(July 10, 2015 at 11:32 am)Jenny A Wrote:This is the heart of the other disagreement: initial plausibility of irregularities. Freethinkers (atheists, agnostics, deists) want the more economical irregularities since we are starting with occam's razor; for example, someone surviving a crucifixion, people lying and dying for a lie, mass hallucinations, myths mixing with facts in short periods (which isn't even an irregularity to be honest). He just wants the conclusion, "Christian god caused a resurrection" so he will only entertain that view and give no other view naturalistic or supernaturalistic a day in court.(July 9, 2015 at 10:36 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: No, Jenny. The Romans were professional soldiers with LOTS of experience crucifying people. Jesus died on the cross, and hanging your coat on this peg looks like mere denial - not rational evaluation of the evidence.
Hang my hat on it? Read the part in bold. But the possibility is far from mere denial. Modern doctors mistakenly pronounce the living dead with some regularity (I see you deleted my link about this http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree...kolkiewicz) what could possibly make the average Roman soldier better identifying death?
It is very important not to mistake hemlock for parsley, but to believe or not believe in God is not important at all. - Denis Diderot
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
We are the United States of Amnesia, we learn nothing because we remember nothing. - Gore Vidal
