(September 4, 2018 at 3:27 pm)polymath257 Wrote:(September 4, 2018 at 3:18 pm)SteveII Wrote: You clearly don't know what you are talking about and your statement is an assertion based on...nothing--because you don't even have a handle on the basic facts. I'll bet you $100 that you don't know of any other group of texts (let alone 27)with extraordinary claims from that time period. The resurrection of Jesus was firmly believed by churches across the Roman empire by 50AD--before any of the books of the NT were even written. How do you account for that? Really--I would like to hear an answer.
Unless of course he rose from the dead after being crucified. Your incredulity (which is all you have) does not carry any weight against facts of the matter. I'll wait to hear your answer above.
Ah. Your analogy fails. Garden Gnomes are contingent objects, denizens of the universe. Anything objects in the universe are subject to the scrutiny of science. Your Gnomes would fail the scientific test. God, by definition is not a contingent being. You have a category error problem with your analogy.
I just showed a rational argument from start to finish. I don't even have to be right. But I am certainly rational. You simply assert crap. After seeing the responses in this thread to RR you seem incapable of holding up your end of an argument. All you have are assertions that other people's reasons are somehow defective. You don't/can't even articulate why? Can't you see that?
Read Livy (the history of Rome) for any number of remarkable claims and corresponding messages from the Gods.
Special pleading concerning 'contingency' is just another aspect of confabulation. To exist *means* to be in the universe. Garden gnomes cannot be detected by ordinary science because of their magical abilities.
Again, firm belief in a delusion isn't evidence of the truth of that delusion. Most of those in the first 500 years had NOTHING to do with the original evidence. Even the *legend* of the resurrection should be held at least as skeptically as the *legend* that the god Pan lead Caesar across the Rubicon.
Livy? Was he making claims about things of which he had personal knowledge? No. So...you don't have a comparison to the 27 books of the NT. You have only proved my point that you don't know what you are talking about in your offhand dismissal of the NT.
"To exist *means to be in the universe" ??? Really? That is a metaphysical claim that you can not know anything about.
If garden gnomes have magical abilities, you are positing contingent/emergent magical properties that the universe somehow caused but are not bound by the universe's laws. Science says that is impossible. Your own worldview says that is impossible. Why would I take seriously an impossible analogy? No offence, but between this and the "exists" comment, you don't seem to be equipped to argue metaphysical concepts.
Your last paragraph is just filled with assertions and proof that you don't know anything about the NT or early church history. It is a fitting end to your series of missteps in support of your 'delusion' argument.
