RESURRECTION : THE EVIDENCE (+ Apostolic Martyrdom considerations)

Tera :Certain things must be assumed in any given debates. Without even addressing the specifics of your challenge (apostles/existed/martyred)
I answer by saying NOBODY contests whether they existed, NOBODY contests whether they were martyred. If all I had to do was prove they existed/martyred then "everyone" would be convinced of their report. This particular issue is a "101" "cobbler" (as the Brits say).Remember, the text of evidence says that Christ was preached raised and ascended, this was assumed as fact, this places the reporters in the category of eyewitnesses, this makes the apostles messengers of "historic certainty", which, of course, to everyone 2000 years removed from the event is "de-accessioned" from being able to directly examine the witnesses. This is why there are only two
choices : they lied or told the truth in the written record of the event/claim.If you want to challenge the gospels then you need to assume the claim to be true AND THEN from there, specifically state why they are liars. I have provided two examples of intrinsic evidence of truth in the text."contemporary " individuals sacrificing lives for whatever cause SAYS nothing for or against the text of evidence.The important aspect of the apostles death, is the fact that they died alone, horribly, while possessing the ability to escape death by recanting, this tri-fold circumstance is the common denominator in all the sources/accounts/legends/stories/bios of their deaths. This particular evidence is also offered under the challenge for anyone to uncover any source/account/legend/story/ or bio about their deaths that even remotely implies that they did not die alone, horribly, or recanted.

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.

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.

IF Jesus rose, then this validates everything else He said to be true.Jesus predicted His death and resurrection, and guess what, IF it is true then Jesus is the most remarkable figure in all of history.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.What about those Natives you mentioned ? Unless they can prove their god is alive then one can only speculate as to the origin.There are witch doctors in Haiti and Africa that can do things that would disturb your mind - they admit their source. The supernatural exists and the Bible is the best source to explain it.

It is certainly evidence.But, the evidence I offered has a simple clear point. 11 losers became 11 men of iron who turned the world upside down. This point evidences the claim of Resurrection and its ability to change a person miraculously.

I never argue by website linkage - any fool can create a web page.Go to any library for books about the apostles, or any bookstore, or I guess you can search your subject at http://www.capstonebooks.comBooks:"Who Moved the Stone ? " Frank Morison"Evidence that Demands a Verdict Vol.1 and Vol.2 " Josh McDowell"Sherlock's Tryal (intentional misspelling) of the Witnesses" Bishop SherlockJesus Christ : Super Nut or Super Natural ? (6 volumes) Dr. Gene ScottOr go to Pastor Melissa Scott presents Dr. Gene Scott - The Official Site and utilize your media player abilities and choose from thousands of hours of teaching listed in archives/instant listening.I know you are no fan of Dr. Scott, but if you want to learn the whole field/gestalt of any historical religious subject then this source is priceless - the epitome of objectivity, and when he takes a position he tells you straight out.

I truly didn't intend to call you any of those things. It was meant as a general point. Really, I don't even know you.

I never said I didn't know where or how each were martyred.

The argument can only go so low as to accomodate everyone -this is what I was told in the evolution debates. It seems religious matters are viewed as something not worthy of strenuous study.The content of your post reveals that you are ignorant in this area.I am not a Sunday School teacher in this debate.You parrot "myth" as established fact - your mind is made up.

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]