Book Plunge: Can Christians Prove The Resurrection?

[Gary]

And why would Satan perform miracles in Africa among the Muslims, but not in Europe among the agnostics?

"Satan doesn't want people to believe in (the Christian) God. Miracles among agnostics, forcing them to acknowledge the supernatural, would be counter-productive."

"Disbelief tends to make miracles rather less likely to occur. People who disbelieve in miracles don't want them to happen, so they don't."

Wow! Based on what evidence are these statements made? Answer: None! They are based on the assumption and illogical argument that miracles are true because the alleged miracles of Jesus were true, and, that the pattern of Jesus' alleged miracles as told in four, anonymous, first century books are the pattern of alleged miracles today.

Do Christians realize just how silly and preposterous such statements sound to educated non-Christians???

[JimL]

How did you come to this conclusion that the NT accounts are a hoax? Please, give the evidene and step us through the logic. Each piece at a time so there can be no doubts.

Physics. Empirical evidence to the contrary. Men tell tall tales. The naive and ignorant have, throughout all of ancient history, fallen for these unevidenced tall tales of the reality of these many differing gods. But hey, what are you going to do.

[Gary]

I am currently reading Chapter Seven. It is painful reading. Keener is working desperately to convince the reader of the validity of these two premises for the plausibility of miracles:

1. Hundreds of millions of people in the world claim to have witnessed miracles. The odds that they are all wrong are extremely low. Even if a handful of these millions of miracle claims are true, Hume is proven wrong, and miracles must be accepted by mainstream scholarship.

2. The Western empirical world view is ethnocentric and racist. With the rise of multiculturalism, academia should abandon their narrow western/Humean world view and accept as equally valid, the world views of other cultures. And since a belief in the supernatural and miracles is wide spread among most world cultures, these concepts should be accepted as equally valid world views in western culture and academia.

I am choking and gagging at the bald face hypocrisy: Traditional/conservative Christianity has been vigorously (and often violently) attempting to impose its world view on the entire world for the last 2,000 years, but now that it is in decline, it cries out for acceptance under the liberal mantra of "multiculturalism".

Wow.

Let's take a closer look at Keener's claim: Because a lot of people in the world believe X, it is probably true.

Because a lot of people in the world believe that evil spirits cause disease, it is probably true.
Because a lot of people in the world believe that seizures are caused by evil spirits, they probably are.
Because a lot of people in the world believe that they can communicate with the dead, they probably can.
Because a lot of people in the world have claimed to see ghosts, they probably did.

Dear folks: Just because millions of people on the planet believe something does NOT make it true or even probably true.

[psstein]

Gary's last comment is best summed up like this:

[Gary]

Gary's last comment is best summed up like this:

As I continue plodding through chapter 7, with Keener's repeated calls for "multicultural" respect for miracle claims and "majority world" (the Third World) healing practices, I dare Keener's admirers to think about the consequences of his agenda. If we in western society give equal respect to all world views on health and healing as Keener encourages us to do, how would you feel about the following:

You show up to the local ER in the middle of a heart attack. As you are wheeled in from the ambulance, a clerk comes to your bedside and advises you that the hospital has just adopted a "multicultural" approach to medical care. Patients coming into the ER will be randomly assigned to three different categories of medical care:

1. Prayer (rotating between Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, Jewish, Hindu, and Muslim clergy saying the prayer over you).
2. Folk medicine.
3. Standard, western, empirical medicine.

It's your lucky day! A nurse brings a rooster to your bedside, slits its throat, and rubs the fresh blood on your chest. "That was your treatment. Hope you get better!" the nurse says, as she walks away.

This "multicultural argument" is a ploy. Conservative Christians would not use this argument for medical care, but they want us to buy it to give more acceptability to their miracle claims.

[One Bad Pig]

I don't deny it. I ignore it.

That would explain why you're having so much difficulty understanding Keener's work. Ignoring something you're reading about is a pretty neat trick.

[One Bad Pig]

And why would Satan perform miracles in Africa among the Muslims, but not in Europe among the agnostics?

"Satan doesn't want people to believe in (the Christian) God. Miracles among agnostics, forcing them to acknowledge the supernatural, would be counter-productive."

"Disbelief tends to make miracles rather less likely to occur. People who disbelieve in miracles don't want them to happen, so they don't."

Wow! Based on what evidence are these statements made? Answer: None!

The first should be rather evident, given a remote acquaintance with Christian beliefs. Satan is an adversary of God. Miracles tend to promote belief in God. Satan wouldn't want that. This chain of logic is not difficult to follow. I provided evidence for the second, but you conveniently decided to ignore it. Of course, you've just admitted to ignoring evidence for the metaphysical, rendering it impossible to present any evidence you would accept. I appreciate your inadvertent candor, but it brings to mind the aphorism "there is no one so blind as him who will not see."

They are based on the assumption and illogical argument that miracles are true because the alleged miracles of Jesus were true, and, that the pattern of Jesus' alleged miracles as told in four, anonymous, first century books are the pattern of alleged miracles today.

Do Christians realize just how silly and preposterous such statements sound to educated non-Christians???

I realize that you are doing your damndest to make Christianity look as silly and preposterous as possible.

[One Bad Pig]

Gary's last comment is best summed up like this:

Unlike many of his other comments in the thread?

I think Keener is getting under his skin a little. Gary's arguments go downhill from even his usual standard when that happens.

[Gary]

That would explain why you're having so much difficulty understanding Keener's work. Ignoring something you're reading about is a pretty neat trick.

I'm not ignoring what I am reading in Keener's book. The fact that I am quoting him and commenting on his quotes shows that I am paying attention to what he is saying. When I say that I am ignoring the metaphysical, I mean that I am currently ignoring the tens of thousands of metaphysical (superstitious) claims in the world, such as that if I step on a crack I will break my mother's back; if I break a mirror I will have seven years back luck; the same for walking under a ladder; and that I will be tossed into a pit of utter darkness for all eternity for not "loving" and obeying a man who died twenty centuries ago.

If good evidence for any of these metaphysical claims is presented to me, I will reconsider my position. But until then, I am on automatic pilot to "ignore all". The fact that I am willing to read a very long two volume Christian work demonstrates that I am open to other points of view. But just because I am reading this Christian book doesn't mean I won't criticize the arguments therein when I think that they are either poor or just plain silly.

[Tassman]

The first should be rather evident, given a remote acquaintance with Christian beliefs. Satan is an adversary of God. Miracles tend to promote belief in God. Satan wouldn't want that.

This chain of logic is not difficult to follow. I provided evidence for the second, but you conveniently decided to ignore it. Of course, you've just admitted to ignoring evidence for the metaphysical, rendering it impossible to present any evidence you would accept. I appreciate your inadvertent candor, but it brings to mind the aphorism "there is no one so blind as him who will not see."

I realize that you are doing your damndest to make Christianity look as silly and preposterous as possible.

Gary needs no help in making Christianity look silly and preposterous, given the silly and preposterous beliefs of Christianity as enumerated in part by you above. And no, your chain of logic is "not difficult to follow", merely indistinguishable from legend and folk tales.

[Gary]

I'm still reading chapter seven. It mentions one "miracle" of a woman in a Third World country dying from pneumonia. A white missionary (from a Christian tradition of which healing is not an emphasized teaching), was asked to pray for the woman's healing. He prayed and she was better for one evening. The next day she was back near death. That day, only the local Christians prayed for her healing; they did not invite the missionaries to attend the healing prayer service. The woman allegedly immediately rose from her bed and was completely well!

The next day the native Christians apologized to the white missionaries for not inviting them to the healing service. Their excuse was, "We knew it wouldn't work if you were present because you don't really believe in healings."

Wow.

If the Gospels tell us anything historical about the character of Jesus, would Jesus have refused to heal a dying person simply because one observer in the room did not believe?? It is this story, and OBP's claim that miracles happen less among people who don't believe in them, that makes me very suspicious of these claims. They don't even fit the character of Jesus! Yet, they fit perfectly with a case of group hysteria or...group fraud!

[Adam]

Well, we can quote Jesus on exactly that.
Mark 6:4: Jesus said to them, "Only in his hometown, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honor." 5 He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal the. 6 And he was amazed at their lack of faith.

[JimL]

Well, we can quote Jesus on exactly that.
Mark 6:4: Jesus said to them, "Only in his hometown, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honor."

That is probably because only in his home town do they know him well enough to know better.

5 He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal the. 6 And he was amazed at their lack of faith.

If there were a god who truely wanted people to know of his divinity I'm sure he could find a way to convince them all. Faith is the naive belief in the truth of mere words.

[lilpixieofterror]

What it is, is a hoax targeting the naive, the ignorant.

There can be no in-between's. Either you agree with Jimmy or you're naive and/or ignorant.

[Gary]

Well, we can quote Jesus on exactly that.
Mark 6:4: Jesus said to them, "Only in his hometown, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honor." 5 He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal the. 6 And he was amazed at their lack of faith.

You are begging the question, Adam. You are trying to prove the validity of miracles with a story about miracles.