Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Your protests to the contrary, it is obvious that you are anything but open-minded about Christianity; it often takes more material to convince a skeptic than one who is ambivalent.
    How many books should I read, Pig, in order to be able to say that I have given the Christian claims a fair review?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Gary View Post
      How many books should I read, Pig, in order to be able to say that I have given the Christian claims a fair review?
      You won't. You've already decided that you will not believe Christianity's truth claims no matter what. You would not believe even if Jesus bothered to show up in front of you.
      If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
        You won't. You've already decided that you will not believe Christianity's truth claims no matter what. You would not believe even if Jesus bothered to show up in front of you.
        That is your assumption.

        But let's take me out of the equation.

        Nick: How many books by NT scholars should the average person read in order to be able to say that they have fairly looked at the evidence for the Resurrection, and, so that they can make an adequately informed decision as to the historicity of this alleged event? Please kindly list the names and authors of the books, and, the minimum number that need to be read to be considered "adequately informed".
        Last edited by Gary; 09-01-2015, 03:14 PM.

        Comment


        • How about you, Stein:

          How many books by NT scholars should the average person read in order to be able to say that they have fairly looked at the evidence for the Resurrection, and, so that they can make an adequately informed decision as to the historicity of this alleged event? Please kindly list the names and authors of the books, and, the minimum number that need to be read to be considered "adequately informed".

          Comment


          • I just went on Dr. Daniel Wallace's blog and asked him this same question. I will be very interested in what he says. Remember, folks, Nick, Stein and other Christians on this site have claimed that there is "strong evidence" (9 out of 10 in strength) for the historicity of the bodily resurrection of Jesus. Many conservative Christians even make the claim that the resurrection of Jesus has as strong of supporting evidence as Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon. Nick et al. do not ask people to make a leap of faith to believe in the Resurrection, they assert that the evidence for the bodily reanimation of Jesus is strong enough to stand on its own.

            So if this is true, how many books by NT scholars must one read to be considered well-enough informed to make a reasoned and fair decision on the historicity of this alleged event?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
              Let's see if I have understood correctly.
              Gary rejects the witness of the people who were actually there, but he will accept the testimony of people who come along 2000 years later, provided that most of them agree with him.
              The "logic" is ineffable.
              FIFY no charge.

              Comment


              • Tick, tock, tick, tock...

                While we wait for Nick, Stein, or Pig to answer my very simple question, let me review this point: If you wanted to find out if any other alleged event in history is considered a historical fact by the overwhelming majority of historians and scholars, how many books by imminent scholars on the event in question would you need to read to determine if the event indeed happened?

                Let's again use the crossing of the Rubicon by Caesar as an example. How many books by prominent historians describing the evidence for this alleged event would you need to read to determine if the event happened or not? One? Two? Maybe three?? How would you react if someone told you that in order for you to be well-enough informed on the issue of whether Caesar did or did not cross the Rubicon, you must read 7-10 books by prominent historians? Wouldn't that be ridiculous?

                And more to the point, would you really need to read an entire book to make this decision? In this internet age, couldn't you just do a google search on the topic and after reading three or four entries, find out what percentage of historians/scholars support the historicity of the event in question, and make an informed decision based on this information? For instance, if you do a google search on the topic of Julius Caesar crossing the Rubicon, will you find a substantial number of historians who doubt this event happened? If you find that 30% of all experts in ancient Roman history doubt the historicity of Caesar crossing the Rubicon, wouldn't that give you pause about believing the historicity of this event? But what if the majority of historians question the historicity of this event, wouldn't that cast a great deal of doubt for the historicity of this alleged event?

                I challenge anyone on TW to provide a reference stating that the majority of historians believe that the bodily resurrection of Jesus was an historical event. And if the majority of historians are unwilling to state that this claim is historical, how on earth can Nick, Stein and others claim that the evidence for this event is "strong"??

                And if this evidence is so "strong", why do Christians insist that you must read five to ten books by NT scholars before considering you informed enough to make an intelligent decision yourself on the historicity of this claim.

                Dear Christians, take the rose-colored glasses from your eyes! The evidence for this claim is weak. Very, very weak.
                Last edited by Gary; 09-01-2015, 07:55 PM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                  How many books should I read, Pig, in order to be able to say that I have given the Christian claims a fair review?
                  Without a change of heart, an infinitude of books is unlikely to suffice. You've invested an inordinate amount of time in the last couple years to trashing Christianity; you have too much invested in doing so to easily change your mind. Your pride's on the line now.
                  Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                  Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                  sigpic
                  I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                    Tick, tock, tick, tock...

                    While we wait for Nick, Stein, or Pig to answer my very simple question, let me review this point: If you wanted to find out if any other alleged event in history is considered a historical fact by the overwhelming majority of historians and scholars, how many books by imminent scholars on the event in question would you need to read to determine if the event indeed happened?

                    Let's again use the crossing of the Rubicon by Caesar as an example. How many books by prominent historians describing the evidence for this alleged event would you need to read to determine if the event happened or not? One? Two? Maybe three?? How would you react if someone told you that in order for you to be well-enough informed on the issue of whether Caesar did or did not cross the Rubicon, you must read 7-10 books by prominent historians? Wouldn't that be ridiculous?

                    And more to the point, would you really need to read an entire book to make this decision? In this internet age, couldn't you just do a google search on the topic and after reading three or four entries, find out what percentage of historians/scholars support the historicity of the event in question, and make an informed decision based on this information? For instance, if you do a google search on the topic of Julius Caesar crossing the Rubicon, will you find a substantial number of historians who doubt this event happened? If you find that 30% of all experts in ancient Roman history doubt the historicity of Caesar crossing the Rubicon, wouldn't that give you pause about believing the historicity of this event? But what if the majority of historians question the historicity of this event, wouldn't that cast a great deal of doubt for the historicity of this alleged event?

                    I challenge anyone on TW to provide a reference stating that the majority of historians believe that the bodily resurrection of Jesus was an historical event. And if the majority of historians are unwilling to state that this claim is historical, how on earth can Nick, Stein and others claim that the evidence for this event is "strong"??

                    And if this evidence is so "strong", why do Christians insist that you must read five to ten books by NT scholars before considering you informed enough to make an intelligent decision yourself on the historicity of this claim.

                    Dear Christians, take the rose-colored glasses from your eyes! The evidence for this claim is weak. Very, very weak.
                    You should be able to read ONE book by one Christian NT scholar and be informed enough to make up your mind. I personally have read NT Wright's 800+page book on the Resurrection. Wright's evidence is all based on hearsay and generalizations, as is the evidence that every other Christians apologist and wanna-be apologist that I have read or interacted with asserts. You don't need to read a library full of books to know that this alleged event most probably didn't happen. Could it have happened? Sure! Anything is possible, but so is the existence of invisible monsters under your bed, but how many of us lose any sleep about that probability?

                    The reanimation of a dead first century preacher just isn't probable. There is no reason to believe this claim unless you really, really want to.
                    Last edited by Gary; 09-01-2015, 08:31 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                      Without a change of heart, an infinitude of books is unlikely to suffice. You've invested an inordinate amount of time in the last couple years to trashing Christianity; you have too much invested in doing so to easily change your mind. Your pride's on the line now.
                      How about the ambivalent person seeking the truth on this alleged event? How many books does he need to read to be informed?

                      Comment


                      • Your question is idiotic, but I'll answer it: as many as I feel necessary.

                        History isn't an exact science. Anybody remotely competent in history will tell you that. Generally, you look for corroborating data from other independent sources. The NT has such sources.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by psstein View Post
                          Your question is idiotic, but I'll answer it: as many as I feel necessary.

                          History isn't an exact science. Anybody remotely competent in history will tell you that. Generally, you look for corroborating data from other independent sources. The NT has such sources.
                          I'm not talking about the existence of Jesus or his main preaching points. I'm talking about the central claim of your belief system: the bodily resurrection of a dead man. Please give me a source that states that the majority of historians believe that this alleged event happened, not with 100% certainty, no one can make that claim about any event in ancient history, but with a very high probability. You can't and you know it.

                          Once again, how many books by NT scholars must one read to meet your standard of being well-enough informed to make a rational decision on the historicity of the bodily resurrection of Jesus? One, two, three, or ten? Please list them. I might just read some or all of them.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                            How about the ambivalent person seeking the truth on this alleged event? How many books does he need to read to be informed?
                            One is probably sufficient, though it never hurts to get multiple perspectives.
                            Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                            Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                            sigpic
                            I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                              One is probably sufficient, though it never hurts to get multiple perspectives.
                              Thank you, Pig.

                              So by your standards, if a person reads ONE book by a NT scholar regarding the evidence for the Resurrection they should therefore be informed and competent to make an intelligent and informed decision regarding the historicity of this alleged event.

                              I have read one entire book, that of NT Wright, all 800+ pages, and I have read many articles by other Christian NT scholars, therefore by your standard I am informed. You can accuse me of being biased and closed-minded, but by your standard, I am not "uninformed", as Nick and Stein have alleged.

                              Would Nick and Stein now tell us how many books by NT scholars a person must read before Nick and Stein will consider them "informed" enough to make an intelligent and informed decision on the historicity of the Resurrection.
                              Last edited by Gary; 09-01-2015, 10:43 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Here is what Biblical scholar Marcus Borg said regarding the evidence for the historical Jesus that would be agreed upon by most historians. Notice that the Resurrection is not included.

                                "We do know some things about the historical Jesus — less than some Christians think, but more than some skeptics think,” said Marcus Borg, a preeminent Biblical scholar, author and retired professor of religion and culture at Oregon State University. “Though a few books have recently argued that Jesus never existed, the evidence that he did is persuasive to the vast majority of scholars, whether Christian or non-Christian.”

                                The following description, surmised from the Gospels, would be affirmed by most history scholars, Borg told LiveScience:

                                Jesus was born sometime just before 4 B.C. and grew up in Nazareth, a small village in Galilee, as part of the peasant class. Jesus' father was a carpenter and he became one, too, meaning that they had likely lost their agricultural land at some point. Jesus was raised Jewish and he remained deeply Jewish all of his life; he never intended to create a new religion. Rather, he saw himself as acting within Judaism.

                                He left Nazareth as an adult and met the prophet John, who baptized him. During his baptism, Jesus likely experienced some sort of divine vision. Shortly afterwards, he began his public preaching with the message that the world could be transformed into a "Kingdom of God." He became a noted teacher and prophet, as well as a healer: More healing stories are told about Jesus than about any other figure in the Jewish tradition.

                                He was executed by Roman imperial authority, and his followers experienced him after his death. It is clear, Borg said, that they had visions of Jesus as they had known him during his historical life. Only after his death did they declare Jesus to be "lord" or "the son of God."

                                Source: http://www.livescience.com/13711-jes...ence-hold.html

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X