(July 7, 2015 at 4:11 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: But what I do know is that there hasn't been one documented case of a human being coming back to life after being dead for three days.
And based on that information and the unconvincing nature of your evidence, I reject your theory of resurrection.
A ridiculous violation of basic laws of biology is not the best explanation. Ever heard of Occam's razor?
Randy is simply aping what skeptics do. The problem is that he's placing far more weight on the bible (which is really the claim and not the evidence for it, anyway) than anyone else otherwise would. Our knowledge of biology certainly trumps heresay and myth, even if they're partially based on real events. He thinks that varying degrees of historical evidence for places, people and events = divinity. But that's not how it works. Especially when the part he wants to prove - the resurrection - has the least going for it.
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
