Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   RESURRECTION : THE EVIDENCE (+ Apostolic Martyrdom considerations)
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 136 of 233 (92857)
03-17-2004 12:28 AM


Dubious humor suspression effort
Time once again, to try to crush out a dubious humor diversion.
Be nice now.
Adminnemooseus

Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
too fast closure of threads

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 137 of 233 (92872)
03-17-2004 2:53 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by Admin
03-16-2004 12:14 PM


I am very glad to see Admin, thank you for your much needed attention in this debate.
I am disappointed that the "message" of your post preliminarily sides with my opponents. Maybe I can change your mind.
Previously, in this debate, I said that in evolution debates whatever I argued was immediately responded to/challenged/refuted(?). But in this debate, starting in Post 37, and repeated in posts 45, 59, 77, 101, and 126, was a specific challenge for anyone to produce ONE shred of evidence that contradicted the claim that the apostles/disciples did not die horribly, alone, for the report of the Resurrection.
Thus far not one person has been able to produce that ONE piece of evidence. The collective educated body of my opponents can instantly produce contrary evidence in other topics but when challenged to do so here no one can even produce ONE shred.
Everything said thus far I have (past tense) argued to be in itself evidence supporting my claim that the apostles/disciples died, alone, horribly, for the report of the Resurrection. The challenge stands and has yet to be tarnished in any way.
The preceding evidence ALSO resides on the following foundations :
That the evidence of martyrdom varies, some sources disagree about locations and methods of death, and of course the dates. But the point is the common denominators; which are, that all the sources agree that the apostles/disciples died alone, horribly, for the report of the Resurrection. This claimed fact was posted in posts 37, and 45, and 59, and 101. Thus far none of my opponents have offered any contrary evidence, in fact this particular evidence has been completely ignored.
Post 59 and Post 77 : In post 59 I tossed out three famous names and challenged how we know they existed. In post 77 debater took bait and immediately posted evidence. My point here was that this educated person could evidence three famous people instantly but he could not offer a shred of evidence against the 14 most famous men of all time and the claims I was making about them. This further evidences the claim of the challenge that zero evidence exists contradicting that the apostles/disciples died alone, horribly, for the report of the Resurrection. Thus far the debater in question has completely evaded answering the specific lapse evidenced here.
Post 62 : 11 losers became 11 men of iron who turned the world upside down. They became winners because of the Resurrection. No debater has offered any explanation of this, much less any evidence to refute the claim.
Post 101 and Post 126 : These posts declare as fact that the worldwide climate of New Testament times had zero tolerance for opposing political/religious views/claims, that this atmosphere establishes as fact that those who challenged the status quo were subject to instant death/martyrdom. I even included a comparison to what would happen in certain cities today if the gospel were to be preached in these places. The point is that the apostles/disciples did exactly what I referenced (preached radical new religion in a dangerous climate that often murdered such persons). No debater, as of yet, has offered any evidence (or explanation) to refute this evidence. I must conclude that it does evidence the claim that the apostles died alone, horribly, for the report of the Resurrection.
Again, I only claim the preceding text of evidence to be "pieces of proof supporting the claimed fact".
Post 1 : Says eminent Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas identified the checkmate evidence. No debater thus far can offer one single shred of evidence against the messenger or his message. This post also says that it took a man of Ph.D. capabilities three and a half years to review all the Resurrection evidence and he could not find one shred of evidence against the claim.
This is why I demand in this particular debate that the claim is fact unless one person can post one shred of evidence (or even an explanation) to the contrary. I am sure explanations will now come - bring them on !
I also admitted that the only reason I posted this topic was to smack the Talibanic atheists in this room/generation with the integrity of a Professor Thomas.
Admin. I believe I have provided evidence and its explanation.
May I request that you remain silent and allow the debate to proceed ?
Whatever you decide, in advance, I support.
Thank You.
Willowtree

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Admin, posted 03-16-2004 12:14 PM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by :æ:, posted 03-17-2004 3:13 AM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 139 by hitchy, posted 03-17-2004 8:17 AM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 141 by Admin, posted 03-17-2004 1:26 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 142 by Asgara, posted 03-17-2004 2:06 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 143 by Chiroptera, posted 03-17-2004 2:14 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 223 by xandrezz, posted 03-29-2004 4:57 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

:æ: 
Suspended Member (Idle past 7184 days)
Posts: 423
Joined: 07-23-2003


Message 138 of 233 (92875)
03-17-2004 3:13 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by Cold Foreign Object
03-17-2004 2:53 AM


Bluff and bluster, smoke and mirrors
Willowtree writes:
But in this debate, starting in Post 37, and repeated in posts 45, 59, 77, 101, and 126, was a specific challenge for anyone to produce ONE shred of evidence that contradicted the claim that the apostles/disciples did not die horribly, alone, for the report of the Resurrection.
Yeah, and in just about every OTHER post, you were challenged to present evidence in SUPPORT of your claim.
Thus far not one person has been able to produce that ONE piece of evidence.
Yourself being the most obvious individual.
That the evidence of martyrdom varies, some sources disagree about locations and methods of death, and of course the dates. But the point is the common denominators; which are, that all the sources agree that the apostles/disciples died alone, horribly, for the report of the Resurrection.
Tell me, how are we supposed to believe this when you continually refuse to identify these alleged "sources"? I'm sorry, but we're not just going to take your word for it.
Thus far none of my opponents have offered any contrary evidence, in fact this particular evidence has been completely ignored.
WHAT EVIDENCE?!?!?! All you've done is CLAIM that the evidence exists! PRESENT IT, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!
No debater has offered any explanation of this, much less any evidence to refute the claim.
Why should we bother to refute your claim when youv'e given us no reason to believe that it's factual?
Post 101 and Post 126 : These posts declare as fact that the worldwide climate of New Testament times had zero tolerance for opposing political/religious views/claims, that this atmosphere establishes as fact that those who challenged the status quo were subject to instant death/martyrdom. I even included a comparison to what would happen in certain cities today if the gospel were to be preached in these places.
WT, you really need to realize the vast difference between CLAIMS and EVIDENCE -- they are not, repeat NOT the same. All you have is your own CLAIMS. Show us something else that SUPPORTS them.
Post 1 : Says eminent Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas identified the checkmate evidence.
Which was...?
This post also says that it took a man of Ph.D. capabilities three and a half years to review all the Resurrection evidence and he could not find one shred of evidence against the claim.
So you say. Why should we believe you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-17-2004 2:53 AM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

hitchy
Member (Idle past 5118 days)
Posts: 215
From: Southern Maryland via Pittsburgh
Joined: 01-05-2004


Message 139 of 233 (92896)
03-17-2004 8:17 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by Cold Foreign Object
03-17-2004 2:53 AM


Huh!?!
I thought the members of the Taliban were monotheists who believed in the same god that the Christians and Jews and other Muslims believed in. Don't try to sound witty by referencing the current "enemy" of the "free world". If you have a problem with athiests then pray for them. Isn't that what Christians do?
Also, I am sure Thomas Aquinas said a lot of things. Isn't he the one who said "a woman is a temple built upon a sewer"? Or was that "Saint" Augustine? Or Saint Jizzleslobber!?!
Furthermore, can't you think of better evidence than a quote from someone with obvious confirmational bias? That would be like saying "David Koresch is god" based on a quote from one of his followers.
I still don't see the logic behind using the bible to prove that the stories in the bible are true. And don't cite works by dark age monks and "scholars" whose chief reference was the same book that they were and you are trying to validate.
From another realistic standpoint--the physical reserrection of a three day old human corpse does not happen. You can say it was a miracle, but miraculous claims demand miraculous evidence. Where is your miraculous evidence? IF you had presented it already, this thread would not now be at 139 posts!!!
Can't anyone produce Roman records about these "martyrs"? How about any ancient record from any non-biased source? How were the Romans unbiased, you ask? Easy, they didn't care what your beliefs were. They killed you if you didn't follow their rules regardless of your personal faith.
One last thing--other parts of the bible are clearly in error. The epistles of Paul weren't even written by Paul and it says so in the bible! So, who really wrote Acts? The book as a whole cannot be taken seriously as a historic text. The current version of the bible even runs afoul of the gnostic texts that predate the bible. I am sure other discrepencies would be found if the early church fathers had not burned all the classical knowledge they could get their hands on. Why would they do that? To cover up something!?! This alone should cast doubt on the bible and the unsubstantiated stories associated with its dogma--like the resurrection.
I am not saying that people didn't die b/c they professed faith in Christianity, I am just saying that martyrdom does not validate Jesus's "resurrection".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-17-2004 2:53 AM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by 1.61803, posted 03-17-2004 10:38 AM hitchy has not replied
 Message 144 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-17-2004 3:40 PM hitchy has not replied

1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 140 of 233 (92907)
03-17-2004 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by hitchy
03-17-2004 8:17 AM


Re: Huh!?!
Hi Hitchy,
In regards to St. Thomas, he was writing isn the 1200's. And the only EVIDENCE he has access to was source documents. He was a man of faith and has no reason to doubt what books he had available. Willow tree is using the writings of a monk who lived in 1200's and although wise and well read did not have any evidence which she claims.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by hitchy, posted 03-17-2004 8:17 AM hitchy has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 141 of 233 (92926)
03-17-2004 1:26 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by Cold Foreign Object
03-17-2004 2:53 AM


You should supply evidence and move the discussion forward
Rule 4 of the Forum Guidelines says:
  1. Make your points by providing supporting argument. Avoid bare assertions. Because it is often not possible to tell which points will prove controversial, it is acceptable to wait until a point is challenged before supporting it.
I think your point has been challenged.
Rule 2 of the Forum Guidelines says:
  1. Debate in good faith by addressing rebuttals through the introduction of new information or by providing additional argument. Do not merely keep repeating the same points without elaboration.
You are repeating the same argument post after post.
While I can't speak for the other moderators, I'm not going to resort to administrative actions to influence you to follow these guidelines, but I don't believe any useful discussion will develop until you do. I would guess that by this time even the Creationist lurkers are asking themselves, "Why is he so reluctant to cite the evidence? Does he not know it? Is it weak? What's going on here?"
Others have already adequately addressed the inherent difficulties surrounding negative evidence, which is what you keep requesting. If you're going to simply refuse to acknowledge this reality of inductive logic then I don't think I have any special powers of persuasion that would make me any more likely to convince you.
Just so there's no ambiguity, if this were a debate I were moderating, I would long ago have defaulted you for refusing to support your position. It has nothing to do with your position and everything to do with your refusal to actually debate. I, for one, would find an examination of the evidence for apostolic martyrdom fascinating.

--Percy
EvC Forum Administrator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-17-2004 2:53 AM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-18-2004 9:40 PM Admin has not replied

Asgara
Member (Idle past 2302 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 142 of 233 (92929)
03-17-2004 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by Cold Foreign Object
03-17-2004 2:53 AM


But in this debate, starting in Post 37, and repeated in posts 45, 59, 77, 101, and 126, was a specific challenge for anyone to produce ONE shred of evidence that contradicted the claim that the apostles/disciples did not die horribly, alone, for the report of the Resurrection.
Willowtree, you cannot get out of supporting a claim by later making a counterclaim. In post 2 of this thread, I called you on making the claim that the apostles all died a horrible martyr's death, alone for their beliefs. I have asked you in several threads about this and you have yet to answer me.
post 1 - you make the claim
post 2 - I ask for supporting evidence
post 3 to 141 - you say "well you can't prove it wrong"
That is NOT how it works and everyone here has been telling you the same thing. You made the existential claim, it is up to you to support it. You say evidence exists for your claim, you claim that you KNOW this evidence...please supply it!

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-17-2004 2:53 AM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 143 of 233 (92930)
03-17-2004 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by Cold Foreign Object
03-17-2004 2:53 AM


a clarification
quote:
But in this debate, starting in Post 37, and repeated in posts 45, 59, 77, 101, and 126, was a specific challenge for anyone to produce ONE shred of evidence that contradicted the claim that the apostles/disciples did not die horribly, alone, for the report of the Resurrection.
WillowTree, no one is claiming that the apostles did not die as martyrs. Since no one is claiming this, it is silly to for anyone to provide evidence for this.
You, on the other hand, did make a claim: that the apostles did die as martyrs. Therefore, it is up to you to provide some evidence for your assertian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-17-2004 2:53 AM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 144 of 233 (92944)
03-17-2004 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by hitchy
03-17-2004 8:17 AM


Your reply will be the next one I respond to AFTER I respond to Admin.
Thanks for your response.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by hitchy, posted 03-17-2004 8:17 AM hitchy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 145 of 233 (92960)
03-17-2004 4:37 PM


Let's Pick an Apostle
While WillowTree is currently mired in attempts to avoid a discussion based on evidence, I thought I'd pick an Apostle and see what I can find out about what happened to him.
Before picking an Apostle I need a list of the 12 Apostles. Looking about the web I find this list:
  • Simon Peter
  • James
  • John
  • Judas Iscariot
  • Andrew
  • Philip
  • Bartholomew
  • Matthew
  • Thomas
  • James
  • Thaddaeus
  • Simon
There was an Apostle named Bartholomew? I had no idea!
Some lists include Matthias who replaced Judas Iscariot.
I randomly choose Thaddaeus because that's a really cool name. More accurately, according to Young's Compact Bible Dictionary, he was Judas, son of James, also called Thaddaeus. Young's has no more to say about Thaddaeus.
My Britannica lists him under Saint Judas, and says there is some uncertainty concerning whether Judas is the brother or the son of James.
It goes on to say, in part:
After Jesus' ascension, Judas' history is unknown. Like the Apostle St. Simon, he seems to have come from the Zealots, the Jewish nationalistic party prior to AD 70. Legends first appearing in the 4th century credit Simon and Judas with missionary work and martyrdom in Persia (noted in the apocryphal Passion of Simon and Jude). Thus, since the 8th century, the Western Church has commemorated them together on October 28. The Greek Orthodox Church, however, distinguishes Judas from Thaddaeus, celebrating Judas, brother of the Lord, on June 19, and Thaddaeus the Apostle on August 21. The devotion to Judas (Jude) as patron of desperate causes began in France and Germany in the late 18th century.
I'm a little confused on the part about the Greek Orthodox Church's beliefs. Is this passage saying they believe Judas/Thaddaeus was actually two different people?
The apocrypha source about the mission of Simon and Jude in Persia is contradicted by other legends (mentioned widely on the web, e.g., Early Church Missionaries) that Simon's missionary work was actually in Egypt with Mark.
Summing up, the evidence for martyrdom of Thaddaeus is legends recounted in later apocrypha.
--Percy
[text=wheat][Fix syntactic gumbo in next to last para. --Percy][/text]
[This message has been edited by Percy, 03-18-2004]

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-22-2004 10:41 PM Percy has replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 146 of 233 (93002)
03-17-2004 6:43 PM


Matthew RIP
According to this website, and many others, Matthew died a natural death.
No historical use can be made of the artificial story, in Sanhedrin 43a, that Matthew was condemned to death by a Jewish court (see Laible, Christ in the Talmud, ~i seq.). According to the Gnostic Heracleon, quoted by Clement of Alexandria (Strom. iv. 9), Matthew died a natural death.
What a martyr.
Brian.

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by :æ:, posted 03-17-2004 7:02 PM Brian has replied
 Message 154 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-18-2004 10:39 PM Brian has replied

:æ: 
Suspended Member (Idle past 7184 days)
Posts: 423
Joined: 07-23-2003


Message 147 of 233 (93010)
03-17-2004 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by Brian
03-17-2004 6:43 PM


Re: Matthew RIP
So much for Willowtree's asssertion that no one can produce evidence to refute his claims.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Brian, posted 03-17-2004 6:43 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 148 by Brian, posted 03-18-2004 12:33 PM :æ: has not replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 148 of 233 (93147)
03-18-2004 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by :æ:
03-17-2004 7:02 PM


Re: Matthew RIP
Hi,
WT obviously hasn't done his homework, I believe all he has done is to parrot his idol Gene Scott.
I personally do not study the New Testament very much at all, I much prefer the OT, it is a far superior collection of literature. But to find out that Matthew died a peaceful death took about two minutes.
WT really hasn't reserched this at all, which we all suspected of course, as his delaying tactics painfully suggested this. His conclusion about Barabbas as well was shown to be based upon lack of research, he confidently claimed that Barabbas only robbed the Jews so the Romans would not have been that interested in him, but the Bible itself clearly states that Barabbas was a revolutionary. Do you think that WT will alter his conclusion about the Passover release story now that he has been shown that Barabbas was an enemy of Rome? I have my doubts.
The whole thread has been a sham, and the sad thing is WT will believe that he is in the right and we have been unfair.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by :æ:, posted 03-17-2004 7:02 PM :æ: has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 149 of 233 (93237)
03-18-2004 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by Admin
03-17-2004 1:26 PM


The supreme claim of my central argument was that the collective body of my opponents could instantly post and refute(?) anything in previous topics, but when I boasted a challenge to produce ONE shred of evidence that contradicted the checkmate evidence - the silence was deafening.
Instead, this specific challenge was treated as if it wasn't made. I find it very interesting that the most important claim of christianity and the challenge to evidence against it was met with the dishonest responses of acting like it wasn't there. This denial went on until your appearance, this is why I repeated the claim/challenge.
If a claim is not recognized/acknowledged then should I keep repeating it or just at some point conclude it to be unchallenged fact ?
Its my topic, I am running it my way, and I will not have my clear points/agruments ignored.
I made a grand point indeed, even the scholarly elements present could not offer anything against the challenge - they could only deny what I was specifically saying and cry foul by invoking the rules.
But the point is now moot, a little further up the road I see that scholar has found a "shred".
It also becomes even more moot because you too have completely gutted the strength of my point by not recognizing it, which lets all my opponents off of the meat hook they were dangling from.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by Admin, posted 03-17-2004 1:26 PM Admin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Rand Al'Thor, posted 03-18-2004 10:04 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 152 by Asgara, posted 03-18-2004 10:07 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 158 by PaulK, posted 03-19-2004 3:15 AM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3048 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 150 of 233 (93238)
03-18-2004 9:59 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by Adminnemooseus
03-16-2004 6:40 PM


Re: Topic title modification notice
This is an obvious inducement to debate something that I never agreed.
I did say that the intent of this topic was to smack the atheists of this room/generation with the integrity of a Professor Thomas.
By changing the topic title you are also declaring the 8 assumed facts to be facts. (post 1)
There will be no debate unless these 8 facts are assumed true. This is the claim of post 1. If not, delete the title amendment and the 8 facts are back on the table.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Adminnemooseus, posted 03-16-2004 6:40 PM Adminnemooseus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by Asgara, posted 03-18-2004 10:14 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 155 by Adminnemooseus, posted 03-18-2004 10:51 PM Cold Foreign Object 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