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
    It's also possible that the written gospel is largely identical to that which had been preached in the intervening years, and that the confirmation of that would be elementary. Paul, at any rate, was a stickler for that (well before AD 65-75). To admit that this is quite possible is disastrous for Gary's skepicism.
    And how can you prove that the Resurrection story(s) we find in the Gospels is identical to the original facts? You can't and you know it. All you can do is assume. And assuming is what most of the Christian evidence for this supernatural event involves.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Gary View Post
      Here is another point regarding the "Five Hundred Witnesses": We have zero details of this appearance. Zero.

      Where did it happen?
      When did it happen?
      How did it happen
      To whom did it happen?

      Did Jesus appear in the flesh to the 500 or did he just appear as a bright light as he did to Paul? Did the bright light talk as it did to Paul or was there only a bright light? We have many accounts in history where large groups of believers (in particular, Roman Catholic believers), all in one place and at the same time, have seen the Virgin Mary, angels, saints, etc. So just because 500 believers in the first century saw a bright light or other image that they believed to be Jesus should we believe as historical fact that they really did SEE a reanimated dead body??

      Do we have ANY testimony from these five hundred people? No.
      Do we have ANY description of what Jesus said, did, or looked like in this appearance? No.

      If someone told you today, that someone had told them, that several years ago, a green Martian with antennaes on his little head had appeared to 500 un-named people, all at once, and in the same place, and that if you wanted to verify this, you could take a trip to the Middle East to verify it because most of these witnesses are still alive (but some are dead), would you believe this story based on this very, very flimsy evidence???

      I don't think so. So why do you believe the 2,000 year old Five Hundred Witnesses story??

      Answer: Because you so very much want to.
      Dear Christians,

      Have you ever considered this: If God so loved the entire world, if God truly desires that ALL men be saved, why didn't he leave better evidence for the Resurrection?? Why did he have Jesus only appear to disciples, family members, and one rabbi? If God really wanted the whole world to be saved, why didn't he have Jesus appear to Pilate, to the entire Sanhedrin, to all of Jerusalem? Why didn't he have Jesus appear to the crowd of thousands on Pentecost? Why didn't he have Jesus appear to the Emperor of Rome himself? Why didn't he have Jesus appear to every individual on earth then and every individual who has lived since?

      Christians have two answers for this question:

      1. God wants people to really, really seek him. (God enjoys playing hide and seek)

      Would a just, loving, merciful, good God play hide and seek with people whose eternal destinies are at stake?

      2. God's ways are not our ways. (It is a mystery)

      This is a blatant cop-out. This is the ultimate surrender of your educated, intelligent brain to an ancient superstitious tale. USE YOUR BRAIN, FOLKS! A good, loving, and merciful being would NOT play hide and seek with people whom he loved, people who would face an eternity of suffering if they fail in "finding" him.

      Either your God is cruel and evil, or this supernatural tall tale is just that, a tale. It isn't true.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
        People back then knew the same. That's what makes it even more unusual. For most people, if you saw a dead person again, even if you were a Jew, that assured you the person was dead. See the idea that Peter's angel had appeared in Acts 12.
        The problem with Gary's comment is that its (and I might add for him - characteristically) circular. It assumes out of the many thousands of people who claim to have seen a loved one none of them have. If we have learned anything from UFO sightings its that UFOs quite often are real. In many cases UNIDENTIFIED flying objects ARE actually seen - people saw something that was real and later identified - Military exercises, balloons, atmospheric conditions etc. the whole idea of an entire story spanning days arising out of shared visions is so contrived even in my teens I wondered why skeptics even bothered with it. Organized fraud makes more sense. What we have in the accounts of the early church, corroborated by multiple sources fits no hallucination vision profile in history. The whole thing is just contrived

        Comment


        • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
          deh. It is a good way to keep up with what passes for Biblical criticism among the atheist community - never know when it will come in handy.
          Googling is probably better. the problem with using Gary as the gauge of the atheist community is it will give you a false sense of confidence you have heard their best arguments, Anyone can topple over the weakest link.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
            It's also possible that the written gospel is largely identical to that which had been preached in the intervening years, and that the confirmation of that would be elementary. Paul, at any rate, was a stickler for that (well before AD 65-75). To admit that this is quite possible is disastrous for Gary's skepicism.
            In reality, the written gospel looks extremely close to what oral preaching would look like. Mark's lack of order, as well as the abrupt ending and the "Markan Sandwich" all suggest an oral origin.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Gary View Post
              Dear Christians,

              Have you ever considered this: If God so loved the entire world, if God truly desires that ALL men be saved, why didn't he leave better evidence for the Resurrection?? Why did he have Jesus only appear to disciples, family members, and one rabbi? If God really wanted the whole world to be saved, why didn't he have Jesus appear to Pilate, to the entire Sanhedrin, to all of Jerusalem? Why didn't he have Jesus appear to the crowd of thousands on Pentecost? Why didn't he have Jesus appear to the Emperor of Rome himself? Why didn't he have Jesus appear to every individual on earth then and every individual who has lived since?

              Christians have two answers for this question:

              1. God wants people to really, really seek him. (God enjoys playing hide and seek)

              Would a just, loving, merciful, good God play hide and seek with people whose eternal destinies are at stake?

              2. God's ways are not our ways. (It is a mystery)

              This is a blatant cop-out. This is the ultimate surrender of your educated, intelligent brain to an ancient superstitious tale. USE YOUR BRAIN, FOLKS! A good, loving, and merciful being would NOT play hide and seek with people whom he loved, people who would face an eternity of suffering if they fail in "finding" him.

              Either your God is cruel and evil, or this supernatural tall tale is just that, a tale. It isn't true.
              This is a really poor attempt at the argument from divine hiddenness.

              Ever consider that God doesn't want to abrogate free will? No, that can't be a response, it makes too much sense.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Mikeenders View Post
                The problem with Gary's comment is that its (and I might add for him - characteristically) circular. It assumes out of the many thousands of people who claim to have seen a loved one none of them have. If we have learned anything from UFO sightings its that UFOs quite often are real. In many cases UNIDENTIFIED flying objects ARE actually seen - people saw something that was real and later identified - Military exercises, balloons, atmospheric conditions etc. the whole idea of an entire story spanning days arising out of shared visions is so contrived even in my teens I wondered why skeptics even bothered with it. Organized fraud makes more sense. What we have in the accounts of the early church, corroborated by multiple sources fits no hallucination vision profile in history. The whole thing is just contrived
                I'm inclined to agree. People see something that they can't identify and assign some (speculated) explanation to the event - however outlandish, the sighting itself is not pulled out of thin air. By contrast, the resurrection accounts point to a sighting of an identified object - no confluence. Likewise a "ghost" sighting would be wholly consistent with the "superstitious" beliefs of the time - the pains that the gospel authors go to in making sure that they are not considered to be talking about a ghost sighting or vision doesn't fit with the pattern of simple superstitious beliefs. Nor does anything in the atheists' criticisms address possible causes for why these accounts were believed. The story could be expected to meet with the same response then, as alien abduction stories do now.
                Last edited by tabibito; 09-12-2015, 12:39 PM.
                1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                .
                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                Scripture before Tradition:
                but that won't prevent others from
                taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                of the right to call yourself Christian.

                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Mikeenders View Post
                  The problem with Gary's comment is that its (and I might add for him - characteristically) circular. It assumes out of the many thousands of people who claim to have seen a loved one none of them have. If we have learned anything from UFO sightings its that UFOs quite often are real. In many cases UNIDENTIFIED flying objects ARE actually seen - people saw something that was real and later identified - Military exercises, balloons, atmospheric conditions etc. the whole idea of an entire story spanning days arising out of shared visions is so contrived even in my teens I wondered why skeptics even bothered with it. Organized fraud makes more sense. What we have in the accounts of the early church, corroborated by multiple sources fits no hallucination vision profile in history. The whole thing is just contrived
                  Bright light appears to group of people.jpg

                  Is this what the Five Hundred really saw when they believed that Jesus had appeared to them?

                  With the little that is said about this appearance in First Corinthians 15, you can't rule it out, can you?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                    [ATTACH=CONFIG]9668[/ATTACH]

                    Is this what the Five Hundred really saw when they believed that Jesus had appeared to them?

                    With the little that is said about this appearance in First Corinthians 15, you can't rule it out, can you?

                    I'm sorry but your stupidity knows no end. It can be easily ruled out. They claimed to have seen the same person what was killed according tot he scripture and buried according to the scripture not a beam of light.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by psstein View Post
                      In reality, the written gospel looks extremely close to what oral preaching would look like. Mark's lack of order, as well as the abrupt ending and the "Markan Sandwich" all suggest an oral origin.
                      I don't disagree. My point is that there is no way to know if the story in Mark reflects the original "story" of what happened to Jesus after his death. Other than the vague creed in First Corinthians 15, there are no contemporary accounts of this event, either Christian, Jewish, or pagan, nor are there any accounts of this event from the following 30-40 years until Mark is written. That is plenty of time for the story to "develop" (be embellished), and, we have no solid proof that the author of Mark was an eyewitness or an associate of an eyewitness. The claim that John Mark wrote this gospel is based on very weak evidence.

                      The argument that oral traditions were memorized and remained intact is undone by the fact that Christians claimed that over 500 people witnessed this event, therefore there would have been five hundred different versions of the story. How often do even two eyewitness accounts differ in at least some of the details? There was no ONE story to memorize. The variations between the four Gospel witnesses lists prove this. Then compare these witness lists to the witness list in First Corinthians and you see how different witnesses "see" different versions of the same event.
                      Last edited by Gary; 09-12-2015, 01:03 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by psstein View Post
                        This is a really poor attempt at the argument from divine hiddenness.

                        Ever consider that God doesn't want to abrogate free will? No, that can't be a response, it makes too much sense.
                        How does Jesus appearing in his resurrected, superhero-like body to every human being abrogate free will? God appeared to or at least spoke to Adam and Eve and that did not abrogate their free will, so why would it be different for any of us today?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                          I'm inclined to agree. People see something that they can't identify and assign some (speculated) explanation to the event - however outlandish, the sighting itself is not pulled out of thin air. By contrast, the resurrection accounts point to a sighting of an identified object - no confluence. Likewise a "ghost" sighting would be wholly consistent with the "superstitious" beliefs of the time - the pains that the gospel authors go to in making sure that they are not considered to be talking about a ghost sighting or vision doesn't fit with the pattern of simple superstitious beliefs. Nor does anything in the atheists' criticisms address possible causes for why these accounts were believed. The story could be expected to meet with the same response then, as alien abduction stories do now.
                          We have zero details of the alleged appearance to the Five Hundred. For all we know, all they saw was a bright light that appeared in front of them (as in the photo I uploaded) for a few seconds and then disappeared.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Mikeenders View Post
                            I'm sorry but your stupidity knows no end. It can be easily ruled out. They claimed to have seen the same person what was killed according tot he scripture and buried according to the scripture not a beam of light.
                            Please provide the passage where "they" say this.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                              I'm inclined to agree. People see something that they can't identify and assign some (speculated) explanation to the event - however outlandish, the sighting itself is not pulled out of thin air. By contrast, the resurrection accounts point to a sighting of an identified object - no confluence. Likewise a "ghost" sighting would be wholly consistent with the "superstitious" beliefs of the time - the pains that the gospel authors go to in making sure that they are not considered to be talking about a ghost sighting or vision doesn't fit with the pattern of simple superstitious beliefs. Nor does anything in the atheists' criticisms address possible causes for why these accounts were believed. The story could be expected to meet with the same response then, as alien abduction stories do now.
                              Again, you have created a strawman for my position. I nor most skeptics allege that Christians made up appearances. The overwhelming majority of us believe that Christians saw SOMETHING and believed it was Jesus. What exactly they saw we will never know, but the chances they were mistaken in what they believed they saw is far more probable than that they really saw a resurrected, dead body.

                              Most people who claim today to have a vision of a dead loved one, do not state that the person was a ghost. They believe the dead person really appeared to them in the flesh.
                              Last edited by Gary; 09-12-2015, 01:09 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Mikeenders View Post
                                Googling is probably better. the problem with using Gary as the gauge of the atheist community is it will give you a false sense of confidence you have heard their best arguments, Anyone can topple over the weakest link.
                                Hmmm. Hadn't thought of that - though it does seem that Gary is simply regurgitating what he finds in his own googling. There doesn't seem to be anything original in his posts.
                                1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                                .
                                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                                Scripture before Tradition:
                                but that won't prevent others from
                                taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                                of the right to call yourself Christian.

                                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                                Comment

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