Book Plunge: Can Christians Prove The Resurrection?

[Apologiaphoenix]

Stein doesn't go by those people. He reads the scholars. THat's what we both do.

[Gary]

Good thing that's not what we have.

Please keep it up Gary. THe more you speak, the more you embarrass the non-Christian position.

My god. You have just admitted that multiple non-miracle explanations are possible, but then you insist they couldn't have happened because there is no evidence. You are contradicting yourself. You are irrational. You are brainwashed.

I have gotten from you what I wanted: An admission that there are MULTIPLE possible explanations for the early Christian belief in a resurrection.

Let the internet take note.

[Gary]

Stein doesn't go by those people. He reads the scholars. THat's what we both do.

Ok, please give us a few names of scholars who state that the only plausible explanation for the belief in a resurrection was a literal bodily resurrection. Just a couple of names is fine. Let's see who they are.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Dude. It's possible you're really an alien. I just don't have evidence for it. It's possible I got transported to another dimension in my sleep and I was unaware of it. There's just no evidence for it.

It's possible that there was a doppleganger from an Earth-2 (Such as in the Flash) that shot the victim in the murder and has fingerprints just like his Earth-1) counterpart.

There's just no evidence for these.

Sorry, but you honor evidence with your lips, but your thinking is far from it.

[Gary]

Dude. It's possible you're really an alien. I just don't have evidence for it. It's possible I got transported to another dimension in my sleep and I was unaware of it. There's just no evidence for it.

It's possible that there was a doppleganger from an Earth-2 (Such as in the Flash) that shot the victim in the murder and has fingerprints just like his Earth-1) counterpart.

There's just no evidence for these.


Sorry, but you honor evidence with your lips, but your thinking is far from it.

Nick. Stop and think about what you are saying! All we have is a missing body! Just because the only "evidence" we have as to why it is missing is four anonymous books, written decades after the body went missing, from a small, new religious sect, that claims the body was beamed up to outer space by an invisible deity, is NOT sufficient reason to exclude more probable, natural, explanations EVEN IF WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT A SPECIFIC NATURAL EXPLANATION!!!

Why can't you grasp that very simple, rational, concept?

[One Bad Pig]

Possible? Of course.

It's also possible that Jesus was an alien from another planet.

Yep. Someone's already had fun with that one.

[Zymologist]

Yep. Someone's already had fun with that one.

Heh, I actually have this book. Never read it, and don't even remember where/when I got it. Didn't know much about it either.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Let's review again what we have since Gary doesn't know about it.

We have a popular figure who got crucified.
We have him buried.
We have his tomb being found empty
We have him being seen walking around again and not looking like a crucified victim.
We have this convincing enough for skeptics like Paul and James.
We have this happening with group appearances when group hallucinations don't happen.
We have this person being seen as the Messiah immediately.
We have Him also being seen as included in the divine identity incredibly early on.
We have an utterly shameful belief somehow surviving when it should have died.
On top of that, I have at least five strong arguments for classical theism and I have evidence as well of the reality of miracles and no strong argument against them.

On your side we have

"Miwacle! Miwacle! Miwacles are impwobable!"

Also, our earliest claims for most of these are found in the Pauline epistles and the creed that contains the death, burial, resurrection, and appearances is material dated to at the latest five years of the event.

[Gary]

Let's review again what we have since Gary doesn't know about it.

We have a popular figure who got crucified.
We have him buried.
We have his tomb being found empty
We have him being seen walking around again and not looking like a crucified victim.
We have this convincing enough for skeptics like Paul and James.
We have this happening with group appearances when group hallucinations don't happen.
We have this person being seen as the Messiah immediately.
We have Him also being seen as included in the divine identity incredibly early on.
We have an utterly shameful belief somehow surviving when it should have died.
On top of that, I have at least five strong arguments for classical theism and I have evidence as well of the reality of miracles and no strong argument against them.

On your side we have

"Miwacle! Miwacle! Miwacles are impwobable!"

Also, our earliest claims for most of these are found in the Pauline epistles and the creed that contains the death, burial, resurrection, and appearances is material dated to at the latest five years of the event.

Ok. Let's reword what Nick has said into non-Christian terms:

---We have a missing body
---We have zero contemporaneous statements about the man or his missing body.
---All we have are four, anonymous books, written decades after the alleged event, at least two and possibly three of these books using the first book as a boiler plate for their alleged "eyewitness" stories--(the majority of scholars do not believe these four authors were eyewitnesses)---writing in far away lands, telling a supernatural tale that if made TODAY, no one, I mean no one, with a high school education, would believe.

The fact that a few poor, despondent, superstitious, mostly-uneducated peasants believed that they saw a dead person is NOT convincing evidence, folks.

Bottom line: Nick has admitted that there are several possible alternative explanations for the early Christian belief in a resurrection. So now it is up to you, reader: Which is more probable of two very improbable explanations:

1. Someone moved the body and people only imagined that they had seen a dead person.
2. An ancient middle-eastern deity, named Yahweh, magically reanimated a dead body, giving it life immortal and supernatural powers, including, levitating into outer space.

Your choice. But if you believe that option two is more probable, no amount of reason and logic is going to change your mind because you belief is not built on evidence and reason but on faith...which is just a polite word for superstition.

[One Bad Pig]

Ok. Let's reword what Nick has said into non-Christian terms:

In the end, Gary, "rewording" is your best argument - and you can't even do that without changing the meaning of the words as you do it. You're just not credible, Gary.

[Gary]

In the end, Gary, "rewording" is your best argument - and you can't even do that without changing the meaning of the words as you do it. You're just not credible, Gary.

And your thinking is insane. One hundred years from now people will look back at your comments and scratch their heads.

[Apologiaphoenix]

I don't recognize my argument at all in that drivel Gary posted.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Well OBP. I guess he told you.

[Gary]

I don't recognize my argument at all in that drivel Gary posted.

You, Nick, are the Pied Piper of the Brainwashed; your thinking, regardless of how you dress it up with philosophical and theological psychobabble, is silly, silly, superstitious nonsense. Virgin-impregnating ghosts do not exist. Water-walking man-gods do not exist. Reanimated dead bodies that levitate into outer space do not exist. It's silly, silly nonsense. Open your eyes, Nick.

[Apologiaphoenix]

OBP. You forgot his other argument. Incredulity.