Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   RESURRECTION : THE EVIDENCE (+ Apostolic Martyrdom considerations)
:æ: 
Suspended Member (Idle past 7184 days)
Posts: 423
Joined: 07-23-2003


Message 76 of 233 (91624)
03-10-2004 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Brian
03-10-2004 4:34 PM


Re: Courtesy Post
Brian writes:
Can I just add that my reason for rejecting miracles is not because of my atheist beliefs, it is because of my crtical approach to history writing. This is not a premise that I made up, it is a basic rule of critical history writing that miracles are outside the realms of historical enquiry.
It is also important to note that WT arbitrarily and baselessly excludes competing miracle hypotheses like the idea that Loki altered the texts to trick us, or that he changed the position of all the photons in mid-air that gave the IMPRESSION of water turning to wine, or that Loki made Jesus' body disappear and appeared to the disciples AS JESUS to trick them. Are these hypotheses falsified by evidence? No, they account for all of the evidence equally well and are unfalsifiable. Objectively, we can't distinguish between one miracle and another, even if we were quite certain that something miraculous occurred.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Brian, posted 03-10-2004 4:34 PM Brian has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 77 of 233 (91663)
03-10-2004 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by Asgara
03-10-2004 3:30 PM


Of course I know, and I have generally alluded to the massive amount evidence for the existence of the apostles/disciples in previous posts.
The text of evidence says the apostles/disciples each died alone, horribly, for preaching /reporting the Resurrection. Certain debaters understand exactly what is being claimed/said - this is why they suddenly feign ignorance and question foundational issues of historic fact.
One debater took my bait of mentioning three famous persons, they immediately revealed much knowledge about their existence etc.etc.
But when it comes to the 14 most famous men of history this person is suddenly claiming ignorance.
Scientists do not have to prove the Earth is round to anyone claiming flat, likewise, I do not have to prove the apostles/disciples existed/martyred. Round Earth and apostles/disciples existed/martyred are facts, unless anyone can offer credible evidence to the contrary.
Because the amount of evidence is voluminous, anyone wishing to challenge must present their evidence first. Otherwise, they are just clowning the debate with ignorance/dishonesty.
The demand of this particular type of evidence reveals subversive intent. It wouldn't matter how much actual evidence I cited these debaters would automatically say " thats not evidence "...." that doesn't prove anything "
Professor Thomas was convinced that Jesus rose, thats why he challenged the 8 assumed facts, which of course are easier to prove than the Resurrection. Professor Thomas knew the apostles existed/martyred because that is a fact(s) of history. And because no evidence exists to the contrary all honest objective people accept this truth.
If you want to challenge the existence of the apostles/disciples and their martydom then re-read what I have already said AND then go get an education and come back. I will not be clowned by the proverbial little kid asking " why " to everything said.
[This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 03-10-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Asgara, posted 03-10-2004 3:30 PM Asgara has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Asgara, posted 03-10-2004 9:21 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 79 by PaulK, posted 03-11-2004 3:03 AM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 85 by :æ:, posted 03-11-2004 12:29 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

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


Message 78 of 233 (91667)
03-10-2004 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Cold Foreign Object
03-10-2004 8:56 PM


Wow! I honestly ask some questions that I do not have the answers to. You claim to know the answers but refuse to tell. Now maybe you will explain to me just why in the hell anyone would take you serious ever again? That had to be the shoddiest answer to an honest question I have ever heard.
I am not a dishonest person. If I knew the answers to my questions I would not have asked you. You made a claim, I asked for references because I had heard the claim before and could never find any thing other than stories. You now claim to know the answers I am looking for, you claim voluminous amounts of evidence yet refuse to divulge any of it. And you are back to calling me ignorant and now dishonest.
Well WT, I now know that you are the dishonest one. You have avoided this question from me since you first joined this forum and continue to avoid it. I will now assume that you don't know the answer and will call you on it, every time you make the claim.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-10-2004 8:56 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-11-2004 10:49 AM Asgara has not replied

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


Message 79 of 233 (91700)
03-11-2004 3:03 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by Cold Foreign Object
03-10-2004 8:56 PM


Well, well well, you can't even deal accurately with what was said in the thread.
When you mentioned "three famous people" I pointed out some of the evidence for their existence - as you asked, and it covered just basic knowledge. I also pointed out that we do NOT accept every story told about them simply because we know that they exist AND pointed out that there are stories that "everyone knows" whihc are inaccurate (Paul Revere's ride) or fictional (George Washington and the cherry tree).
I also provided evidence relevent to the tradition of martyrdom associated with Peter which indicated that your assertion that recanting Christianity or denying the Resurrection was not at all what those responsible for the execution were after. A confession of involvement in the great fire in Rome would have been more to the point.
I also specifically asked you to provide evidence for the martyrdom of John - showing that it happened and that it met your description. I asked knwoing full well that if you bother to research John you will find statements like "no tradition of martyrdom". That's right. The "evidence" that John was martyred falls short of even the weak evidence - stories that do not appear to centuries after the supposed event - for some of the other disciples.
It is absolutely false to say that "The text of evidence says the apostles/disciples each died alone, horribly, for preaching /reporting the Resurrection."
It is also absolutely false to claim that just because "everyone knows" something you do not need to provide evidence to support it. That is especially true when you are making claims about the evidence that are totally untrue. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the reason you do not want to provide evidence is that you are not familiar with it and that you do not know what the evidence REALLY says. So why try to pretend otherwise ? Why run this bluff ? Why try to pass off an unsupported opinion as "checkmate evidence" ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-10-2004 8:56 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-11-2004 9:17 PM PaulK has not replied

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


Message 80 of 233 (91719)
03-11-2004 7:36 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by Cold Foreign Object
03-10-2004 3:14 PM


Ignorance is bliss!
Just b/c you refuse to accept evidence for alternative explanations to the stories in the bible does not make me ignorant of religious matters. I am against your viewpoint and disagree with almost everything you say. Yet, just b/c I don't agree with you doesn't mean I am ignorant. Disprove my ignorant comments if you can. If you cannot then your silence will speak for itself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-10-2004 3:14 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

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


Message 81 of 233 (91727)
03-11-2004 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by Cold Foreign Object
03-10-2004 3:14 PM


Myths
quote:
Included in everything else He said was His validation of the Septuagint, which, of course, contained Genesis. The Bible clearly reveals that there are only two sources - God or Satan.
Now who is parroting myth? Supernatural beings playing games with humans is not a novel innovation first seen in the bible. Many other cultures used their myths to explain the same things that you and your misguided fundamentalist buddies are trying to explain. The major difference--christianity was a small Jewish "cult" that ended up the state religion of one of the greatest empires to ever exist. By gaining polical and social control over most of Europe, christianity became intrenched in the minds of our progenitors. The people of the middle ages in Europe can be forgiven for their ignorance since they truly were ignorant. However, the ignorance of rationality and the blind dismissal of evidence by you and your cohorts cannot be forgiven b/c you all have the capacity and the opportunity to "know better".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-10-2004 3:14 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

AdminBrian
Inactive Member


Message 82 of 233 (91728)
03-11-2004 9:15 AM


Support Please WT?
HI WT,
There have been quite a few messages on this thread that really should not have been required.
If you are in possession of the evidence to support your 'checkmate' move you could have posted it a long time ago and saved a lot of time.
You are the one informing others at the board about the deaths of the disciples, the members are replying and they are admitting that they do not know what evidence you are talking about, so you should really post it to support your stance. You should also remember that just because it may be common knowledge in the circles that you move in, you should not assume that everyone knows about this evidence.
Could you please post the evidence before we have another 50 posts asking you to do so?
AdminBrian.

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 83 of 233 (91749)
03-11-2004 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Asgara
03-10-2004 9:21 PM


There is no avoidance, the only avoidance is the refusal to agrue from that which I already have posted. If no person can refute from what I already said then this reveals the dishonesty in ones intent.
If you really care then re-read my replies - I have answered. No one has the honesty to even admit that which is already there. If this is true then how much more is it true that it won't matter if I downloaded an entire library into this board.
For an Admin to burst in under the guise of neutrality is further proof of the private speaking and giving creedance to the massive ignorance being presented as legitimacy in this room. A person who knows exactly what I am talking about, a person who is next in my cross hairs of replies forth coming.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Asgara, posted 03-10-2004 9:21 PM Asgara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by NosyNed, posted 03-11-2004 11:14 AM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 86 by PaulK, posted 03-11-2004 2:33 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 87 by Loudmouth, posted 03-11-2004 3:03 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 84 of 233 (91752)
03-11-2004 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by Cold Foreign Object
03-11-2004 10:49 AM


There is no avoidance, the only avoidance is the refusal to agrue from that which I already have posted. If no person can refute from what I already said then this reveals the dishonesty in ones intent.
Then it would be easy for you to post a UBB msg = to the place where you posted the answer to the quesion. Why not do that right away rather than carry on for several more posts.
If you think that what you have said is all that is needed you have a significant misunderstanding. No one is going to take what you say at face value unless they are already convinced. Why you believe it is justified is what is important. What independent evidence is there for others to look at and make up there own mind without just taking what they are told?
[This message has been edited by NosyNed, 03-11-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-11-2004 10:49 AM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

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


Message 85 of 233 (91756)
03-11-2004 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Cold Foreign Object
03-10-2004 8:56 PM


Willowtree writes:
Because the amount of evidence is voluminous, anyone wishing to challenge must present their evidence first. Otherwise, they are just clowning the debate with ignorance/dishonesty.
You owe me a new bullshit detector. Mine overloaded and blew up when I read this.
YOU presented a dubious assertion, so it is YOUR burden to prove it. Bald assertions are not true until proven false.
Scientists do not have to prove the Earth is round to anyone claiming flat...
Of course not. The person claiming the Earth is flat has the burden of proof because s/he is the one making the claim. Likewise, YOU are claiming that the apostles were martyred. Prove your claim, or retract it.
The demand of this particular type of evidence reveals subversive intent. It wouldn't matter how much actual evidence I cited these debaters would automatically say " thats not evidence "...." that doesn't prove anything "
This seems to me to imply that you are not as confident as you are purporting to be about the evidence that you think you have. Perhaps you should familarize yourself with the disingenuous debate tactic of poisoning the well.
Professor Thomas knew the apostles existed/martyred because that is a fact(s) of history.
Prove that they were. If it is indeed a fact, then it should be rather easy, shouldn't it? If it were so undeniable, wouldn't it be easier to simply present your proof and show us just how wrong we all are rather than to dodge requests from half a dozen posters? To continue on as you are only makes your claims more and more suspect.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-10-2004 8:56 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Chiroptera, posted 03-11-2004 3:11 PM :æ: has not replied

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


Message 86 of 233 (91773)
03-11-2004 2:33 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Cold Foreign Object
03-11-2004 10:49 AM


There certainly are questions and evidence that you have yet to answer.
And it is quite clear that either you do not *know* anything about this "evidence" you are talking about - and that you are trying to conceal that. Or alternatively you know that what you have been saying is not true - and you will not admit that.
So you are falsely accusing others of dishonesty while behaving less than honestly yourself. And THAT speaks for itself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-11-2004 10:49 AM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 233 (91775)
03-11-2004 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Cold Foreign Object
03-11-2004 10:49 AM


quote:
There is no avoidance, the only avoidance is the refusal to agrue from that which I already have posted. If no person can refute from what I already said then this reveals the dishonesty in ones intent.
Let's use a little analogy, shall we. Pretend that we are playing poker. At the end of betting I claim that I have 4 aces. Without showing my cards I start to sweep up the chips in the middle of the table. You cry out "Prove that you have 4 aces." I shout back "Prove that I don't". You can't prove that I don't have 4 aces, so do I win the pot? According to your logic, I do.
The burden of proof is on the person who is making the claim. We don't argue about the earth being flat or round because the evidence is readily found and known to most people. However, the question about the deaths of the apostles is not widely known and the evidence is subjective, not objective. I really think that the burden is on you, WT, to show the evidence. The fact that you are not doing so seems to indicate the weakness of your evidence. This weakness will be assumed until you actually provide this evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 03-11-2004 10:49 AM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 88 of 233 (91778)
03-11-2004 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by :æ:
03-11-2004 12:29 PM


quote:
Scientists do not have to prove the Earth is round to anyone claiming flat...
Of course not. The person claiming the Earth is flat has the burden of proof because s/he is the one making the claim.
Actually, those asserting that the earth is flat did provide evidence that the earth is round. And not only has most of that evidence never been successfully refuted, but there is much more evidence available today.
This is different than the assertian that the Jesus and apostles existed, and that they taught what is claimed that they taught. My understanding is that the early Christians and the early Church fathers did present arguments, perhaps considered good at the time, as to why the Bible should be accepted as history, but as the field of history progressed these arguments were reexamined and found wanting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by :æ:, posted 03-11-2004 12:29 PM :æ: has not replied

Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 89 of 233 (91779)
03-11-2004 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Chiroptera
03-06-2004 6:40 PM


Contemporary evidence
Chiroptera,
I became convinced of the resurection by doing the following personal experiment. In doing prayer experiments with my family and some personal issues, I included testimony of the blood sacrifice of Yeshua and His resurrection in some of these prayers, but not in others. Because it is written that they "overcame Satan by the blood of the Lamb, and the word of their testimony, and they loved not their lives unto death." I wanted to see if including this information intensified the power of prayer. If so, I would be more inclined to believe the reports.
I quickly learned to make it a regular part of my praying, because of the remarkable power it manifested.
I don't say this to convince you, of course. As I understand the whole idea, "it is the glory of God to conceal this matter." Yeshua spoke in parables to hide the gist of what He was doing, so as not to convince the public. This truth, apparently, can only be ascertained person by person. It's relational, after all. No, I cannot and will not try to convince you. I can only tell you, that if you want to know, you can, with God's help, convince yourself.
Stephen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Chiroptera, posted 03-06-2004 6:40 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 90 of 233 (91781)
03-11-2004 3:37 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Brian
03-10-2004 4:34 PM


This debate is experiencing wholesale denial of evidence posted after post one. Until this evidence is at least recognized the debate consists of one genuine person who does not know (Asgara), and a handful of educated persons suddenly feigning ignorance with the sole intent of denying the massive amount of evidence in existence.
Anyone who doesn't believe the apostles/disciples existed is a dishonest clown. One debater cited evidence for Alexander the Great by acknowledging a city named after him. I wonder if by the same criteria one could guess how many cities, places, cathedrals, etc.etc. are named after an apostle.
The true intent of this topic is to expose and evidence the difference between a Professor Thomas versus todays dishonest atheist revisionist activity.
It doesn't matter what you now claim - your first responses indicate the truth. You refused (and still do) to even consider whether a miracle has happened. This is because of your atheist worldview, of which, I have already identified to be a moral decision congruent with the atheist dimension of truth.
The "challenge" of the apostles existence is the only place to go in lieu of the evidence presented. My response is for anyone to produce one shred of evidence to the contrary. Or how about attacking the content of the post (1) ?
Atheists want to revise history by claiming it never happened. This is why they arbitrarily create the "details" exclusion. If a source records what a person was thinking it is automatically tossed because "nobody can remember details like that". This is done so they can revise history in conformity to their worldview and its hatreds.
The Bible records a lot of details because the claim is that it is God's eternal word. The claim is verified by the Resurrection. Nobody says the apostles didn't exist.
Barrabas was released because of the custom of Passover, he being the type of the Hebrews condemned to a life of slavery in Egypt but saved by God through Moses.
You are correct about the trials of Jesus being impossible UNLESS you view it under the claim - which is the Father was pouring His wrath on the Son for all sins. Only God could of pulled those strings and made Christ go through 3 trials in one night. Paul sat in jail for years waiting for trial.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Brian, posted 03-10-2004 4:34 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by PaulK, posted 03-11-2004 3:53 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 92 by Dan Carroll, posted 03-11-2004 4:03 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 93 by 1.61803, posted 03-11-2004 4:15 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 94 by :æ:, posted 03-11-2004 4:22 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 96 by wj, posted 03-11-2004 5:21 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 113 by Brian, posted 03-12-2004 7:06 AM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024