[split] Debating Lion IRC
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-01-2013, 02:26 AM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(18-01-2013 08:40 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  argumentum ad youtubiam
Ooo nice Smile I'm gonna steal this one Big Grin

Quote:No, scripture doesnt account for every Christian who ever lived. There were followers of Jesus who never read the NT.
Theophilus was an early Christian before he read the written Gospel.
OK. Why does every Christian who ever lived and what *they* believed has relevance to whether the resurrection happened ? I mean, you agree that you are a Christian, but you are not able to say *from your own experience* that the resurrection happened - you haven't seen it, so at most the Christians whose opinion had any relevance would be those living at the time ? Exampli gratia: Theophilus - why would his opinion on the resurrection matter ?

Quote:Well we wouldnt bother having a discussion about some isolated bronze age historical event which includes miracles if everyone agreed God either doesnt exist or cant do miracles. Theres plenty of other miracles in the bible. So why would the atheist be concerned about just one more?
Um... OK. Don't wanna give it to you but can't think of a reason not to Tongue The evidence we have isn't magical right ? We've just got human accounts and writings.

So, since at least a large part of your argument from what I could see would have to be scripture based - unless you elaborate more on the 'every Christian' argument. What is the reason for accepting scripture as evidence in this trial ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2013, 01:49 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(17-01-2013 09:23 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  
(17-01-2013 03:55 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  No mistakes or errors? Do contradictions count? If so, could you explain some things?


Who did the women see at the tomb?

Who were against Jesus?

How are people judged?

Just how many women came to the sepulchre?

Where did the women stand when watching the crucifixion?

And many, many more.

Ah....skeptics annotated bible URL's
I anticipated that debate tactic.
And so I retort...........

Those are not contradictions. See this video.

It sounds like you're dismissing it because of the source (ad hominem). One could simply post links to "bible gateway" with the same scriptures. Do you also believe that the contradictions pointed out in the Skeptics' Annotated Qur'an and Book of Mormon are also bunk, too? Or did they just happen to get those ones right?

But it's nice that you at least linked to a video with an argument. However, cognitive bias plays an important role in protecting one from seeing contradictions. Every religion argues that the contradictions in their bibles aren't really contradictions at all... what a coincidence.

Take an example that you'll probably agree with me on -- the Mormon bible talks about the existence of steel roughly 2000 years before it was invented (and yes, I learned about it on The Skeptics' Annotated Book of Mormon). Mormons claim it isn't contradictory because that sword could have been "miracled" into place for Laban's use. But the Book of Mormon was supposedly translated from Egyptian Hieroglyphs, and there isn't a glyph for a material that didn't exist (like steel) until recent years... so even if a miracle placed this impossible material in ancient times, there's no way for the supposed author of the story to have written about it.

And yet Mormonism persists, despite this and many other problems with their bible. They still believe that their bible is true, despite the fact that non-believers can clearly see many things in their holy book that aren't true. But I'm sure they're rationalizing their belief and you're not, because they're biased and you're not... right?

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Starcrash's post
19-01-2013, 11:26 PM (This post was last modified: 19-01-2013 11:31 PM by Lion IRC.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(19-01-2013 01:49 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  
(17-01-2013 09:23 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  Ah....skeptics annotated bible URL's
I anticipated that debate tactic.
And so I retort...........

Those are not contradictions. See this video.

It sounds like you're dismissing it because of the source (ad hominem).

No. I didnt dismiss it. I responded.
Why would I dismiss someone elses arguments your arguments? I love reading that site's alleged contradictions.
I would have dismissed it if I thought it didnt warrant/deserve a reply. But it did deserve a response.


There is no ad hom. Bzzzzt! Sorry. Thanks for playing.
Next time dont belittle your own sources by automatically assuming they werent taken seriously. Cool


(19-01-2013 01:49 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  ...One could simply post links to "bible gateway" with the same scriptures. Do you also believe that the contradictions pointed out in the Skeptics' Annotated Qur'an and Book of Mormon are also bunk, too? Or did they just happen to get those ones right?

You'll have to show me. I've never looked at their islam or LDS stuff. You realise Christianity/Mormonism, Judaism and Islam are all part of the same Abrahamic monotheism right? Its a pretty big tent - all having differing theologies about the same One God.

I find the SAB folk have an unusual definition of the word contradiction. Eg. one person describing Jesus' robe as scarlet and someone else describing it as purple, doesnt seem like a contradiction to me - let alone an incisive counter-apologetic 'gotcha'.
...especially if the later was reporting the color of a robe stained by dried blood, seen later in the day than the person who saw a clean scarlet color.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-01-2013, 02:05 AM (This post was last modified: 20-01-2013 09:16 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
Islam did not originate from a monotheistic culture. Sometime AFTER the Satanic versses were removed they declared themselves so. Thay are also not Abrahamic, in any way. They declare themselves so. It is simply historically false.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...k+a+muslim
Judaism, until very late in it's history, (post Exile) was not monotheistic. Yahweh had a wife, and there is proof and eviidence for that all over the ancient Near East, and in the worship centers of Yahweh, including Beth-El, Dan and even Jerusalem. Her name was Ashera. It also did not come in any way from monotheism. Look at the First Commandment ... "no OTHER gods before me". The belief in other deities was ubiquitous in the ancient Near East, and the constant reversion on the Hebrews to Baal worship, etc is well known to anyone who has ever actually read the Hebrew scriptures, and not just spouting drivel they learned in Sunday school.



Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-01-2013, 03:46 PM (This post was last modified: 20-01-2013 04:06 PM by Lion IRC.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
Anyway, getting back to the Resurrection...

Here's my two starting points. (It seems a lot of Resurrection debates start at the end and work back. I rather start at these two because they seem to me, to be the most elementary.)

a) Opportunity
b) Motive

Nobody has challenged that omnipotent God has the ability to do this. And the only way to escape this conclusion is to argue that God doesnt even exist, which is a separate debate. I have also reasoned that, if you assert there is no God to raise people from the grave (or to an afterlife,) then why bother arguing against the Resurrection AT ALL? The ''no-God hypothesis'' wouldnt stand or fall depending on a gnat-straining debate of just one single New Testament miracle.
The point here is you have to concede that; if God, ---> then yes, miracles ARE possible.

On motive, I have argued twofold. Firstly, the motive of God is relevant and if He has a reasonable motive then the Resurrection is reasonable. Secondly, the motive of those declaring the historical events are true. (Motive is paramount in evaluating the historicity of the accounts we have.)
I have given a simple outline of Gods motive for action previously;

(17-01-2013 11:44 AM)Lion IRC Wrote:  
(17-01-2013 07:42 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  ...Let me ask you a final time:
Would you like to debate with me?
Yes or no?
Yes.
And with anyone else who thinks theres no good logical reasons or evidence to believe in the death and Resurrection of the historical
Jesus of Nazareth - my personal Lord and Saviour.
...who gave Himself to bring us the Good News that The Kingdom of God is closer than you think. And that people who are sad, broken, afflicted, ashamed, depressed, confused by the sins of this world (greed, hatred, violence, injustice) can find salvation, forgiveness and hope if they want. The Resurrection shows us that God DOES love us and that death is not the end.
Heart


Now I would like to tackle and dismantle the bizarre theories about the sort of ulterior motives a person might have for fabricating an account of things (which appeared miraculous) following the death of Jesus of Nazareth.

There are a few stock theories but I wont present straw arguments and then challenge them. So I will invite people like atothetheist to submit the ones they feel are logical, reasonable or based in historical evidence.

Why would Jesus' disciples WANT to publically declare falsehoods about the post-death appearances? (Especially given that lying is a Ten Commandment sin and especially given that these people believe in God's punishment of sin.)

Why would it not have been easier to simply let it go, and put it in the ''too hard basket'' of Jewish Messianic theology? Just revert back to the familiar and comfortable,
pre-Jesus Judaism where you started and live out the rest of your life in the same old synagogues talking about who the next ''failed'' Messiah would be.

Note that I am not claiming that humans never risk death and persecution for something (propaganda) which is not or may not actually be true. What I am asking however, is, what is the motive for doing so when you KNOW it is a fabrication - and one that is so astonishing that people will kill you even for the very act of simply making the claim.

The two options seem to be;

- yes I know its a lie but I MUST declare it because.....
- no, it's not a lie and I MUST declare it because.....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-01-2013, 05:09 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
Since i cant argue the the very existance of god, i will simply go with this: Jesus did not resurrect simply because he wasn't the "messiah" according to several books and writings found in the old testament. He failed to build the third temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28), he failed to usher in a thousand years of world peace and failed to unite the children of israel (Isaiah 2:4 and Isaiah 43:5-6) He failed in other ways....He failed in every respect to fulfill any prophecy.

He couldn't have resurrected because he was just fairy tale made up by Saul of Tarsus -- long after he was forgotten and the idea of him revived (again by Saul and a few others fed up with following all the god's laws ). A nice game of nothing more than Chinese whispers built on exaggerations and outright lies and misconceptions.


Wind's in the east, a mist coming in
Like something is brewing and about to begin
Can't put my finger on what lies in store
but I feel what's to happen has happened before...


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
20-01-2013, 05:29 PM (This post was last modified: 20-01-2013 05:46 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(20-01-2013 03:46 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  The ''no-God hypothesis'' wouldnt stand or fall depending on a gnat-straining debate of just one single New Testament miracle.

Unfortunately, there is no proof of even one New Testament miracle and ALL the messiah figures of the 1st Century were seen to have done miracles, so that argument falls flat on it's face, and is totally worthless. It was a culture, where "magic" and miracles were everywhere. So that fails utterly. Thus the resurrection, as just another of the ubuquitous miracles also fails. Sorry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_messiah_claimants
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/r...kooks.html
The gospels were not eyewitness accounts, and they were written for proclamation in liturgical services to be read/sung to believers, to remind them what they already believed. They are in no way reliable. It was an era of Pious Fraud, (http://www.ftarchives.net/foote/crimes/c5.htm ), where deception to achieve a goal, was considered acceptable. Thus everything they say is unreliable.There is no independant documentation of ANY Nrew Testament "miracle" and many reasons to doubt that what they were witnessing was in fact trus, as so much of the resurrection nonsense was obviously false, (seen by 500 ... who were NEVER documented). At the end of Matthew in Galilee it says they saw him, and it STILL says they "doubted". So whatever they were seeing, they were not certain, and they did not recognize him.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
20-01-2013, 05:48 PM (This post was last modified: 20-01-2013 05:55 PM by Lion IRC.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(20-01-2013 05:09 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Since i cant argue the the very existance of god, i will simply go with this: Jesus did not resurrect simply because he wasn't the "messiah" according to several books and writings found in the old testament. He failed to build the third temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28), he failed to usher in a thousand years of world peace and failed to unite the children of israel (Isaiah 2:4 and Isaiah 43:5-6) He failed in other ways....He failed in every respect to fulfill any prophecy.

He couldn't have resurrected because he was just fairy tale made up by Saul of Tarsus -- long after he was forgotten and the idea of him revived (again by Saul and a few others fed up with following all the god's laws ). A nice game of nothing more than Chinese whispers built on exaggerations and outright lies and misconceptions.

OK thats not really an atheistic response to the issue of motive but I'll put this on my ''To Do'' list.

Gnostic Rebuttal #1

God might exist and Jesus might have been Resurrected if He had been the actual Messiah but He wasnt because a non-Christian interpretation/exegesis of OT scripture shows this not to be the case, therefore prevailing belief that He was the true Messsiah is mistaken, and He was, instead, just an ordinary person. Therefore NO MATTER WHAT evidence is presented about His post-mortem appearances, they must be discounted on that basis and some gnostic or naturalistic explanation then becomes mandatory and we will await some future actual Messiah.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-01-2013, 05:53 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
The first Christian to write about a "resurrected Jesus" was Paul. There are very good reason the think he did not intend to say that he "physically rose". http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...surrection
This is NOT a "atheist" response. It's from the Professor of NT at Tulsa, a good Christian.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-01-2013, 06:13 PM (This post was last modified: 20-01-2013 06:19 PM by Lion IRC.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
Come on atothetheist.
Where are your debating skills?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: