Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,809 Year: 3,066/9,624 Month: 911/1,588 Week: 94/223 Day: 5/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Are religions manmade and natural or supernaturally based?
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 16 of 511 (771364)
10-25-2015 4:24 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by PaulK
10-25-2015 3:03 AM


Re: More evidence for the resurrection
Faith, I am afraid that you have no ability to evaluate evidence. Which is something of a handicap in these discussions.
The women did not even see the resurrection (nobody saw the actual event). They aren't put forward as court witnesses, just participants in the events. And in Mark, the original version, they don't even tell anyone what they supposedly saw.
As I pointed out to GDR this is evidence against the empty tomb story (which likely is fiction)
Only to a twisted mind.
Let me put it this way. Millions of people who are far better judges of just about anything than you are have found these accounts to be good evidence both for the resurrection and for the inerrancy of scripture. I'll take their word over yours any day.
What on earth could it mean to "see the actual event?" A man waking up and sitting up that you thought was dead? You'd just say it was a lie anyway, obviously he hadn't been dead or some such, anything to discredit the account.
And what could it add to the evidence of seeing there was no body in the tomb that you expected to be there, since he was supposed to be dead, a body that nobody ever produced? And the actual seeing of him alive as first Mary Magdalene did and then the other disciples. You split hairs and condemn yourself.
And by the way you've bought another lie: Mark was NOT the first gospel. Matthew was. That's why it's first in the canon. You prefer the revisionists who do whatever they can to twist things around to cast doubt on the scriptures. They are only leading you down the primrose path to you know where. Though you are going quite willingly aren't you?
The whole Bible has a remarkable ring of truth to it, to those who have ears to hear. Strange though that GDR has ears for some parts and not for others. But you might as well be totally deaf.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 3:03 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 4:44 AM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 17 of 511 (771365)
10-25-2015 4:44 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Faith
10-25-2015 4:24 AM


Re: More evidence for the resurrection
quote:
Let me put it this way. Millions of people who are far better judges of just about anything than you are have found these accounts to be good evidence both for the resurrection and for the inerrancy of scripture. I'll take their word over yours any day.
Come off it Faith. if that was true they would have better reasons. And inerrancy in particular generates a lot of silly excuses to twist the Bible.
quote:
What on earth could it mean to "see the actual event?" A man waking up and sitting up that you thought was dead? You'd just say it was a lie anyway, obviously he hadn't been dead or some such, anything to discredit the account.
How can you be a witness to a resurrection without seeing an actual resurrection? And surely the decades-long delay between the supposed events and the first report does rather more to discredit the account than any opinion I might offer.
quote:
And what could it add to the evidence of seeing there was no body in the tomb that you expected to be there, since he was supposed to be dead, a body that nobody ever produced? And the actual seeing of him alive as first Mary Magdalene did and then the other disciples. You split hairs and condemn yourself.
I'm hardly splitting hairs. The first reports we have just say that various people - not including the women saw Jesus in some sense. and even if we granted the empty tomb story (and I don't) a missing body is just a missing body. It's hardly good evidence that the body came to life again.
quote:
And by the way you've bought another lie: Mark was NOT the first gospel. Matthew was. That's why it's first in the canon. You prefer the revisionists who do whatever they can to twist things around to cast doubt on the scriptures. They are only leading you down the primrose path to you know where.
Hardly a lie - the considered opinion of the majority of Bible scholars. People much more familiar with the evidence than you are. All you have to the contrary is tradition, which we know is unreliable,

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Faith, posted 10-25-2015 4:24 AM Faith has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 18 of 511 (771370)
10-25-2015 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by PaulK
10-25-2015 2:58 AM


PaulK writes:
As you know we've been over this and the case against the resurrection is stronger. Despite your dishonest attempts to attack the evidence.
Your claim was that there was no evidence. I produced evidence which which as we know you discount, but it is evidence. Now, just what did I say that was dishonest. You are calling me a liar and I'd like to know where it was that I lied.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 2:58 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 11:38 AM GDR has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 19 of 511 (771371)
10-25-2015 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by GDR
10-25-2015 11:07 AM


In fact I said that I wasn't aware of any "excellent evidence". And you certainly didn't manage to produce any of that.
As for your dishonesty, I give one example from the previous discussion. According to the Gospel of Luke Jesus ordered to the disciples to stay in Jerusalem. Because the gospel also says that they took a short trip outside the walls, to the Mount of Olives - a trip too short to count against Sabbath provisions against travelling, you insisted that the restriction would also allow a trip to Galilee!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by GDR, posted 10-25-2015 11:07 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by GDR, posted 10-25-2015 8:22 PM PaulK has replied

  
Raphael
Member (Idle past 462 days)
Posts: 173
From: Southern California, United States
Joined: 09-29-2007


Message 20 of 511 (771381)
10-25-2015 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by PaulK
10-24-2015 4:30 AM


PaulK writes:
I'd say that the evidence, properly considered is against it. Care to produce your evidence?
Hey there Paul! I am writing up a response but am not quite finished yet, so will reserve this spot here. You have asked a valid question and I will treat it respectfully, and in typical long-winded Raphael fashion . This may be later today or tomorrow.
Until then, regards!
- Raph

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by PaulK, posted 10-24-2015 4:30 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 4:14 PM Raphael has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 21 of 511 (771386)
10-25-2015 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Raphael
10-25-2015 3:31 PM


Just to make things easier I'm probably familiar with the common arguments and consider them to be pretty worthless, so you needn't rehearse any of those.
If you want to use the Empty Tomb story, then you'd better come up with some pretty novel reasons to think it genuine AND explain why a missing body qualifies as "excellent evidence" of a resurrection. I think that's a tall order.
And don't assume that the Gospels are reliable for anything more than telling us about Christian beliefs in the later part of the 1st Century. They aren't (although the conflict between Matthew and Luke looks interesting - and it's probably worth considering why that conflict might be there)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Raphael, posted 10-25-2015 3:31 PM Raphael has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Faith, posted 10-25-2015 4:53 PM PaulK has replied
 Message 47 by Raphael, posted 10-27-2015 12:52 AM PaulK has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 22 of 511 (771388)
10-25-2015 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by PaulK
10-25-2015 4:14 PM


Yeah, Raphael, you might as well give up. PaulK's made up his mind and that's that.
If you want to use the Empty Tomb story, then you'd better come up with some pretty novel reasons to think it genuine AND explain why a missing body qualifies as "excellent evidence" of a resurrection. I think that's a tall order.
I think it takes a pernicious sort of obtuseness to deny the evidence of the empty tomb. Considering all the people who would have loved to prove Jesus did not rise from the dead, most of the Jewish establishment for starters, you'd think whoever supposedly stole the body would have brought it for evidence against our belief in the resurrectrion. But nobody did.
And then of course the disciples saw Him risen from the dead, starting with Mary Magdalene in the garden outside the tomb, and for forty days afterward.
But the perniciously obtuse deny that there's any truth at all to the Bible reports so don't bother, Raphael, trying to persuade PaulK.
Maybe there are some other people here who can still recognize good evidence, however.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 4:14 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 5:05 PM Faith has replied
 Message 24 by Omnivorous, posted 10-25-2015 6:52 PM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


(2)
Message 23 of 511 (771390)
10-25-2015 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Faith
10-25-2015 4:53 PM


Yes Faith, we know you despise the honest search for the truth. And that is really all you've said. Personally I have some hope of an intelligent discussion with Raphael, and neither you, nor GDR seem able to manage that. So please butt out, instead of indulging your usual hostility to honest enquiry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Faith, posted 10-25-2015 4:53 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Faith, posted 10-25-2015 7:53 PM PaulK has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


(3)
Message 24 of 511 (771403)
10-25-2015 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Faith
10-25-2015 4:53 PM


Do you believe in magic?
Faith writes:
I think it takes a pernicious sort of obtuseness to deny the evidence of the empty tomb.
Only if you already believe.
Consider the magician who steps into the sword cabginet. He tells you this is gonna be magic. His assistant runs swords through at all angles. We hear screams. She opens the cabinet--and it is empty. After she closes the cabinet and withdraws the swords, she reopens it to reveal our triumphant magician. He tells you it was magic.
Do you believe it was magic? How can you be so perniciously obtuse as to deny the evidence of the empty cabinet?
Because you already don't believe in this magician.
You consistently call many of us here deluded for not being persuaded by something that would only persuade those who already believe in the magic. When you get frustrated enough by it, you call us pernicious, twisted, satanic...
That doesn't make your magic more credible either.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."
Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.
-Terence

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Faith, posted 10-25-2015 4:53 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Faith, posted 10-25-2015 8:08 PM Omnivorous has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 25 of 511 (771412)
10-25-2015 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by PaulK
10-25-2015 5:05 PM


Yes Faith, we know you despise the honest search for the truth. And that is really all you've said.
What you fail to grasp is that there is such a thing as no longer NEEDING to search for the truth because it's been FOUND! I certainly found it when I came to understand and believe the gospel. The searching had been done over all the early part of my life but most intensively in the few years leading up to understanding the gospel. It's delusional to think that after finding the truth, given by God Himself, I would need to consider the fallen human vaporings you trust in, that deny the God-given truth and can only lead you to perdition. The truth has been given, your job is to believe it.
Personally I have some hope of an intelligent discussion with Raphael, and neither you, nor GDR seem able to manage that. So please butt out, instead of indulging your usual hostility to honest enquiry.
Boy are you confused!
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 5:05 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by PaulK, posted 10-26-2015 1:42 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 26 of 511 (771413)
10-25-2015 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Omnivorous
10-25-2015 6:52 PM


Re: Do you believe in magic?
Faith writes:
I think it takes a pernicious sort of obtuseness to deny the evidence of the empty tomb.
Only if you already believe.
There are some who CAME to believe by recognizing the meaning of the empty tomb. All you have to believe to believe that is that the Bible is a simple truthful record by and about simple truthful people.
Consider the magician who steps into the sword cabginet. He tells you this is gonna be magic. His assistant runs swords through at all angles. We hear screams. She opens the cabinet--and it is empty. After she closes the cabinet and withdraws the swords, she reopens it to reveal our triumphant magician. He tells you it was magic.
Do you believe it was magic? How can you be so perniciously obtuse as to deny the evidence of the empty cabinet?
Because you already don't believe in this magician.
But that is not the case with the empty tomb. Nobody is doing any hocus pocus or even trying to persuade us of the meaning of the empty tomb. It is presented as a simple factual account. The women came to the tomb in the early morning to finish anointing the body, and found the stone rolled back and the body gone. The narrative doesn't stop to tell us its import, it just goes on recounting fact after fact. If you put simple trust in the simple narrative by the simple honest people you have to give some thought to what it means that His body wasn't there. The disciples were not expecting this, they were shocked and confused at first, always slow on the uptake. You either believe the simple honest narrative by simple honest people or you don't. There is no magic involved.
You consistently call many of us here deluded for not being persuaded by something that would only persuade those who already believe in the magic. When you get frustrated enough by it, you call us pernicious, twisted, satanic...
Something has to persuade people in the first place, we assume others can be similarly persuaded, that's really all that's going on. PaulK goes out of his way to avoid the truth, it does take a pernicious obtuseness to do what he does to avoid it. Just believe the simple honest narrative by the simple honest people and recognize the implications of the absence of the body in the tomb.
ABE: You have to interfere with the narrative somehow to deny what it's saying. You have to call the writer a liar or the people he's writing about liars. Remember, again, that it would have been out of the question for a Jew to give credence to the report of women about such a momentous event unless he knew it was true; he certainly wouldn't make it up.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Omnivorous, posted 10-25-2015 6:52 PM Omnivorous has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Greatest I am, posted 10-27-2015 10:10 AM Faith has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 27 of 511 (771414)
10-25-2015 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by PaulK
10-25-2015 11:38 AM


PaulK writes:
In fact I said that I wasn't aware of any "excellent evidence". And you certainly didn't manage to produce any of that.
Whether it is excellent or not is my opinion against yours and we aren't going to agree.
PaulK writes:
As for your dishonesty, I give one example from the previous discussion. According to the Gospel of Luke Jesus ordered to the disciples to stay in Jerusalem. Because the gospel also says that they took a short trip outside the walls, to the Mount of Olives - a trip too short to count against Sabbath provisions against travelling, you insisted that the restriction would also allow a trip to Galilee!
Can you give me a link to that? I sure can't remember that discussion and frankly it isn't an argument I would make.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by PaulK, posted 10-25-2015 11:38 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by PaulK, posted 10-26-2015 1:49 AM GDR has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 28 of 511 (771423)
10-26-2015 1:42 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Faith
10-25-2015 7:53 PM


quote:
What you fail to grasp is that there is such a thing as no longer NEEDING to search for the truth because it's been FOUND
On the contrary. However, if you had found the truth you would still have no cause to attack those honestly searching for it. Rather you should help them. Your approach makes it quite obvious that you don't have the truth and don't want anyone else to know it wither.
Since your hate for the truth and the Bible - the real Bible - leaves you unable to rationally discuss the matter, again I ask you to please bow out of the discussion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Faith, posted 10-25-2015 7:53 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Faith, posted 10-26-2015 1:55 AM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 29 of 511 (771425)
10-26-2015 1:49 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by GDR
10-25-2015 8:22 PM


quote:
Whether it is excellent or not is my opinion against yours and we aren't going to agree.
I'd say that it is the facts against your opinion. Even if I were being generous my opinion clearly has a rational basis and yours does not. if your mind was open there would be a chance of agreement. So long as it remains perversely closed, there is not.
quote:
Can you give me a link to that? I sure can't remember that discussion and frankly it isn't an argument I would make.
Really? Do you really accept that a command to stay in Jerusalem would allow a short trip outside the walks, but rule out a trip to Galilee ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by GDR, posted 10-25-2015 8:22 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by GDR, posted 10-26-2015 2:16 AM PaulK has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 30 of 511 (771427)
10-26-2015 1:55 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by PaulK
10-26-2015 1:42 AM


The way you twist the truth is horrifying. Ugly, creepy, indefensible.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by PaulK, posted 10-26-2015 1:42 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by PaulK, posted 10-26-2015 8:52 AM Faith has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024