RESURRECTION : THE EVIDENCE (+ Apostolic Martyrdom considerations)

Good point, my sources say Matthew, others Mark.However, dating is always very important. Forces that be resist the first century for many reasons. Paleography settles the issue.The only point I believe that is relevant to be the fact that there are first century sources in existence.

Because the Bible is crystal clear in this issue.IF Jesus rose, then this validates everything else He said as truth.
Jesus never challenged Satan's claim that he could give Him all the kingdoms of this world if He were to bow down and worship him.Satan temporarily owns the world because of Adam's relinquishment.Once again, there are only TWO possible sources of miracle : God or Satan.

Those same Pharisees in the previous chapter recognized that God must be with any person that performs the miracles that Jesus did.Now they attribute the source to be Beelzebub/Satan.It is in this context that Jesus defines "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit", which is to attribute that which you already know to be from God - as Satan's. That is willful and deliberate sin/blasphemy.

In this case you can because of the totality of the evidence/claim.What about the written records ?If they are liars then what about examples 1 and 2 ?What about "cataclysmic change" in their lives for the better. Lies change people, but not an entire group for better.

Aliens ?You laugh young earth creationists off the board (rightfully so),There is more evidence for YEC than aliens.There is more evidence for God.But it takes a little sense. Crick didn't have any, he chose aliens.Why is God not a possibility ? That is rhetorical.Ned, I am not judging you. I have read your Guidosoft posts, "seek and you shall find"WT.

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Aliens. Given that there is as much evidence supporting aliens as there is supporting god.

Willowtree, you can assume anything is true. It doesn't make it so. You are working from the premise that the ressurection is real, without subsantiating evidence, and then demand others to disprove it. The burden of proof falls upon the arguement made from the unsupported assumption, not those who point out the logical fallacy and ask for more evidence. Like any logical proposition, you must support of claim.
Secondly, you claim that the event had witnesses. In modern courts, eyewitness testimony is always considered suspect without corraborating evidence, since it has been shown repeatadly in controlled experiments to be unreliable. Now, in the case of the bible, recountings of the ressurection were written decades afterwards. The dramatic distance of time from the event inherantly increases the unrealiablity of the recountings. Also, you are making another assumption that the bible isn't biased, or that the authors were above embellishment to increase the draw of their stories.
Finally, you state that NOBODY conetests the apostles existance or martyrdom. They only thing you have shown evidence for is that you, and several christians with a nearly identical viewpoints, don't contest their existance or martydom. Obviously, there is at least someone who disputes this claim, and their may well be others. Now, both sides provide little corraborating evidence, but it is a bold face lie to claim NOBODY disputes your view.

No, there is evidence that YEC is wrong. There is no evidence one way or the other for alien visitors. Alien visitors are way ahead of YEC for that reason.For me there is no evidence for God or against God (of some kinds of god at least). I prefer a different kind of evidence than you do, obviously. So God is, at best, at the same level as alien visitors.

Atheism changed my life for the better. I'm sure you'd hear the same from anybody who's currently an atheist.Does that prove that there's no God?

You are absolutely wrong. As I stated it is only a minority opinion that they are NT documents AT ALL. The best suggestion for 7Q5 appears to be 1 Enoch. NOT Mark and certainly not Matthew (and so far as I knwo nobody has EVER suggested that identification). The dating is NOT AN ISSUE for the 7Q fragments. IDENTIFICATION IS>Obviously you have not been paying attention ot what I have been saying, let alone checking the links I provided or you would already know that. I explicitly stated that it was identiifcation not dating that was the question.And you have yet to explain the relevance of the Chester Beatty Papyrus (after 200 AD) or Tatian's Harmony (writte 170 AD)..

Speaking as a Brit I have no idea what you mean by a "101" "cobbler".On the other hand your answer is what we would describe as "cobblers" - i.e. complete rubbish.It certainly is in dispute and there is no clear evidence that even MOST of the disciples were martyred. And even if they were martyred it is far from certain that they had the opportunity to recant. The onus is on you to back up your claims - not for others to disprove them. If there are no reliable sources we do not have to treat the sources we do have as if they were reliable.

quote:

---

Once again, there are only TWO possible sources of miracle : God or Satan.

---

Except that the Native American people don't believe that God or Satan do anything; they think that the rock or tree spirits are responsible. Their traditions are very clear on this.The Hindus don't believe that God or Satan are responsible for anything, either; they believe that Vishnu, Krishna, Lakshmi, or another god in the Hindu pantheon is responsible. The Gita is very clear on this (and predates the Bible, I might add).Since it's just your opinion against theirs regarding which god(s), God, or spirits are responsible for certain events, how do I know who is right?

quote:

---

Secondly, you claim that the event had witnesses. In modern courts, eyewitness testimony is always considered suspect without corraborating evidence, since it has been shown repeatadly in controlled experiments to be unreliable. Now, in the case of the bible, recountings of the ressurection were written decades afterwards. The dramatic distance of time from the event inherantly increases the unrealiablity of the recountings.

---

That's why we have things called "statutes of limitation".

Attention everyone.I am responding to a post from EvC member Paulk, an experienced debater in this forum, a person who exhibits qualities known to inhabit educated persons, a person who energetically argues very intelligently in science topics, a person who has well rounded knowledge in many areas, a person who in the previous post is slinging around codes used to identify one of a kind papyri/fragments, a person who suddenly claims that the 14 most famous persons in the world never existed/never were martyred. This person is clowning the debate with the sabotage of ignorance presented under the disguise of legitimate enquiry.Every honest, intelligent, and educated person knows the apostles/disciples existed and were martyred. Even Satan's most productive lie factory - Burton L. Mack, acknowledges that they existed. He creates the fictitious theory that the gospels were written by persons who forged the apostles names.Strewn across N.T. geography are hundreds of sites that claim by tradition, legend, archival records, architecture, inscriptions, of the apostles/disciples presence. There are tens of thousands of books writtten about the apostles/disciples. The entire Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Church worlds verifies their existence/martyrdom. Scholars who believe in there existence and martyrdom out number the few "oddballs" who don't 500 to 1.The existence of the apostles/disciples is a fact that every honest and intelligent and educated person knows, many differences are argued concerning the details of their lives, journeys, and deaths. But there is no evidence, not a shred of credible evidence in existence that says they did not die for the report of the Resurrection.The common denominator that history records concerning the apostles/disciples is that they were martyred alone for their Resurrection report.What evidence do you have for the existence of Alexander the Great ?Julius Caesar ?Paul Revere ?Paulk will argue "reliable sources" which is code for sources that he agrees with.To make this particular "challenge" reveals a fear of the truth of the text of evidence (Post 1).The text of evidence says there are 8 things that must be assumed as fact before we can discuss whether the Resurrection happened. Not included in these 8 is the existence/martyrdom of the apostles/disciples. To claim they never existed is to also say Jesus never lived (fact #1). Like I already said, Mack/Jesus Seminar admits He lived. To challenge that which is an accepted fact of history is tantamount to holding the Earth be flat.To recede behind the text of evidence and make claims of challenge of established fact is an endless game of subversion. Science constantly deduces unseen things via the behavior of seen things and you have no trouble believing, but voluminous amounts of eclectic evidence concerning the apostles is placed in a category of speculation.EvC member Brian argued the best counter-argument in this debate. He refused to even consider the possibility of a miracle. This is an honest and moral decision congruent with the dimension of truth that he believes is true - atheism. I must and will respect this position - a position that takes a clear stand. What I cannot stand is atheists who would rather revise history instead of sticking to the foundation of their philosophy.[This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 03-09-2004][This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 03-09-2004]

post 59 in this debate speaks of you.