Posts: 8731
Threads: 425
Joined: October 7, 2014
Reputation:
37
RE: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Deux)
November 30, 2014 at 1:20 am
(This post was last modified: November 30, 2014 at 1:36 am by dyresand.)
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
Posts: 15352
Threads: 119
Joined: January 13, 2014
Reputation:
116
RE: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Deux)
November 30, 2014 at 1:24 am
Posts: 69246
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
258
RE: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Deux)
November 30, 2014 at 1:33 am
Quote:and I can shovel in even more evidence for Jesus
The operative word there being "shovel."
![[Image: shit%2Bshovel.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=1.bp.blogspot.com%2F_VbB1uRVgs8g%2FTTEt1fGA89I%2FAAAAAAAAD_Q%2FJEHXKnCrcWk%2Fs400%2Fshit%252Bshovel.jpg)
Posts: 639
Threads: 47
Joined: March 7, 2012
Reputation:
34
RE: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Deux)
November 30, 2014 at 1:47 am
(This post was last modified: November 30, 2014 at 2:08 am by YahwehIsTheWay.)
[out of character]
We interrupt this presentation of the overwhelming evidence for the resurrection of Jesus to bring you this clip that I reminded myself of when I asked "what part of this progression escapes you?"
Star Trek sucks. Babylon 5 rules!
[/out of character]
(November 30, 2014 at 1:20 am)dyresand Wrote: ...
"You don't need facts when you got Jesus." -Pastor Deacon Fred, Landover Baptist Church
™: True Christian is a Trademark of the Landover Baptist Church. I have no affiliation with this fine group of True Christians ™ because I can't afford their tithing requirements but would like to be. Maybe someday the Lord will bless me with enough riches that I am able to.
And for the lovers of Poe, here's your winking smiley: 
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Deux)
November 30, 2014 at 4:09 am
(November 30, 2014 at 1:47 am)YahwehIsTheWay Wrote: Star Trek sucks. Babylon 5 rules!
Repent! NOW!!!
Posts: 29101
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
154
RE: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Deux)
November 30, 2014 at 4:15 am
(This post was last modified: November 30, 2014 at 4:23 am by robvalue.)
Errrrrrrhhhmmmm...
What is the point of this?
As I said in the other thread, even if you could somehow prove beyond reasonable doubt that some guy was declared dead and later came to life, all you have is an unexplained phenomenon. You don't get to shoehorn in your own unsupported explanation as fact because none currently exist. "How else could it have happened?" is an argument from ignorance/incredulity and is a fallacy.
In fact, with text all you can prove is what people believed happened, at best. It does not tell you what actually happened. Especially when the people at that time were already surrounded with mythology and had no good science to explain stuff.
If you use faith as an answer, you have admitted you have no good reason or argument. Believing in something doesn't make it true. I think we could all demonstrate that pretty easily.
Posts: 639
Threads: 47
Joined: March 7, 2012
Reputation:
34
RE: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Deux)
November 30, 2014 at 4:28 am
8. Liar, Lord or Lunatic?
What do you get when you start with a preconceived notion, throw it in a pot, toss in two caricatured alternatives presented in a false trilemma, mix in some strawmanning, sprinkle a dash of argument from incredulity, flavor with cherry picked Bible verses and stir over a roaring fire of confirmation bias?
You have the perfect recipe for the Trilemma, C.S. Lewis' classic argument for the divinity of Jesus. Enjoy the video of his argument presented in his words with the Mel Gibson BDSM gay-porn flick in the background.
The argument is simple: Jesus said he was God.
Sort of.
Well, he did say that his will was inferior to God's ("Not my will but thy will be done"). And he did say he didn't have the knowledge of God ("No man knows the day, no not even the Son, but the Father only"). And he did speak to God in 2nd person and about him in 3rd, as did the booming voice from the sky when speaking to him ("This is my son, hear ye him"). And he did say that his morality was inferior to God's ("Why do you call me good? There is no one good but God.")
But see, all that is when Jesus is fully human. He's also fully divine, which is when he's forgiving sins. The Trinity is the way of having it both ways, which works to smooth out the rough spots of the story.
Anyway, I digress. If Jesus is going around forgiving sins, that means he's either a "demon" as Josh McDowell put it, he's insane along the lines of claiming to "be a poached egg" as C.S. Lewis puts it or he's The Lord.
Now, we all know that anyone claiming to be God must be a demon right? No possibility that, just to spitball out a possibility, that Jesus was picked as Messiah of the week, at first saw an opportunity for his own gain, then his idealistic side kicked in and he thought he could reform an austere religion and make it more gentle and loving for the people, right?
I wonder if Josh McDowell would call Miguel a "demon"?
The other possibility, at least the only one we allow for, is that Jesus was crazy. And we all know that crazy people never get a religious following or get taken seriously as religious leaders, right?
And if Jesus was crazy, how could he have had the sanity to stand in front of a fig tree when figs were out of season and then curse the tree for not bearing fruit? If Jesus was crazy, how could he have been wise enough to use bloody metaphors in his sermon on the mount about cutting your hands off or plucking your own eyes out of they offend you, metaphors taken tragically too literally on occasion. And if Jesus were not completely grounded, how could he give such advice as "love your enemies" and "do good to those who hate you" while condemning any who don't believe in him to eternal Hell?
Clearly, anyone who reads the Gospel accounts must come to the conclusion that Jesus is not crazy nor is he lying but that he must be Lord. After all, why would we not get a complete and clear picture from such credible sources as religious texts?
...Let's see if there's any other arguments I missed...
"You don't need facts when you got Jesus." -Pastor Deacon Fred, Landover Baptist Church
™: True Christian is a Trademark of the Landover Baptist Church. I have no affiliation with this fine group of True Christians ™ because I can't afford their tithing requirements but would like to be. Maybe someday the Lord will bless me with enough riches that I am able to.
And for the lovers of Poe, here's your winking smiley:
Posts: 29101
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
154
RE: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Deux)
November 30, 2014 at 4:36 am
(This post was last modified: November 30, 2014 at 4:47 am by robvalue.)
Appeals to incredulity, logical fallacy.
The thing is (borrowing from Matt Dillahunty) no one actually believes because of any of these arguments. They already believe for other reasons, and use them as rationalisations. I would find it hard to believe a single sane person was ever convinced to believe, without coercion, by any of this.
(Yes, indoctrination is coercion as well as child abuse. If you are for real here, you are almost certainly a victim of it, and for that I am sorry.)
Posts: 19670
Threads: 178
Joined: July 31, 2012
Reputation:
91
RE: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Deux)
November 30, 2014 at 5:44 am
Dude, not fair!
We want his majesty to present these things!
Take all of that back!
Posts: 18503
Threads: 79
Joined: May 29, 2010
Reputation:
125
RE: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part Deux)
November 30, 2014 at 7:24 am
I recommend people to read the OP signature.
|
