Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus...ENJOY!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-10-2012, 03:33 PM
RE: Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus...ENJOY!
(17-10-2012 03:27 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  I want to distill your arguments here before commenting. Please correct any errors here. Your argument, in part, is:

1. The willingness of people to die for their belief is a testament to its truth;
2. The conversion of skeptics is a testament to its truth;
3. The breaking of very strong Jewish traditions is a testament to its truth;
4. The persistence of the message, in spite of great opposition, is a testament to its truth;

If these are correct, are you willing to allow them as evidence for other belief systems as well?

Lemme finish that thought.

1. I think we see Islamic fundamentalists willing to die for their Allah far more often than we see Christians dying for Jesus.
2. Islam converts skeptics all the time.
3. Can't deny Islam's dedication to breaking of all things Jewish, traditions or otherwise.
4. Islam has persisted, despite great opposition, for a very long time.

Ergo, Idiot For Christ should probably strongly consider becoming Idiot for Allah.

QED

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Aseptic Skeptic's post
17-10-2012, 03:46 PM
RE: Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus...ENJOY!
(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  EVIDENCE FOR THE RESSURECTION OF JESUS

NOTE: what I will present is a general, broad, list of evidence that also is quite easily found elsewhere in various forms on the internet and in debates such as offered by William Lane Craig, etc. If this has been offered up by others on here, I apologize, but this is in a direct request, thus I am posting it. As this is a broad brush look at the evidence, as the discussion goes on - if it does - details will be looked at as needed.

Okay then:

To start off, I will provide a list of what is generally accepted as historical facts.

1) Jesus died via crucifixion.
2) Jesus was buried in a tomb.
3) A few days later Jesus’ tomb was discovered empty by his women followers.
4) Disciples had experiences they believed to be true and actual appearance of the risen Jesus. (including accounts from Paul of Jesus appearing before 500 additional people)

These four are the foundation upon which the remaining pieces of evidence set.

1) The disciple’s lives were transformed because of (5) so much so that they would die for this belief.
a. Paul (AD5-67) – beheaded
b. Saint Stephen, Protomartyr, was stoned c. 34 AD.
i. One of the first deacons
c. Saint James the Great (Son of Zebedee) was beheaded in 44 AD.
i. One of original 12 apostles.
d. Saint Philip the Apostle was crucified in 54 AD.
i. One of original 12 apostles.
e. Saint Matthew the Evangelist killed with a halberd (a combination of battle axe and spear) in 60 AD.
i. One of original 12 apostles.
f. Saint Thomas the Apostle was killed by a spear in Mylapore, Madras, India in AD 72.
i. One of original 12 apostles.
g. Ignatius (AD35/55 – 98) disciple of John, Coliseum (AD6-c.100).

h. Polycarp (AD69-155) disciple of John, bound and burned.
i. As noted both were disciples of the Apostle John, as disciple of Jesus, original witness.

(note: as seen by the dates, some were killed quite early on after Jesus’ death and burial. Others, years, to decades later – while persecution continued. None recanted their accounts.)

2) This Gospel was the central message of the early church and.
3) Even proclaimed this message in Jerusalem, where Jesus was killed and buried.
4) Jesus’ brother James was a skeptic, until his own encounter with the risen Jesus.
5) Paul, an early prosecutor of the early church, was also converted by his own experience with the risen Jesus.
a. Also, as noted around the time of Jesus’ ministry, death, and claimed resurrection.
6) Jewish leadership (hostile to the early church) was unable to derail the message, despite both motive and means.
a. Best offering they had to try and discredit the resurrection: they stole the body.
7) Sunday became a day of worship, which was a departure from Jewish tradition.

Cultural consideration:

The Jews’ (the disciples were Jewish, remember) belief of resurrection was that it would occur at the end of the world only. However, the disciples believed that he was resurrected before such, not fitting with Jewish belief.

Is there a “better” explanation?

So, given the evidence above, what could be a better explanation than Jesus rose from the dead as the disciples claim?

Many other “theories” have been offered up. IE. Wrong tomb, stolen body – as the Jewish leadership offered, not completely dead, mass hallucinations, etc.

However, these fall short of explanatory scope and power as the resurrection would.

Also, unlike the resurrection, the other theories need more than ONE additional hypothesis. Resurrection needs only one: God exists.

So I will, for now, leave it at that, and address issues as they are no doubt for sure to come up. Should be nothing new to anyone, and I look forward to the discussion.

Interestingly, you have presented no actual evidence.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
17-10-2012, 03:46 PM
RE: Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus...ENJOY!
(17-10-2012 03:20 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  IFC, also note that I believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ; however, I do accept the fact that there isn't much proof of it outside religion.

Trying to make "facts" fit in a world view doesn't strengthen one's case. Like people have said, there is sufficient evidence that could be used to completely deny the existence of a historical Jesus.

I'm not fitting the "facts" - they either are true or not. There is evidence that points to those four points are historically true. If they aren't, then certainly my argument and belief (including yours) is null and void.

But these four point I listed are not my own, these are what scholars agree to - including atheist scholars.

that doesn't make the points true, they either are or aren't and one decides based on the evidence provided.

There is evidence (oustide of the Gospels) for those four points I showed, including Josephus and Tacitus for example. There are also, then external documents regarding Christians in general.

Certainly it's about interpretation of the evidence available...most scholars, take the evidence of the four points as historical fact. I agree with them.

You, or anyone else on here is free to do otherwise.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2012, 03:48 PM
RE: Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus...ENJOY!
These resurrection debates always seem to revolve around the following as their strongest points:

1. The empty tomb;
2. Sightings of Jesus after his death;

The empty tomb, in my opinion, is the weakest testament to resurrection. There are many reasonable explanations for why a tomb would be empty. A god reanimating his son is the most complex, far-fetched of all of them. And not very special, when you consider one of the gospels speaks of other dead rising from their graves.

The sightings of Jesus after his death mean no more or less to me than sightings of Elvis. You can certainly enter them as an argument, but as a non-theist, I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm not feeling obliged to believe in god. So when you tell me that people swear they saw and spoke with Jesus, I have a few options to weigh:

1. I believe that a god raised his son from the dead; or...

2. I believe the people are lying, or mistaken, about who it is they're seeing;
3. I believe people who had never seen Jesus believed someone claiming to be Jesus;
4. Dreams, visions, hallucinations;

As a non-theist, with no confirmation bias, which of these seems most likely?

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like guitar_nut's post
17-10-2012, 03:49 PM
RE: Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus...ENJOY!
(17-10-2012 03:25 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  
(17-10-2012 03:23 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  Correct, which is why we look to WHO is in the majority as well. As if it were just Christians, it would then be compeltely irrelevant. However, atheist scholars as well accept this and are part of the majority.

It is an interpretation of the evidence, for sure. Of course I'm going off the proposition the events (four facts) are true. that the majority of scholars agree, no, doesn't make them true.

This confuses me. Atheists who accept the crucifixion? Or atheists who accept the resurrection?

The crucifixion. Sorry if I implied otherwise, I'm not aware of ANY atheist scholar that accepts the resurrection...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2012, 03:51 PM
RE: Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus...ENJOY!
KC has already destroyed the argument in multiple ways...and he is one of the BELIEVERS on this forum in this event.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
17-10-2012, 03:53 PM
RE: Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus...ENJOY!
Just for you idiot....I mean Idiot.


Attached File(s) Thumbnail(s)
   

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2012, 03:56 PM (This post was last modified: 18-10-2012 03:21 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus...ENJOY!
-
Idiot for Christ / William Lane Craig try to do the Resurrection and fail miserably


(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  EVIDENCE FOR THE RESSURECTION OF JESUS

NOTE: what I will present is a general, broad, list of evidence that also is quite easily found elsewhere in various forms on the internet and in debates such as offered by William Lane Craig, etc. If this has been offered up by others on here, I apologize, but this is in a direct request, thus I am posting it. As this is a broad brush look at the evidence, as the discussion goes on - if it does - details will be looked at as needed.

Okay then:

To start off, I will provide a list of what is generally accepted as historical facts.

1) Jesus died via crucifixion.
2) Jesus was buried in a tomb.
3) A few days later Jesus’ tomb was discovered empty by his women followers.
4) Disciples had experiences they believed to be true and actual appearance of the risen Jesus. (including accounts from Paul of Jesus appearing before 500 additional people)

These four are the foundation upon which the remaining pieces of evidence set.

1) The disciple’s lives were transformed because of (5) so much so that they would die for this belief.
a. Paul (AD5-67) – beheaded
b. Saint Stephen, Protomartyr, was stoned c. 34 AD.
i. One of the first deacons
c. Saint James the Great (Son of Zebedee) was beheaded in 44 AD.
i. One of original 12 apostles.
d. Saint Philip the Apostle was crucified in 54 AD.
i. One of original 12 apostles.
e. Saint Matthew the Evangelist killed with a halberd (a combination of battle axe and spear) in 60 AD.
i. One of original 12 apostles.
f. Saint Thomas the Apostle was killed by a spear in Mylapore, Madras, India in AD 72.
i. One of original 12 apostles.
g. Ignatius (AD35/55 – 98) disciple of John, Coliseum (AD6-c.100).

h. Polycarp (AD69-155) disciple of John, bound and burned.
i. As noted both were disciples of the Apostle John, as disciple of Jesus, original witness.

(note: as seen by the dates, some were killed quite early on after Jesus’ death and burial. Others, years, to decades later – while persecution continued. None recanted their accounts.)

Ok then, lets look at this nonsense.

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  2) This Gospel was the central message of the early church and.
3) Even proclaimed this message in Jerusalem, where Jesus was killed and buried.

Assertion. No evidence. Prove it. The message of Jesus never said anything about "ressurection". The preaching of Jesus did not include himself as content. He said "come follow me", not "come worship me". When the young man in Mattew asked him what he should do to gain eternal life, Jesus said : "keep the commandments". Nothing else. Proof that later Christianity is not what Jesus taught, or even remotely resembled it. Proof later church radically changed what Jesus was all about.

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  4) Jesus’ brother James was a skeptic, until his own encounter with the risen Jesus.

Assertion,. No external evidence. Not proven. IF the James of the NT "Letter of James", is the brother of Jesus, it is astounding that he never mentions the resurrection once, if that was the central theme in the church, and in fact the fact that James DOES spend much of his time talking about continuing adherence to the Jewish law AFTER the Diaspora, is proof that the communities STILL, that late considered themselves Jews, and members of Jewry, well after the time the gospels were written.

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  5) Paul, an early prosecutor of the early church, was also converted by his own experience with the risen Jesus.

Not proven. No external evidence for Paul's origins or identity. In fact we can infer that there were two men writing under that name, as they have two distinct Theologies. (see below). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDSUTjxNuiU

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  a. Also, as noted around the time of Jesus’ ministry, death, and claimed resurrection.

Irrelevant. No external evidence. In fact he had every motivation to lie, as he wanted to gain adherents, which he did do by importing themes from Mithraism, ie the Eucharist, and Zoroastrian "purification", which was antithetical to Hebrew "atonement/sacrifice" themes).

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  6) Jewish leadership (hostile to the early church) was unable to derail the message, despite both motive and means.

They did try to expel the Way cult from Jewish communities, as is known as late as 90's AD when Gamaliel had the "expulsion curses" read. However it again proves the Way cult was still a parasitic part of Judaism, and the Jews wanted them out, and they refused to leave.

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  a. Best offering they had to try and discredit the resurrection: they stole the body.

No. The entire thing was a fiction. If this was used, it was irrelevant. There is no proof this was widespread. If it was, it only proves widespread doubt.

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  7) Sunday became a day of worship, which was a departure from Jewish tradition.

Irrelevant. Custom did not become fixed until mid Second Century, In fact DISPROVES gospel, as Luke 23.54 requires Sabbath as "commandment" on Saturday, IN THE GOSPEL. Oops.

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  Cultural consideration:
1a The Jews’ (the disciples were Jewish, remember) belief of resurrection was that it would occur at the end of the world only. However, the disciples believed that he was resurrected before such, not fitting with Jewish belief.

Absolutely false. The Jews believed the Messiah would come to restore the kingdom, and would be a POLITICAL messiah, and PROVED this in acts, 1:6 "Lord wilt Thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel". also disproven by the appellation of Simon bar Kochba, leader of the revolt in 132 CE as "messiah", also, (among MANY others).

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  2a. Is there a “better” explanation?

Logical Fallacy called Argument from Ignorance.
Also there are very good "other" explanations. The "magical" resurrection is actually THE WORST, (most improbable) explanation. ANY other one, is better. There are many. Since "resurrection is THE most improbable, ANY other explanation would be ahead of it in line of Probability.

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  However, these fall short of explanatory scope and power as the resurrection would.

Of course you would say that. Unsupported assertion. No criteria or standard established for determination.

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  Also, unlike the resurrection, the other theories need more than ONE additional hypothesis. Resurrection needs only one: God exists.

Capricious standard. Bad faith exposed. No standard established a priori.

(17-10-2012 02:41 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  So I will, for now, leave it at that,

That's a good thing. You are obviously not up to this task, and have made a fool of yourself, and your cult.
So that's it ? That's your best shot ? Please.
Do you know how much Craig got paid for this ? We did an estimate. Would you like to know how much he ripped off the churches and schools for ? We had people there. We know.

So since I know you can't think for yourself, and you have proven that, I will address Criag, as we are making a video, to put out in public. So thank you SO VERY much for giving us , in advance, his arguments, so we can get busy putting our video up on YouTube. We can credit your help in it if you like ?? I see you were just wetting your pants to come back here and do this. We had predicted it in PM's among each other. Thanks for being so predictable. I won $10.00. Smile Yippeee.

So I don't really understand why you would start a thread, and just copy-paste in the same old crap that's been refuted so many times before ? Don't you have anything new or original ? Why not even ONE original argument ?

1. There is no evidence that Jesus ever existed, much less was crucified. The manner of a death is evidence of nothing. All others who were crucified never claimed resurrection. Therefore #1 is irrelevant. Many people were crucified. #1 is meaningless.
2. If he was buried in a tomb, it is irrelevant to any argument for a resurrection. All dead people are put in tombs. This list is a bad faith attempt to make an absurd conclusion appear to be a reasonable outcome of a normal set of facts, which it is not. #2 is also irrelevant.
3. The gospels, which are faith documents, written by believers to remind themselves what they believe they already believe, are evidence of nothing. In a culture where many miraculous events were seen to be commonplace, another commonplace miraculous event is nothing unusual, or unique. Many of the other apocalyptic preachers also were seen to do miracles, and a few even rise from the dead, thus this resurrection is also not a unique event. The description of the finding of the "empty tomb" in the gospels are all different in each gospel, with regard to who was there first, and what they saw, thus they are ALL suspect. The resurrection was NOT the central event on which Christianity was founded, as we know for certain the original Gospel of Mark, had no resurrection, and all scholars know it was added later.
4. Many people have experiences they believe are true, especially humans who live in cultures that have what Anthropologists call "magical thinking".
Paul was a self admitted liar. He never met Jesus. I can say I have a delusion in front of 10,000,000 people and MY claim to that event is no stronger than 1, UNLESS the OTHER people also corroborate it, and they did not. Matthew said that there was an earthquake, split rocks, the temple curtain was rent, and "the bodies of many saints who had fallen asleep were raised" (Matthew 27:52). NO ONE EVER said anything about all your other zombies from the zombie invasion, nor have the split rocks been found, nor was the temple curtain recorded by any Jewish historian to have miraculously been ripped, nor was the earthquakes, either at the death, OR the resurrection recorded by the historians of the day, who recorded ALL the other (real) earthquakes.

The deluded men who flew the planes into the towers also believed their delusion, therefore you have ample evidence, that many men are willing to die for their delusions, thus ALL your "martyr" arguments are dismissed, as nothing unique, and in fact quite common.

The earliest Jewish disciples did NOT believe he was resurrected, including Thomas, (the doubter). Therefore this was false. In fact the Road to Emmaus event in Acts PROVES that they did NOT recognize what they saw, and whatever it was, was NOT a physical "body". The fact that he went through walls means whatever it was, it could NOT have been a real physical body, as NO "physical body" ever passes through walls.
The burden of proof is on YOU to cook up a "better explanation. One does not have to "explain" something which did not happen. Also ANY explanation is a better one, as a "miracle" is the LEAST probable explanation. There is substantial scholarly opinion, (Scott and Crossan among them), that what was intended by "resurrection" was "not defeated", but since you are a Fundie American Literalist, and your Anal Retentive Personality Disorder, REQUIRES a simplistic, childish, literalist explanation, all other possible interpretations, which might make sense, are ruled out, because you are so ignorant of how ancient literature is written, and it's meaning, and non-scientific worldview, is not accounted for.

Please, go call Dr. Willaim Fucking Craig, and tell him you want your money back.
What you did was to buy a bill of goods from a charlatan, snake-oil salesman. Nice try.

So, I didn't enjoy that very much. That was easy, Is that all ya got ? Nothing harder ?
Thanks for the practice tho. Maybe one of these days you people will come up with something original.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Bucky Ball's post
17-10-2012, 03:57 PM
RE: Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus...ENJOY!
(17-10-2012 03:46 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  
(17-10-2012 03:20 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  IFC, also note that I believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ; however, I do accept the fact that there isn't much proof of it outside religion.

Trying to make "facts" fit in a world view doesn't strengthen one's case. Like people have said, there is sufficient evidence that could be used to completely deny the existence of a historical Jesus.

I'm not fitting the "facts" - they either are true or not. There is evidence that points to those four points are historically true. If they aren't, then certainly my argument and belief (including yours) is null and void.

But these four point I listed are not my own, these are what scholars agree to - including atheist scholars.

that doesn't make the points true, they either are or aren't and one decides based on the evidence provided.

There is evidence (oustide of the Gospels) for those four points I showed, including Josephus and Tacitus for example. There are also, then external documents regarding Christians in general.

Certainly it's about interpretation of the evidence available...most scholars, take the evidence of the four points as historical fact. I agree with them.

You, or anyone else on here is free to do otherwise.

Many scholars, including theist scholars do NOT agree to your four points.

There is NOT external evidence outside the Gospels, especially including Josephus and Tacitus, so either retract your claim or provide citations.

Most scholars DO NOT take your four points as evidence, so interpretation is all that you are left with. Non-believers are left with the fact that there is no evidence so there is nothing available to interpret.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Erxomai's post
17-10-2012, 03:59 PM
RE: Evidence for the resurrection of Jesus...ENJOY!
(17-10-2012 03:46 PM)Idiot for Christ Wrote:  
(17-10-2012 03:20 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  IFC, also note that I believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ; however, I do accept the fact that there isn't much proof of it outside religion.

Trying to make "facts" fit in a world view doesn't strengthen one's case. Like people have said, there is sufficient evidence that could be used to completely deny the existence of a historical Jesus.

I'm not fitting the "facts" - they either are true or not. There is evidence that points to those four points are historically true. If they aren't, then certainly my argument and belief (including yours) is null and void.

But these four point I listed are not my own, these are what scholars agree to - including atheist scholars.

that doesn't make the points true, they either are or aren't and one decides based on the evidence provided.

There is evidence (oustide of the Gospels) for those four points I showed, including Josephus and Tacitus for example. There are also, then external documents regarding Christians in general.

Certainly it's about interpretation of the evidence available...most scholars, take the evidence of the four points as historical fact. I agree with them.

You, or anyone else on here is free to do otherwise.

There is 1 of the 4 items that is mostly accepted as fact. In order for your argument to stand, you need to have all 4... which is why I say that your argument cannot stand.

Even if we accept a historical Jesus as fact and His crucifixion as fact, it still doesn't give any credence to what you're trying to argue - as your foundational argument is weak at best.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kingschosen's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: