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

[DeistPaladin]

I am of the religious type, so I believe that if God exists, you can have lunch with your deceased father...

What do you base that on? I realize that as a Christian, the word "God" means only one thing to you: Yahweh, of course. However, even if we assume God exists, there are an indefinite number of possibilities (Allah, Zeus, Odin, Ra, Shiva, Krishna, Dagda, Quetzalcoatl, Marduk, and millions of other gods that humans have believe in plus the indefinite number of possible gods never imagined by any religion). Some of these gods offer an afterlife, some a cycle of reincarnation and some offer no existence after death at all.

Read your OT. Your own god was not always keen on the idea of an afterlife.

Job 7:7-9 O remember that my life is wind: mine eye shall no more see good. The eye of him that hath seen me shall see me no more: thine eyes are upon me, and I am not. As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away: so he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more.

Psalms 115:17 The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence.

Eccl 9:10 Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might;for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.

Much of the Christian concepts of the afterlife, including Hell, salvation and the intercessor-type deity have pagan origins. Christianity itself is an amalgamation of many different faiths, cobbled together in a land that was a crossroad between three continents. Sorry if you thought that it all began with a wonder-working godman born of a virgin.

Now, whether or not I am to believe that actually HAPPENED in your case...I would need more evidence. The point is not to believe EVERYTHING, but take everything on a case by case basis...and being open minded.

So which are you more likely to believe with just my testimony then?
1. I had lunch with my wife.
2. I had lunch with my resurrected father.

If you picked "1", congratulations! You are a normal person who evaluates claims based on how extraordinary they are, demanding an increasing level of evidence that scales with the extraordinary nature of the claim.

The same reason a man rising from the dead is. [an extraordinary claim just like abiogenesis]

Please cite for me peer reviewed science journals where the resurrection of Jesus is discussed and you can place scientific research on the origin of life on par with it.

Btw, do you know what "peer review" is in context with science?

You are talking a good game...the problem is, no freakin' evidence. Go in a lab, prove it. Until then, kill the noise.

What? Are you asserting that terrestrial life existed over 5 billion years ago, before the earth existed? What exactly are you saying?

I was saying, just to clarify, that we both believe that life came into existence, that we haven't always been here on this planet. The planet itself hasn't always been here. The difference is you believe that the world and all life was poofed into existence magically by your god. Scientists are trying to study how life came to be.

The only difference is you say GodDidIt while science is interested in finding out what the answer is.

Clear?

SMH

Why? You yourself said that the resurrection was an extraordinary claim, just like abiogenesis. Why do you shake your head now?

The Gospels, Paul's epistles, the non-Christian accounts, Jewish history, the spread of Christianity...stuff like that...it isn't just one thing, it is the totality of it all that gives historians reasons to believe that at BEST, Jesus of Nazareth existed. They reason that at the very least, the man existed...at least that much.

Oh fuck me, I just can't resist riding the Scholars Say Merry Go Round one more time...

The Gospels: Christian mythology

Paul's Epistles: Half of which are considered inauthentic and the other half I take as seriously as you take Muhammad's writings.

Non-Christian accounts: The best we have are the Annals of Tacitus and even this is late (2nd century) and is so oblique it doesn't even mention Jesus by name.

Jewish history: Doesn't mention any "Jesus" until the 4th century Talmudic entry about a Yeshua prosecuted for sorcery. This Yeshua had a 40 day trial, five disciples and was a wealthy, powerful man "connected with the government".

The Spread of Christianity: Actually, real history works against you here, and my sources include your own Bart Ehrman. There were a wild variety of different Christianities. It seems your Jesus, if he existed, didn't make much clear to his followers.

I mean of course, there are skeptics...hell, there are some that don't believe that Socrates ever existed...these things can't be proved with 100% accuracy...but based on all of the evidence, it seems most likely than not that Jesus existed.

I hold Jesus to a higher standard than Socrates. A miracle working godman is a more extraordinary claim than some guy who wrote philosophy.

If, on the other hand, Jesus was nothing more than some mortal religious leader who ran afoul of the authorities and was deified by his followers after his death, some of whom claimed to have seen him much the same way Elvis was sighted after his death, then your claim rises to the level of "it may be so, and what then?"

Stay tuned.

Truly, I'm on the edge of my seat. *yawn*