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: November 18, 2024, 7:44 am
Thread Rating:
Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
|
(July 9, 2015 at 7:45 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:(July 9, 2015 at 7:38 pm)Easy Guns Wrote: So basically, the only substance Randy has to offer to this thread is *word salad* You didn't add any substance to the argument whatsoever except to continue to repeat the same talking points over again. You failed to address my arguments in any fashion. As far as I'm concerned your proofs are completely invalid and with no reasonable argument I have no choice but to settle with that conclusion.
Even though I pretty much disagree with everything Randy types, you have to give him credit for trying.
It's a lot better than, "It happened because the bible said it happened. The Bible is the word of god, because the Bible says it is!" Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni: "You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???" Quote:Oh, and the fact that some people were around when Jesus, James, John, Peter and Paul were actually alive...people who wrote stuff down. Liar. RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 9, 2015 at 8:44 pm
(This post was last modified: July 9, 2015 at 8:45 pm by Randy Carson.)
(July 9, 2015 at 8:03 pm)Easy Guns Wrote:(July 9, 2015 at 7:45 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Pretty tepid, EG. Pretty tepid. Jesus Mythers are idiots, and both theists and atheists alike know this. Now that we have that out of the way... If you have any opposing arguments you wish to make regarding any of the material I have presented, please make your case in response to the appropriate post(s): Post 1 - My OP Post 65 - Fact 1: Jesus died by crucifixion Post 148 - Fact 2: Jesus' disciples believed that He rose and appeared to them Post 283 - Fact 3: Paul, the enemy of the Church, was suddenly converted Post 460 - Fact 4: James, the skeptical brother of Jesus, was suddenly converted. Coming Soon - Fact 5: Jesus' tomb was found to be empty Thanks. (July 9, 2015 at 8:44 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:(July 9, 2015 at 8:03 pm)Easy Guns Wrote: You didn't add any substance to the argument whatsoever except to continue to repeat the same talking points over again. You failed to address my arguments in any fashion. Some interesting stuff I had never thought of before, Randy. Thanks!
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 9, 2015 at 8:47 pm
(This post was last modified: July 9, 2015 at 8:48 pm by Randy Carson.)
(July 9, 2015 at 8:15 pm)Beccs Wrote: Even though I pretty much disagree with everything Randy types, you have to give him credit for trying. (July 9, 2015 at 8:47 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Some interesting stuff I had never thought of before, Randy. Thanks! (July 9, 2015 at 8:03 pm)Easy Guns Wrote: As far as I'm concerned your proofs are completely invalid and with no reasonable argument I have no choice but to settle with that conclusion. Why? I've quoted all sorts of non-biblical sources in support of my four facts, so far. And I've offered some guidance as to why they matter. You've quoted NO ONE and offered no evidence. Just opinions and assertions...along with the usual atheist hubris and ill-will (which is to be expected, of course). Why should anyone believe that the minimal facts are not valid based on the arguments and evidence that you have presented thus far? RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 9, 2015 at 8:59 pm
(This post was last modified: July 9, 2015 at 9:01 pm by IATIA.)
(July 9, 2015 at 8:44 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Post 65 - Fact 1: Jesus died by crucifixion You have yet to prove that jesus died and not just gone comatose so, not a fact.
You make people miserable and there's nothing they can do about it, just like god.
-- Homer Simpson God has no place within these walls, just as facts have no place within organized religion. -- Superintendent Chalmers Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things. -- Ned Flanders Once something's been approved by the government, it's no longer immoral. -- The Rev Lovejoy RE: Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach
July 9, 2015 at 9:21 pm
(This post was last modified: July 9, 2015 at 9:23 pm by Randy Carson.)
(July 9, 2015 at 8:59 pm)IATIA Wrote:(July 9, 2015 at 8:44 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Post 65 - Fact 1: Jesus died by crucifixion I covered this in post #388 - repeated (and expanded) here for your convenience: In 1835, David Strauss definitively refuted the Swoon Theory, and it has never been taken seriously since. Strauss argued that if a half-dead Jesus, beaten and bloody from head to toe, managed to stagger back to where the apostles were in hiding, he would not have inspired his disciples to proclaim that He was GOD - the Lord of Life - who had triumphed over the grave. After suffering all of the abuse, with all the catastrophic blood loss and trauma, he would have looked so pitiful that the disciples would never have hailed him as the victorious conqueror of death; they would have felt sorry for him and tried to nurse him back to health. Do you honestly think that upon seeing him in this horrible condition the Apostles would have called Him, "Lord"? Or would they have called him a doctor? So, it's preposterous to think that if Jesus had appeared to them in that condition, his disciples would have been prompted to start a world-wide movement based on the hope that someday they, too, would have a resurrection body just like his. Here are nine pieces of evidence that refute the swoon theory:
Hope this helps. |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 29 Guest(s)