Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary

[Apologiaphoenix]

It might have helped to been told why the evidence was weak and on what grounds.

As it stands, I am holding off for now on another debate for a number of reasons.

The first is I have been accepted into a Master's program at another institution and I need to know how much to focus there.

The second is that I am currently working on another Ebook as well.

And finally, this weekend I'm going to be busy anyway as on the 24th of this month Allie and I celebrate five years of marriage where she hasn't killed me.......yet.

Don't tell me self-control isn't a fruit of the Spirit.

[Gary]

Since my deconversion from conservative Christianity, it amazes me how skeptics and theists seem to speak past each other all the time. We look at each other and say, "What is wrong with you? Why can't you see what is so obvious to me?" It is if are speaking two different languages. I believe it is because the foundation of our respective world views are so very, very different. It's kind of like the abortion debate: If one side believes the fetus is a human being with all the rights of a human being, but the other side sees the fetus as just a blog of tissue, there is no foundational position for which to start a debate. Both sides must have at least some common ground from which to have a productive discussion, otherwise, they are going to speak right past one another.

My position and the position of most theists has no common ground.

My position is that the human race is better off using the scientific method, reason, and the probability of events as observed in current and past human history, to determine reality. So even though anything, including the supernatural, is possible, if it is highly improbable, we ignore it unless better evidence comes along to change our minds. Also, in my world view, there are no absolutes (I know Nick and others don't buy that, but that's ok). If someone shows me sufficient evidence for the existence of Big Foot or for the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I will believe it, and adjust my worldview.

A common theist view seems to me to be that since all things are possible, even if it defies science, reason, and the collective experience of billions of human beings during the current era of video recorders, television cameras, I phones, etc., we should believe that it still could very much have happened, IF (a significant) number of people in ancient history, when none of these recording devices were available, sincerely believed it did.

That just isn't rational to me.

[Gary]

What history??

He lived, he was crucified, and shortly thereafter his followers came to believe that he had been resurrected.

That's it, in my opinion. You can make assumptions about him being baptized by John the Baptist, that he taught such and such, but that is all speculation to me.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Since my deconversion from conservative Christianity, it amazes me how skeptics and theists seem to speak past each other all the time. We look at each other and say, "What is wrong with you? Why can't you see what is so obvious to me?" It is if are speaking two different languages. I believe it is because the foundation of our respective world views are so very, very different. It's kind of like the abortion debate: If one side believes the fetus is a human being with all the rights of a human being, but the other side sees the fetus as just a blog of tissue, there is no foundational position for which to start a debate. Both sides must have at least some common ground from which to have a productive discussion, otherwise, they are going to speak right past one another.

My position and the position of most theists has no common ground.

My position is that the human race is better off using the scientific method, reason, and the probability of events as observed in current and past human history, to determine reality. So even though anything, including the supernatural, is possible, if it is highly improbable, we ignore it unless better evidence comes along to change our minds. Also, in my world view, there are no absolutes (I know Nick and others don't buy that, but that's ok). If someone shows me sufficient evidence for the existence of Big Foot or for the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I will believe it, and adjust my worldview.

A common theist view seems to me to be that since all things are possible, even if it defies science, reason, and the collective experience of billions of human beings during the current era of video recorders, television cameras, I phones, etc., we should believe that it still could very much have happened, IF (a significant) number of people in ancient history, when none of these recording devices were available, sincerely believed it.

Okay boys and girls. See how long before you spot the glaring contradiction.

[Gary]

Do you have any comment on my final, final comment, Nick?

Why didn't Saul of Tarsus believe your "collective" evidence? Why did he need a personal appearance to believe?

[Sea of red]

It might have helped to been told why the evidence was weak and on what grounds.

As it stands, I am holding off for now on another debate for a number of reasons.

The first is I have been accepted into a Master's program at another institution and I need to know how much to focus there.

The second is that I am currently working on another Ebook as well.

And finally, this weekend I'm going to be busy anyway as on the 24th of this month Allie and I celebrate five years of marriage where she hasn't killed me.......yet.

Don't tell me self-control isn't a fruit of the Spirit.

What a shock! You only debate people you know you can steam-roll with little effort.

[Gary]

By the way, Nick, Happy Anniversary! I sincerely mean that. My wife and I will be celebrating our anniversary on the 31st.

How did two opinionated jerks like us wind up with such wonderful women? :)

[Apologiaphoenix]

What a shock! You only debate people you know you can steam-roll with little effort.

No. Give me the work load and once I have it there and managed, I'd probably enjoy a debate with BP. It'd be fun.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Do you have any comment on my final, final comment, Nick?

Why didn't Saul of Tarsus believe your "collective" evidence? Why did he need a personal appearance to believe?

Because Jesus was crucified?

Yeah. That would be a dealbreaker right at the start.

[Apologiaphoenix]

By the way, Nick, Happy Anniversary! I sincerely mean that. My wife and I will be celebrating our anniversary on the 31st.

How did two opinionated jerks like us wind up with such wonderful women? :)

Now that I do appreciate. And yes, mine is wonderful.

[Boxing Pythagoras]

What a shock! You only debate people you know you can steam-roll with little effort.

That's not fair, in the least. I perfectly understand how busy Nick is, and he does not owe it to any of us to engage in debates.

[Sea of red]

No. Give me the work load and once I have it there and managed, I'd probably enjoy a debate with BP. It'd be fun.

I'd be willing to do something in the future with you if you're up to it.

[Sea of red]

That's not fair, in the least. I perfectly understand how busy Nick is, and he does not owe it to any of us to engage in debates.

Yet he engages in debates with someone he knows can't refute him very well when has a chance?

[Apologiaphoenix]

I'd be willing to do something in the future with you if you're up to it.

In the future, though not now.

[Sea of red]

In the future, though not now.

I'd be curious as to what we you're interesting discussing with myself or anyone else.