Atheism is unreasonable

[Mister Agenda]

What goal post have I previously moved that justifies you making that assertion?

You will find the answer if you look at whatever I was responding to.

I strongly doubt that.

Ok, I have a simple question for you...which will make or break the case. Do you believe that the disciples believed that Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to them..yes or no?

I don't even know for sure that Jesus existed and you want me to guess what thoughts were in the heads of his followers? None of their adventures are well-documented either, unless you count Paul. Catholic church traditiion has most of them dying horrible deaths as martyrs, but again, that's the claim, not the evidence. Certainly people have willingly died for beliefs that fall far short of believing in a literal resurrection, so that doesn't prove anything. So it beats me. Some early sources make it sound like a 'spiritual resurrection', others make it sound like a literal one, but none of them are actually contemporary to the event in question.

Another thread

Fair enough.

Is it logically possible to be able to change the future is the question. Omnipotence means you can do anything that is LOGICALLY possible.

If the future can be changed, it can't be fully known. That's what I lean towards. I don't think true omnisicence is possible, and if there's a God, it can't logically foresee everything.

I think the concept of changing the future is logically impossible since God cannot do something any different than what he knows that he WILL do.

That's the other way to approach it, but it puts God in the position of not having any options, God must do what God already knows God will do. Where's God's free will in that scenario?

Now, if you can prove that God can't do something that is logically possible, then yeah, you will be smokin'.

It's always interesting to see which leg a Christian will choose to cut off of the theodicy tripod to save what they can. You chose to limit omnipotence, which is a worthy choice in my book. So many Christians choose to take their saw to omnibenevolence instead.

Once science fails to answer certain questions for me, I have no choice but to look elsewhere. If I go to the bank to borrow money and get denied...and I continue 9 or 10 times and still gets denied...eventually I will go to another bank and see if I can get money from there.

A better analogy would be if you looked in your closet.

That is why there is this thing called "The argument based on the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus" which is used to pinpoint exactly which God in the pool of the many theistic creation myths.

Too bad that argument fails. There's no more evidence that Jesus resurrected than that the Trojan War started because of an argument among Greek goddesses. Have you considered using an argument based on something actually known to be true?