The resurrection
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-02-2017, 09:14 AM
RE: The resurrection
(20-02-2017 07:35 PM)f stop Wrote:  "As far as the resurrection, it's the best attested historical fact of antiquity ever recorded!"

Except it isn't. Those who are more knowledgeable on the subject than me can correct me if I'm wrong, but if I'm not mistaken, there are no contemporary writers who wrote of Jesus' resurrection (or anything else about Jesus for that matter). Zero. The writer most commonly cited as supposedly contemporary is Josephus. There are 2 references to Jesus by Josephus. There are a lot of reasons to believe that one reference was inserted into Josephus' original text and was not written by him at all. The other refers to a different Jesus. There are no other contemporary writers about Jesus. The gospels are not contemporary either. So, the fact is, the resurrection is not attested at all by anyone who was "there". Furthermore, even the gospels are inconsistent about how the resurrection happened. Mark didn't even write about it; the mention of the resurrection there was also later inserted.

I am not accountable to any God. I am accountable to myself - and not because I think I am God as some theists would try to assert - but because, no matter what actions I take, thoughts I think, or words I utter, I have to be able to live with myself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Impulse's post
21-02-2017, 09:31 AM
RE: The resurrection
(20-02-2017 07:35 PM)f stop Wrote:  "As far as the resurrection, it's the best attested historical fact of antiquity ever recorded!"

Pure B.S. What's the best way to refute it?

Ask what that evidence might be. Eventually you find out that there is nothing but gospel bullshit written at least decades later by believers. Pure horseshit.

What jesus freaks never seem to grasp is that they have one story - known as "mark" followed by two fan fics and a total re-write.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-02-2017, 10:00 AM
RE: The resurrection
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that the only mention of anyone actually seeing the resurrected Jesus in the original account happens in an ending heavily suspected of being a forgery.

Not that a mere anecdote would be enough evidence anyway, but even at the time the Christians were so bothered by the weakness of their own evidence that they had to go tampering with it.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Robvalue's post
21-02-2017, 10:11 AM
RE: The resurrection
(21-02-2017 08:49 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Such an utterance refutes the utterer, pretty much. No refutation necessary. Tongue

"refutes the utterer" sounds like you don't like farmers. Dodgy

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
21-02-2017, 10:16 AM
RE: The resurrection
Believers brains are so stuck in the cement of faith that it's almost impossible to chisel it free.

One thing I've pointed out to theists is the universal theme of god defying the natural physics that hold us regular mortals to the earth. Almost all gods defy death or gravity is some form and they perform magical deeds. They all have an unusual birth so it sets them apart from other humans from the very beginning.

Most god stories skip over their teenage years and go directly to manhood.

God stories represent the human fear of death and in order for us humans to also defy death we must follow specific rules and regulations so we can hitch a ride on the coattails of a god and defy death ourselves. It's a universal theme that almost all god stories share and the resurrection is just one more god defying death story.

Of course, I've never had any theist de-convert using this argument.....because , well.... cement is in their brain.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like dancefortwo's post
21-02-2017, 10:27 AM
RE: The resurrection
(21-02-2017 10:00 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that the only mention of anyone actually seeing the resurrected Jesus in the original account happens in an ending heavily suspected of being a forgery.

Not that a mere anecdote would be enough evidence anyway, but even at the time the Christians were so bothered by the weakness of their own evidence that they had to go tampering with it.

The gospel of Mark, which is the first gospel written, doesn't have a resurrection in the earliest copies and some of the early church fathers commented on this problem. Here is a link to the Codex Vaticanus from 300 AD. It's in Greek. So far as I know this is the oldest extant copy of the entire new testament. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

http://www.csntm.org/Manuscript/View/GA_03

You can scroll through to the photo of the Mark manuscript , click on it and scroll through to the last chapter and verse and it stops at verse 8 (or is it 6, I can't remember). After around the 4th century the last 8 verses were written and added so it would have a resurrection scene. Most Christians are totally unaware of this.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like dancefortwo's post
21-02-2017, 10:36 AM
RE: The resurrection
(21-02-2017 05:38 AM)yakherder Wrote:  Punch them in the face until they agree that they're wrong.

Laugh out load you are funny

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-02-2017, 10:40 AM
RE: The resurrection
TO F STOP

ask them first to explain to you in details what this resurrection exactly is. See what they say. May be then you can figure how to refute this claim.
I don't know, I am just trying to help you.

BTW, I believe in resurrection of the dead. But don't ask me about it.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-02-2017, 11:27 AM
RE: The resurrection
(21-02-2017 10:40 AM)Alla Wrote:  TO F STOP

ask them first to explain to you in details what this resurrection exactly is. See what they say. May be then you can figure how to refute this claim.
I don't know, I am just trying to help you.

BTW, I believe in resurrection of the dead. But don't ask me about it.

I believe in pink sparkly unicorns. But don't ask me about it. Facepalm

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Bucky Ball's post
21-02-2017, 11:53 AM
RE: The resurrection
(21-02-2017 10:27 AM)dancefortwo Wrote:  
(21-02-2017 10:00 AM)Robvalue Wrote:  Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that the only mention of anyone actually seeing the resurrected Jesus in the original account happens in an ending heavily suspected of being a forgery.

Not that a mere anecdote would be enough evidence anyway, but even at the time the Christians were so bothered by the weakness of their own evidence that they had to go tampering with it.

The gospel of Mark, which is the first gospel written, doesn't have a resurrection in the earliest copies and some of the early church fathers commented on this problem. Here is a link to the Codex Vaticanus from 300 AD. It's in Greek. So far as I know this is the oldest extant copy of the entire new testament. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

http://www.csntm.org/Manuscript/View/GA_03

You can scroll through to the photo of the Mark manuscript , click on it and scroll through to the last chapter and verse and it stops at verse 8 (or is it 6, I can't remember). After around the 4th century the last 8 verses were written and added so it would have a resurrection scene. Most Christians are totally unaware of this.

I think there's some confusion on this point. Even if you stop at verse 6, the two Marys have already discovered the empty tomb and been told "He is risen". That certainly implies a resurrection. What's missing (and was added later) was the appearance of the resurrected Jesus to Mary Magdalene and the apostles. But I don't think it's fair to say that the original doesn't have a resurrection, because it clearly does.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: