25, 2015 at 10:39 pm
Last Post: Wyrd of Gawd
  MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2) His_Majesty 1617 369781 January 12, 2015 at 5:58 pm
Last Post: dyresand
  The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Ad Neuseum) YahwehIsTheWay 32 7635 December 11, 2014 at 4:58 pm
Last Post: robvalue



Users browsing this thread: 37 Guest(s)