MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)

[Exian]

I sincerely had that cross my mind in a moment of Poe paranoia a few days ago. He's like Daniel Day-Lewis, *looks over should* he could be anyone.

[downbeatplumb]

You know, it kind of reminds me of the movie Fire Down Below with Steven Seagal...long story short, this millionaire in the movie is dumping toxic waste in this small country town, and Seagal's character brought him to justice...and Seagal wants the millionaire's son to testify against him at trial...and after roughing up the son's friends at their hangout/bar...Seagal said to the son (paraphrasing)...

"I want you to testify against your father...now, you can do it because you know it is the only way you can save your ass, or you can do it because it is the right thing to do. I really don't give a shit, but you are going to do it."

Kinda reminds me of what is going on here...you can acknowledge the fact that Jesus is Lord and Savior because the Holy Spirit is eating away at you on the inside...or you can acknowledge the fact that Jesus is Lord and Savior on judgement day when you stand before him...I really don't give a shit...but you are going to acknowledge him.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but you aren't as persuasive as you think you are.

All you have done is re-stated things that I have heard many many times before. I found them unconvincing then, I find them unconvincing now.

[robvalue]

Your honour, I present my irrefutable evidence.

Your evidence is hearsay?

Of course not your honour, I would not dream of presenting hearsay. The original documents written 2000 years ago were hearsay, but it's gone through a grinder of Chinese whispers, translation errors, editing under agenda and insertion of forgeries.

Ah OK. You had me worried that I was going to have to throw this evidence out!

[Cyberman]

H_M, if you could keep the proselytising out of the case you're trying to make, you might find your audience more receptive. You would also be less likely to attract Staff attention. Thank you.

[pocaracas]

However, I (and others here) am willing to grant you the possibility of that existence and work from there.

The vast majority of historians also grant that possibility, so you (and others here) are in good company.

The possibility... never forget that it's not established that such a man existed for real.

There are, however, competing gospels... like the gnostic gospels... or just all the apocryphal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament_apocrypha.
I'm sure you've studied them all thoroughly and have your reasons to dismiss each and every one, except for the canonical ones.

Those Gospels were written much, much later.

yeah.... so?

Also, we have the dead sea scrolls... which reveal something about those times... like The Teacher of Righteousness!!
Hmmm.... a teacher, knowledgeable of the scriptures, a "counselor to the king", "dissatisfied with the religious sects in Jerusalem, and in reaction, founded a "crisis cult". While amassing a following, the Teacher (and his followers) claimed he was the fulfillment of various Biblical prophecies, with an emphasis on those found in Isaiah. The Teacher was eventually killed by the religious leadership in Jerusalem, and his followers hailed him as messianic figure who had been exalted to the presence of God's throne."

Sounds familiar?

The Dead Sea Scrolls is about Jewish stuff...the New Testament is about Christian stuff.

derp... christian stuff is jewish stuff.
You ever seen the acronym INRI?
What does the last I stand for, huh?
I was showing you a story already in circulation about 100 years before J.C.'s alleged birth... a story which shares way too many details with the J.C. myth. One more ember in the fire that destroys the credibility of those eyewitnesses still alive after the year 60AD.

Possibly because they were obviously not written by any of the apostles themselves " and jesus did this miracle and all the apostles were amazed"... clearly a 3rd person account.... so a friendly 3rd person must be manufactured... a friend of the apostles, a disciple of an apostle, a meeting with one of the apostles...

First off, what do you mean "obviously"...it isn't obvious to me...

I know... that is why you believe in the fairy tale and I don't.

second, as mentioned previously, Luke said that the story was passed down from eyewitnesses. If the story that Luke told was passed down from eyewitnesses, then it doesn't matter who wrote the story, as long as the source of the story comes from eyewitnesses.

Could Luke... *gasp*... be lying about that?
A Lie that, if believed, would boost the credibility of the remainder of the story.... worth a shot... and see where it's brought him!

Think about it.... Harry Potter lived in London, he visited the London Zoo, he went on the train to school from Paddington train station...
All this written by someone who obviously knew Harry and his environment.
Blimey! Wizards exist! There is a ministry of magic in the UK and in several other countries! There are evil people with magical powers!
We're doomed!!!!!

Fallacy of comparing apples and oranges.

It's an analogy... I thought you people liked analogies...

"real"... you keep using that word...

Jesus of Nazareth was as real as any other person in antiquity.

ah... of course... yes... you keep telling yourself that.

You see... there was this teacher... he taught people... people listened... some wrote it down to remember it better.
The teachings got handed down... the name of the teacher morphed a bit.

For a moment there, I thought you were a Christian all the way up until that last part.

I would much easier believe the story of the Teacher of Righteousness, than J.C.

[Cyberman]

It's an analogy... I thought you people liked analogies...

You're thinking of anal orgies.

And if you weren't, you are now.

[robvalue]

I just... I don't... my brain can't comprehend it.

They see people lie and exaggerate every day of their life, but they don't stop for one second to think that someone 2000 years ago could have done the exact same thing.

And once again, I'll wheel this one out... the very best you can demonstrate with text is what people believe happened. Not what actually happened. And when it comes to supernatural claims, or ones that rest on medical evaluations, then you are attempting the impossible. Sorry. You cannot demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that what you want to have happened, happened. Even if we granted that every word is 100% what people believed happened. Even if they were eye witnesses. Still no good. Evidence must meet the claim. It's just too bad if there isn't any more evidence, you don't get to adjust the reliability of the evidence you do have. The fact that there isn't other evidence is in fact evidence that your evidence is even worse than it seems on its own.

And...... further.... EVEN IF you could somehow prove he really did "come back to life" that still does not demonstrate how, or why. It's a medical anomaly. So what? The fact that he blathered incoherently before and afterwards demonstrates nothing.

I tried pointing all this out before to save time, but was heartily ignored.

[pocaracas]

It's an analogy... I thought you people liked analogies...

You're thinking of anal orgies.

And if you weren't, you are now.

They like anal orgies?... oh yeah....

[dyresand]

You're thinking of anal orgies.

And if you weren't, you are now.

They like anal orgies?... oh yeah....

[Tonus]

It's an analogy... I thought you people liked analogies...