[split] Debating Lion IRC
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-02-2013, 07:26 AM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(15-02-2013 06:36 AM)Lion IRC Wrote:  1. Its not extraordinary that God can do miracles.
2. It's not me claiming to have seen Jesus alive 3 days after He died. The claim is made by witnesses who were there. And the claims were made to people who were also there and those amazing claims were not rejected - they survived and were repeated and believed and eventually written down and copied.


1. Correct, but the existence of very God required to do said miracles IS, dumbass...
2. Supposed witness, whose accounts were told by non-eyewitnesses many, many, many years after the fact. They then recorded it, and made copies, and copies of the copies, and copies of the copies of the copies, and copies of those too. Each time they were copied errors were made by people with an a priori agenda that the story be true. This turns the Gospels into the longest game of Telephone ever...



(15-02-2013 06:36 AM)Lion IRC Wrote:  There would be no Gospel authors if Jesus dead body had been properly guarded by the authorities who wished to quell Messianic rumours. There would be no Gospel authors if the authorities had applied sufficient persuasive methods to get Jesus' followers to recant their claims and renounce Him as a false Messiah.


This is assuming that Jesus even existed. It's really easy to make up stories about people who don't exist, which is the impression you get from Paul's earliest letters. If you didn't already believe that Jesus was real and the son of God, try reading Paul's earliest letters again. Nothing in there gives the impression that Jesus was a actual person that had existed in the flesh.


(15-02-2013 06:36 AM)Lion IRC Wrote:  They didnt.

Judas betrayed Him. Peter denied Him. The Jewish religious leadership heirarchy feared and hated Him. The mob turned against Him. Jesus' followers scattered like sheep. They didnt all go in solidarity with Him to the Cross. He was a loser. He was beaten, mocked, whipped, publically shown to be a mere mortal. No triumphant coming down from the Cross at the last minute. Jesus died a total loser and thats exactly what His powerful enemies wanted. And His body could NOT have been simply left to some chance disappearance staged according to your conspiracy theory because that is EXACTLY THE THING WHICH WOULD HAVE ALLOWED FOR A RUMOUR TO GET STARTED.


See point above. You've making Jesus out to be a much bigger deal than there is any historical evidence of him ever being, because you're assuming the Gospels are literal history. Fail again.


(15-02-2013 06:36 AM)Lion IRC Wrote:  Yes. Life after death is a very persistent idea. Persistent across all civilizations throughout tens of thousands of years. Maybe even hundreds of thousands of years. It's practically instinctive. Its like theres something encoded in our DNA.
Reincarnation, ghosts, resurrection, Higher beings, extra terrestrial life forms (eg. angels,) miracles, parallel space/time dimensions (eg. heaven,) strange quantum forms of ''virtual'' particles/energy not yet fully discovered or understood which behave in counter-intuitive ways...

I dont claim that every single on of the millions/billions of reported supernatural events in human history are ALL true.

But are you prepared to make the EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM that they are all false?


Are you really that stupid? I know it's a rhetorical question at this point, but I feel compelled to ask it again. Want to know of how many verified cases of human resurrection we have in all of human history? ZERO. That is a giant FUCK ALL in favor of any evidence for human resurrection. It is NOT an extraordinary claim that no human resurrection has ever happened because we have ZERO evidence to the contrary. When grandma dies and you bury her in the ground, you have ZERO expectation that she will come back to life, because that is all we have observed. Once again, are you really that stupid?


(15-02-2013 06:36 AM)Lion IRC Wrote:  It wouldnt be a central tenet of anything if nobody ever reported seeing Jesus miracles and post-mortem appearences.
There's a reason why it is so important - because it happened.
People ask for unbiased sources. But the problem is that seeing an actual miracle MAKES YOU VERY BIASED.


See point 2 above.


(15-02-2013 06:36 AM)Lion IRC Wrote:  I dont accept claims made by atheists about what the actual real authentic, well-documented authors of the bible were really thinking.
You dont get to tell me....nobody even knows who ''they'' were, none of them were even there when it happened, so many fakes, etc etc etc...

AND THEN PRESUME TO CLAIM KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR REAL MOTIVES

You do not know that the earliest manuscripts fragments of John were the first original ever written. And some of John's sources come from living people who must have been in the Sanhedrin that convicted Jesus. Likewise, Paul's writings date to within the lifetime of the disciples. The age of the texts is well and truly such that the people telling these accounts knew what they were talking about and their testimony could been refuted by contemporary sources with evidence to the contrary had such denial evidence existed.

The Gospel manuscripts we have are closer in time and better preserved than the oldest copies of Tacitus.


I don't accept claims made by biased theists about what the 'actual real authentic', not at all well-documented authors of the bible were really thinking.

You don't get to tell me it's all true, because nobody even knows who ''they'' were, none of them were even there when it happened, so many fakes, etc etc etc...

AND YET YOU PRESUME TO CLAIM KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR REAL MOTIVES



What Mark gave was a far more plausible explanation for what supposedly happened. More plausible in the sense that it required no miracles or special pleading, and is thus statistically FAR MORE LIKELY to have happened, than any other version that requires a suspension of the laws of nature. Of course, all of this still is based upon the assumption that Jesus even existed at all, a point that is in and of itself debatable.


[Image: tumblr_lkueo1F7oq1qijk0po1_500.gif]

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
15-02-2013, 01:22 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(15-02-2013 07:26 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  2. Supposed witness, whose accounts were told by non-eyewitnesses many, many, many years after the fact. They then recorded it, and made copies, and copies of the copies, and copies of the copies of the copies, and copies of those too. Each time they were copied errors were made by people with an a priori agenda that the story be true. This turns the Gospels into the longest game of Telephone ever...


This made my night.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Free Thought's post
15-02-2013, 07:22 PM (This post was last modified: 15-02-2013 09:40 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(15-02-2013 06:36 AM)Lion IRC Wrote:  
(14-02-2013 08:18 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Hey Lion, you're getting yourself in a real muddle. It's not this complex.

Extraordinary claims (such as that someone rose from the dead) require extraordinary evidence. Your evidence is not extraordinary.


1. Its not extraordinary that God can do miracles.
2. It's not me claiming to have seen Jesus alive 3 days after He died. The claim is made by witnesses who were there. And the claims were made to people who were also there and those amazing claims were not rejected - they survived and were repeated and believed and eventually written down and copied.

Quote:...The Romans crucified Jesus. It must have been a devastating, humiliating blow to his supporters. The Gospel authors couldn’t have their hero disappear after such a dreadful demise.

There would be no Gospel authors if Jesus dead body had been properly guarded by the authorities who wished to quell Messianic rumours. There would be no Gospel authors if the authorities had applied sufficient persuasive methods to get Jesus' followers to recant their claims and renounce Him as a false Messiah.

Quote:The rank and file wouldn’t idolize a loser.

They didnt.

Judas betrayed Him. Peter denied Him. The Jewish religious leadership heirarchy feared and hated Him. The mob turned against Him. Jesus' followers scattered like sheep. They didnt all go in solidarity with Him to the Cross. He was a loser. He was beaten, mocked, whipped, publically shown to be a mere mortal. No triumphant coming down from the Cross at the last minute. Jesus died a total loser and thats exactly what His powerful enemies wanted. And His body could NOT have been simply left to some chance disappearance staged according to your conspiracy theory because that is EXACTLY THE THING WHICH WOULD HAVE ALLOWED FOR A RUMOUR TO GET STARTED.

Quote:The scriptwriters had to spruce up the story. Jesus had to rise from the dead, just like a god was expected to. The Egyptian Osiris, the Greek Dionysus, the Persian Mithras, and many others had all risen from the dead. Resurrection is a timeless theme; if a character is charismatic enough, people like to imagine death has been defeated, even today. Consider Elvis Presley.

Yes. Life after death is a very persistent idea. Persistent across all civilizations throughout tens of thousands of years. Maybe even hundreds of thousands of years. It's practically instinctive. Its like theres something encoded in our DNA.
Reincarnation, ghosts, resurrection, Higher beings, extra terrestrial life forms (eg. angels,) miracles, parallel space/time dimensions (eg. heaven,) strange quantum forms of ''virtual'' particles/energy not yet fully discovered or understood which behave in counter-intuitive ways...

I dont claim that every single on of the millions/billions of reported supernatural events in human history are ALL true.

But are you prepared to make the EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM that they are all false?


Quote:...The resurrection of Christ proved the divinity of Jesus.

Nope. There were people who believed Jesus had divine powers before He died. (Just as there were people who already thought God exists before the bible was written.)

Quote: It’s the central tenet of the faith, the one most important belief upon which Christianity is based.

It wouldnt be a central tenet of anything if nobody ever reported seeing Jesus miracles and post-mortem appearences.
There's a reason why it is so important - because it happened.
People ask for unbiased sources. But the problem is that seeing an actual miracle MAKES YOU VERY BIASED.


Quote:...The authors of the other Gospels probably included a resurrection because by the time they were...


I dont accept claims made by atheists about what the actual real authentic, well-documented authors of the bible were really thinking.
You dont get to tell me....nobody even knows who ''they'' were, none of them were even there when it happened, so many fakes, etc etc etc...

AND THEN PRESUME TO CLAIM KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR REAL MOTIVES

You do not know that the earliest manuscripts fragments of John were the first original ever written. And some of John's sources come from living people who must have been in the Sanhedrin that convicted Jesus. Likewise, Paul's writings date to within the lifetime of the disciples. The age of the texts is well and truly such that the people telling these accounts knew what they were talking about and their testimony could been refuted by contemporary sources with evidence to the contrary had such denial evidence existed.

The Gospel manuscripts we have are closer in time and better preserved than the oldest copies of Tacitus.
Oh dear. As Bucky says, all "faith based" responses. Nothing new. No evidence of an examination of the issues. Despite my well intentioned suggestion you examine for yourself all about the "long" ending of Mark's gospel and report your findings...not a word on this.

Lion..your ignorance of the gospels, how, when and why they were written is MONUMENTAL.

You know almost NOTHING about the history of the ancient Jews and Romans.

You're ignorance of the scientific method is astounding.

You are also LAZY. You're not willing to put in any effort to learn.

I'm not going to give my time to you any more. You don't respond to my arguments. You contribute nothing of value to any discussion. Why should I waste my time discussing history with someone who discusses issues like a two year old?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Mark Fulton's post
16-02-2013, 02:42 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
After 55 pages Lion, you still refuse to understand the burden of proof.

I say refuse because it has been explained to you so many times and so very simply that at this point the only way you could still not get it is by choosing to be stupid because you are too cowardly to face the fact that you cannot prove anything you say.

You try to make others prove you wrong because you are terrified of the personal consequences that may stem from the possibility that you might not be 100% right about everything you've ever said on this forum.

And that is just sad.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like hedgehog648's post
16-02-2013, 02:54 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(16-02-2013 02:42 PM)hedgehog648 Wrote:  After 55 pages Lion, you still refuse to understand the burden of proof.

I say refuse because it has been explained to you so many times and so very simply that at this point the only way you could still not get it is by choosing to be stupid because you are too cowardly to face the fact that you cannot prove anything you say.

You try to make others prove you wrong because you are terrified of the personal consequences that may stem from the possibility that you might not be 100% right about everything you've ever said on this forum.

And that is just sad.


Of course it's sad, but it probably can't be helped. If we assume 'e was heavily indoctrinated as a child, the child-like refusal to understand even the simplest concept such as the Onus of Proof, the behaviour might be justified. Might.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-02-2013, 09:13 PM (This post was last modified: 16-02-2013 09:42 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(15-02-2013 06:36 AM)Lion IRC Wrote:  
(14-02-2013 08:18 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Hey Lion, you're getting yourself in a real muddle. It's not this complex.

Extraordinary claims (such as that someone rose from the dead) require extraordinary evidence. Your evidence is not extraordinary.


1. Its not extraordinary that God can do miracles.
2. It's not me claiming to have seen Jesus alive 3 days after He died. The claim is made by witnesses who were there. And the claims were made to people who were also there and those amazing claims were not rejected - they survived and were repeated and believed and eventually written down and copied.

Quote:...The Romans crucified Jesus. It must have been a devastating, humiliating blow to his supporters. The Gospel authors couldn’t have their hero disappear after such a dreadful demise.

There would be no Gospel authors if Jesus dead body had been properly guarded by the authorities who wished to quell Messianic rumours. There would be no Gospel authors if the authorities had applied sufficient persuasive methods to get Jesus' followers to recant their claims and renounce Him as a false Messiah.

Quote:The rank and file wouldn’t idolize a loser.

They didnt.

Judas betrayed Him. Peter denied Him. The Jewish religious leadership heirarchy feared and hated Him. The mob turned against Him. Jesus' followers scattered like sheep. They didnt all go in solidarity with Him to the Cross. He was a loser. He was beaten, mocked, whipped, publically shown to be a mere mortal. No triumphant coming down from the Cross at the last minute. Jesus died a total loser and thats exactly what His powerful enemies wanted. And His body could NOT have been simply left to some chance disappearance staged according to your conspiracy theory because that is EXACTLY THE THING WHICH WOULD HAVE ALLOWED FOR A RUMOUR TO GET STARTED.

Quote:The scriptwriters had to spruce up the story. Jesus had to rise from the dead, just like a god was expected to. The Egyptian Osiris, the Greek Dionysus, the Persian Mithras, and many others had all risen from the dead. Resurrection is a timeless theme; if a character is charismatic enough, people like to imagine death has been defeated, even today. Consider Elvis Presley.

Yes. Life after death is a very persistent idea. Persistent across all civilizations throughout tens of thousands of years. Maybe even hundreds of thousands of years. It's practically instinctive. Its like theres something encoded in our DNA.
Reincarnation, ghosts, resurrection, Higher beings, extra terrestrial life forms (eg. angels,) miracles, parallel space/time dimensions (eg. heaven,) strange quantum forms of ''virtual'' particles/energy not yet fully discovered or understood which behave in counter-intuitive ways...

I dont claim that every single on of the millions/billions of reported supernatural events in human history are ALL true.

But are you prepared to make the EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM that they are all false?


Quote:...The resurrection of Christ proved the divinity of Jesus.

Nope. There were people who believed Jesus had divine powers before He died. (Just as there were people who already thought God exists before the bible was written.)

Quote: It’s the central tenet of the faith, the one most important belief upon which Christianity is based.

It wouldnt be a central tenet of anything if nobody ever reported seeing Jesus miracles and post-mortem appearences.
There's a reason why it is so important - because it happened.
People ask for unbiased sources. But the problem is that seeing an actual miracle MAKES YOU VERY BIASED.


Quote:...The authors of the other Gospels probably included a resurrection because by the time they were...


I dont accept claims made by atheists about what the actual real authentic, well-documented authors of the bible were really thinking.
You dont get to tell me....nobody even knows who ''they'' were, none of them were even there when it happened, so many fakes, etc etc etc...

AND THEN PRESUME TO CLAIM KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR REAL MOTIVES

You do not know that the earliest manuscripts fragments of John were the first original ever written. And some of John's sources come from living people who must have been in the Sanhedrin that convicted Jesus. Likewise, Paul's writings date to within the lifetime of the disciples. The age of the texts is well and truly such that the people telling these accounts knew what they were talking about and their testimony could been refuted by contemporary sources with evidence to the contrary had such denial evidence existed.

The Gospel manuscripts we have are closer in time and better preserved than the oldest copies of Tacitus.
I'm going to reply to some of Lion's comments; not because I have any hope he will learn something, but rather because there are many visitors to this site who will be more open-minded. In addition to what others have replied..

RE "It's not me claiming to have seen Jesus alive 3 days after He died. The claim is made by witnesses who were there."
TOTALLY, INDISPUTABLY INCORRECT. Whoever the authors of the gospels were, they had no direct or second hand connection with Jesus.

RE "There would be no Gospel authors if Jesus dead body had been properly guarded by the authorities who wished to quell Messianic rumours. There would be no Gospel authors if the authorities had applied sufficient persuasive methods to get Jesus' followers to recant their claims and renounce Him as a false Messiah."
I DOUBT EVEN THE MOST COMMITTED CHRISTIAN CAN MAKE SENSE OF THIS.

RE "The mob turned against Him."
YEAH, RIGHT. The same mob that welcomed him as a hero and king when he rode into Jerusalem on a donkey on palm Sunday? Hardly! THE ROMANS crucified him!

RE "Nope. There were people who believed Jesus had divine powers before He died." WRONG! THE MIRACLE STORIES WERE MADE UP BY AUTHORS CREATING A NEW RELIGION. IF HE"D HEALED THE SICK, THE BLIND, THE BLEEDING, THE CRIPPLED, THE DEAD, HE WOULD'VE BEEN A HERO! HE'D HAVE BEEN BENNY HINN WITH BELLS ON. EVEN THE ROMANS WOULD HAVE BEEN FANS.

RE
"AND THEN PRESUME TO CLAIM KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR REAL MOTIVES"
Do you know what "probably" means?

RE
"There's a reason why it is so important - because it happened."
ARGUMENTUM AD ??????????????????????????????????, POPULUM????????????????????????
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

RE
"You do not know that the earliest manuscripts fragments of John were the first original ever written."
BULLSHIT. PROVE IT. READ ANY ( of thousands ) of modern historical books about the gospels, and you'll know that a version of Mark's was the first of the 4 canonical gospels to be written.

RE
"And some of John's sources come from living people who must have been in the Sanhedrin that convicted Jesus"
NOW YOU"RE REALLY IN FAIRYLAND. A member of the (Jewish) Sanhedrin thought Jeebus was the logos and the son of God, yet sentenced him to death?

RE
"The age of the texts is well and truly such that the people telling these accounts knew what they were talking about "
ARGUMENTUM AD ANTIQUITATEM ...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition

RE
"The Gospel manuscripts we have are closer in time and better preserved than the oldest copies of Tacitus."
A POINTLESS COMMENT (IE IT DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING). AND AN UNPROVEN ASSERTION.

HERE'S COMMENTARY THAT DOES MAKE SENSE...

The Christian Jesus is a Concocted Myth!

“Christians at all levels of intelligence and capacity are being denied access to vital information concerning their religion, and this curtailment of information helps breed either an attitude of ill-founded complacency, or one of smug self-certainty. Living in a kind of metaphysical dream, the custodians of ‘old fashioned’ Christianity stumble from
one futile explanation of New Testament events to another. Jesus was sinless; Jesus was sexless; Jesus was all-knowing; Jesus is the Savior of the whole World; Jesus is God. Such sentiments slip easily from the lips when the mind has been overtaken by spiritual vertigo due to intellectual undernourishment.”

(Douglas Lockhart)

The Jesus of theology has replaced the Yeshua of history. One has to winnow out the substance from the gloss. We should now discard the gloss.

I think Yeshua was a popular potential messiah, a charismatic young zealot supposedly from David’s bloodline who was crazy brave enough to stand up to the Romans. His primary agenda wasn’t to preach philosophy. A wandering teacher’s pithy observations on life wouldn’t have wooed crowds of thousands, nor attracted the attention of the Romans, Herod,
Sadducees, or Pharisees. People were too poor and the times too hard for that.

Churches have misrepresented his message to make it personal rather than social, and spiritual rather than political. The real Yeshua’s been buried beneath a mountain of creeds, jargon and mysteries concocted many years after he died. Christianity only emerged decades after his death – and became a religion primarily for gentiles. It used a story about him to create something new that wasn’t Jewish and that he wouldn’t have understood or approved of. He wasn’t the meek lamb of God. He didn’t think he was God’s son, and nor did any of his original disciples. He didn’t suppose he was the savior of the world. To sacrifice himself for gentile sinners wouldn’t have crossed his mind. He never once thought he was the central figure of a new religious cult. He didn’t rise from the dead. The imaginative Paul of Tarsus put forward all these fictions. Yeshua never met Paul, yet if he had would have despised him for promoting pagan propaganda.

The Romans actually crucified Jesus twice; once in real life, and then again by lying about his legacy in the gospels.

It can be argued that to keep Yeshua trapped in the Christian paradigm is disrespectful to the real man, and, more importantly, confuses people with a web of complex falsehoods. People may ask whether it makes any sense to:

- Praise a Jewish peasant who would never have presumed he was a god?

- Believe that Yeshua loved gentiles, the very people who humiliated, tortured, and executed him?

- Decide that a dead Jesus can somehow control the state of the world or an individual’s destiny?

Many commentators over the last couple of centuries have reached some of the same conclusions. Most of them haven’t had “anti-Christian” agendas; they were honest historians who believed in the importance of the truth.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mark Fulton's post
17-02-2013, 01:58 AM (This post was last modified: 17-02-2013 02:01 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(15-02-2013 06:36 AM)Lion IRC Wrote:  1. Its not extraordinary that God can do miracles.
2. It's not me claiming to have seen Jesus alive 3 days after He died. The claim is made by witnesses who were there. And the claims were made to people who were also there and those amazing claims were not rejected - they survived and were repeated and believed and eventually written down and copied.

Quote:...The Romans crucified Jesus. It must have been a devastating, humiliating blow to his supporters. The Gospel authors couldn’t have their hero disappear after such a dreadful demise.

There would be no Gospel authors if Jesus dead body had been properly guarded by the authorities who wished to quell Messianic rumours. There would be no Gospel authors if the authorities had applied sufficient persuasive methods to get Jesus' followers to recant their claims and renounce Him as a false Messiah.

Quote:The rank and file wouldn’t idolize a loser.

They didnt.

Judas betrayed Him. Peter denied Him. The Jewish religious leadership heirarchy feared and hated Him. The mob turned against Him. Jesus' followers scattered like sheep. They didnt all go in solidarity with Him to the Cross. He was a loser. He was beaten, mocked, whipped, publically shown to be a mere mortal. No triumphant coming down from the Cross at the last minute. Jesus died a total loser and thats exactly what His powerful enemies wanted. And His body could NOT have been simply left to some chance disappearance staged according to your conspiracy theory because that is EXACTLY THE THING WHICH WOULD HAVE ALLOWED FOR A RUMOUR TO GET STARTED.

Quote:The scriptwriters had to spruce up the story. Jesus had to rise from the dead, just like a god was expected to. The Egyptian Osiris, the Greek Dionysus, the Persian Mithras, and many others had all risen from the dead. Resurrection is a timeless theme; if a character is charismatic enough, people like to imagine death has been defeated, even today. Consider Elvis Presley.

Yes. Life after death is a very persistent idea. Persistent across all civilizations throughout tens of thousands of years. Maybe even hundreds of thousands of years. It's practically instinctive. Its like theres something encoded in our DNA.
Reincarnation, ghosts, resurrection, Higher beings, extra terrestrial life forms (eg. angels,) miracles, parallel space/time dimensions (eg. heaven,) strange quantum forms of ''virtual'' particles/energy not yet fully discovered or understood which behave in counter-intuitive ways...

I dont claim that every single on of the millions/billions of reported supernatural events in human history are ALL true.

But are you prepared to make the EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM that they are all false?


Quote:...The resurrection of Christ proved the divinity of Jesus.

Nope. There were people who believed Jesus had divine powers before He died. (Just as there were people who already thought God exists before the bible was written.)

Quote: It’s the central tenet of the faith, the one most important belief upon which Christianity is based.

It wouldnt be a central tenet of anything if nobody ever reported seeing Jesus miracles and post-mortem appearences.
There's a reason why it is so important - because it happened.
People ask for unbiased sources. But the problem is that seeing an actual miracle MAKES YOU VERY BIASED.


Quote:...The authors of the other Gospels probably included a resurrection because by the time they were...


I dont accept claims made by atheists about what the actual real authentic, well-documented authors of the bible were really thinking.
You dont get to tell me....nobody even knows who ''they'' were, none of them were even there when it happened, so many fakes, etc etc etc...

AND THEN PRESUME TO CLAIM KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR REAL MOTIVES

You do not know that the earliest manuscripts fragments of John were the first original ever written. And some of John's sources come from living people who must have been in the Sanhedrin that convicted Jesus. Likewise, Paul's writings date to within the lifetime of the disciples. The age of the texts is well and truly such that the people telling these accounts knew what they were talking about and their testimony could been refuted by contemporary sources with evidence to the contrary had such denial evidence existed.

The Gospel manuscripts we have are closer in time and better preserved than the oldest copies of Tacitus.

Congratulations Pussy Cat IRC. Your post has been selected as the first post to undergo the new TTA coding process. The codes assigned to your post have been determined to be :
LIMWG.B, JDFYSYUW.SCL, SSCTPGAE.0, NEPPPIE.0, HYNBOO.B

For an explanation of the coding system, see :
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...oding-game " .

You will have 30 days to appeal your codes.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein (That's a JOKE, ya idiot)
"And you quit footing the bill for these nations that are oil rich - we're paying for some of their *squirmishes* that have been going on for centuries" - Sarah Palin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
17-02-2013, 11:27 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(16-02-2013 02:42 PM)hedgehog648 Wrote:  After 55 pages Lion, you still refuse to understand the burden of proof....

The burden of proof is on whoever wants to do the proving.

Please continue.
You were saying....?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-02-2013, 11:40 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(17-02-2013 11:27 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  
(16-02-2013 02:42 PM)hedgehog648 Wrote:  After 55 pages Lion, you still refuse to understand the burden of proof....

The burden of proof is on whoever wants to do the proving.

Please continue.
You were saying....?


[Image: stupid.jpg]

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
17-02-2013, 11:40 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(16-02-2013 09:13 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  ...Whoever the authors of the gospels were, they had no direct or second hand connection with Jesus.

See, this is a perfect illustration of the problem. Skeptics claim certainty that the Gospels dont contain eyewitness testimony.
Yet, here you see a classic case of an atheist admitting they dont actually know who wrote what. Mark Fulton certainly doesnt know that the existing manuscripts are the first ever put down in writing.

Atheists/skeptics demand extra-biblical corroboration and dismiss the Gospel maunscripts as history, but I want to ask....
Were the New Testament accounts part of the bible when they were written?

And its grossly disingenuous to quibble about the dating of the manuscripts if you wouldnt believe their contents ANYWAY!

Suppose evidence came to light that all of the manuscripts were written <40AD.

How many non-believers here are suddenly going to change their view of the Gospel content? Consider

It's the actual event rejected as impossible which is the sticking point with most unbelievers. The Resurrection didn’t happen because God can’t do miracles, and the reason He can’t is because He doesn’t exist.

So please dont get all precious about the dating of the text.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: