FREE TAPATALK APP

dafydd · 23rd December 2012, 01:04 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

Actually Jesus' empty tomb shortly after his death as reported by gospel writer Luke (who has been called a first-class historian by Sir William M. Ramsay) is some evidence of a miracle resurrection. It is not proof but it is some historical evidence that a miracle took place.

No it isn't. It's just a story in an old story book. That is not evidence.

Rincewind · 23rd December 2012, 01:09 PM

Actually, DOC, as has been pointed out to you many times, an empty tomb is only evidence of an empty tomb.

It's identified as JC's tomb by people with an agenda - notably Constantine's mother, IIRC.

So, to call it JC's tomb is just a leap of faith....

And I agree with you - it makes no sense at all for Christianity to exist without a resurrection.

However, wanting, and needing a resurrection doesn't make it true.

DOC · 23rd December 2012, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by dafydd

No it isn't. It's just a story in an old story book. That is not evidence.

When a person like Luke, who has been called a first class historian by a famous archaeologist, writes something as fact, that is historical evidence.

DOC · 23rd December 2012, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by Rincewind

Actually, DOC, as has been pointed out to you many times, an empty tomb is only evidence of an empty tomb.

Not when you have multiple writers (including one who has been called a 1st class historian) saying Jesus appeared to many other people afterward.

dafydd · 23rd December 2012, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

When a person like Luke, who has been called a first class historian by a famous archaeologist, writes something as fact, that is historical evidence.

The bible is not historical evidence, it doesn't matter what the old archaeologist called Luke.

dafydd · 23rd December 2012, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

Not when you have multiple writers (including one who has been called a 1st class historian) saying Jesus appeared to many other people afterward.

None of the alleged witnesses wrote anything down, the gospels were not written until later.

Akhenaten · 23rd December 2012, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

When a person like Luke, who has been called a first class historian by a famous archaeologist, writes something as fact, that is historical evidence.

Drivel.

Akhenaten · 23rd December 2012, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

Originally Posted by Rincewind

Actually, DOC, as has been pointed out to you many times, an empty tomb is only evidence of an empty tomb.

Not when you have multiple writers (including one who has been called a 1st class historian) saying Jesus appeared to many other people afterward.

I note that you use the word 'writers' (although goodness knows what they could have been writing on) rather than the word 'witnesses'.

Why is that, DOC?

tsig · 23rd December 2012, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

Actually Jesus' empty tomb shortly after his death as reported by gospel writer Luke (who has been called a first-class historian by Sir William M. Ramsay) is some evidence of a miracle resurrection. It is not proof but it is some historical evidence that a miracle took place.

Also one must consider that it doesn't even make sense for Christianity to exist to the extent it does today without a resurrection since the resurrection is the main focal point of the entire religion. Even the apostle Paul said "If Jesus is not risen, our faith is in vain."

And according to Bart Ehrman we have historical evidence of Jesus' death as early as 32 CE.

Here is what Ehrman (who stated Jesus "certainly existed" on pg. 173) said on page 164 of his new book "Did Jesus exist?":

"And it is important to remember that Jews were saying that Jesus was the crucified messiah in the early 30s. We can date their claims to at least 32 CE, when Paul began persecuting these Jews. In fact, their claims must have originated even earlier. Paul knew Jesus's right-hand man, Peter, and Jesus's brother James. They are evidence that this belief in the crucified messiah goes all the way back to a short time after Jesus's death."

__

So the fact that we have historical evidence of an empty tomb and historical evidence of the historical figure Paul stating without Jesus rising our faith is in vain and the fact that Christianity is the #1 religion in the world today is some evidence that a resurrection took place since it doesn't make sense for Christianity to even exist today without a resurrection. This is not proof but it is some historical and logical evidence of a miracle resurrection.

So the existence of Christianity proves the resurrection and the resurrection proves Christianity.

O

dafydd · 23rd December 2012, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Akhenaten

I note that you use the word 'writers' (although goodness knows what they could have been writing on) rather than the word 'witnesses'.

Why is that, DOC?

Perhaps we can have the hearsay discussion with Doc, again.

catsmate1 · 23rd December 2012, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

When a person like Luke, who has been called a first class historian by a famous archaeologist, writes something as fact, that is historical evidence.

Utter rubbish. You demonstrate (yet again) that you have no understanding of what "evidence" actually means are are willing to lie and distort to shore up your need for belief.
Ramsay was an xian apologist, even his fellow xians considered his nonsense embarrassing and detrimental to xianity. As for the "great historian" Luke, we've dealt with this stupidity many times before yet you continue to recycle it.

catsmate1 · 23rd December 2012, 01:53 PM

Originally Posted by dafydd

Perhaps we can have the hearsay discussion with Doc, again.

I'm sure he'll repeat the lie about Ramsay being an atheist who was converted to xianity by the "evidence".

Rincewind · 23rd December 2012, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

Not when you have multiple writers (including one who has been called a 1st class historian) saying Jesus appeared to many other people afterward.

Actually, I've just had a quick look at Luke's book - There's nothing I can see that details where the tomb was.

So - it's unbelievable that anybody can be certain that any tomb is the "right" one, unless, of course, you have an agenda, and have no interest in truth, honesty and evidence....

John Jones · 23rd December 2012, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

Not when you have multiple writers (including one who has been called a 1st class historian) saying Jesus appeared to many other people afterward.

Not this broken record again!

Give it a rest!

DOC · 24th December 2012, 02:27 AM

Originally Posted by Akhenaten

I note that you use the word 'writers' (although goodness knows what they could have been writing on) rather than the word 'witnesses'.

Why is that, DOC?

If someone dug up a 1st century manuscript that said my name is John and I witnessed Jesus Christ rise from the dead, would your beliefs change any?

ETA Also there is evidence that New Testament writers Matthew, John, and Peter, were apostles, and thus witnesses.

Lowpro · 24th December 2012, 02:34 AM

Originally Posted by DOC

If someone dug up a 1st century manuscript that said my name is John and I witnessed Jesus Christ rise from the dead, would your beliefs change any?

ETA Also there is evidence that New Testament writers Matthew, John, and Peter, were apostles, and thus witnesses.

The exact same thing could be said for any cult in the first century. DOC, if a millennia later someone were to pick up "the adventures of huckleberry Finn" which tells the travels of a young whippersnapper traveling down the Mississippi would it be wise for that person to accept this as testament to a factual event?

People wrote fiction then as much as they wrote fiction now...

DOC · 24th December 2012, 02:42 AM

Originally Posted by DOC

Actually Jesus' empty tomb shortly after his death as reported by gospel writer Luke (who has been called a first-class historian by Sir William M. Ramsay) is some evidence of a miracle resurrection. It is not proof but it is some historical evidence that a miracle took place.

Also one must consider that it doesn't even make sense for Christianity to exist to the extent it does today without a resurrection since the resurrection is the main focal point of the entire religion. Even the apostle Paul said "If Jesus is not risen, our faith is in vain."

And according to Bart Ehrman we have historical evidence of Jesus' death as early as 32 CE.

Here is what Ehrman (who stated Jesus "certainly existed" on pg. 173) said on page 164 of his new book "Did Jesus exist?":

"And it is important to remember that Jews were saying that Jesus was the crucified messiah in the early 30s. We can date their claims to at least 32 CE, when Paul began persecuting these Jews. In fact, their claims must have originated even earlier. Paul knew Jesus's right-hand man, Peter, and Jesus's brother James. They are evidence that this belief in the crucified messiah goes all the way back to a short time after Jesus's death."

__

So the fact that we have historical evidence of an empty tomb and historical evidence of the historical figure Paul stating without Jesus rising our faith is in vain and the fact that Christianity is the #1 religion in the world today is some evidence that a resurrection took place since it doesn't make sense for Christianity to even exist today without a resurrection. This is not proof but it is some historical and logical evidence of a miracle resurrection.

Originally Posted by tsig

So the existence of Christianity proves the resurrection and the resurrection proves Christianity.

O

That is your statement not mine, read the last sentence of my quote.

DOC · 24th December 2012, 02:48 AM

Originally Posted by Lowpro

...People wrote fiction then as much as they wrote fiction now...

Besides "your" belief that the New Testament was written as fiction name some 1st century Judea fiction.

DOC · 24th December 2012, 02:52 AM

Originally Posted by John Jones

Not this broken record again!

Give it a rest!

As long as people keep saying things like there is no "evidence" of miracles, like was done in this thread, I have the right to respond.

Aepervius · 24th December 2012, 03:07 AM

Originally Posted by DOC

When a person like Luke, who has been called a first class historian by a famous archaeologist, writes something as fact, that is historical evidence.

I had to make a double take on the date. Youa re still trotting that dumb story about luke being a first class historien ?

Woot.

DOC · 24th December 2012, 04:19 AM

Originally Posted by Aepervius

I had to make a double take on the date. Youa re still trotting that dumb story about luke being a first class historien ?

It's only dumb if you think the person who made the statement---archaeologist Sir William M. Ramsay who spent 15 years digging in biblical lands---is dumb.

DOC · 24th December 2012, 04:33 AM

Originally Posted by Rincewind

...And I agree with you - it makes no sense at all for Christianity to exist without a resurrection...big print added

Then one has to wonder why it does indeed exist (and is the largest religion in the world) if there was no resurrection, especially when believing it in the 1st century could have got you crucified, beheaded, or covered with wax then impaled on a post and set on fire---not exactly a list of perks.

dafydd · 24th December 2012, 05:39 AM

Originally Posted by DOC

If someone dug up a 1st century manuscript that said my name is John and I witnessed Jesus Christ rise from the dead, would your beliefs change any?

No. Fiction is fiction.

dafydd · 24th December 2012, 05:40 AM

Originally Posted by DOC

It's only dumb if you think the person who made the statement---archaeologist Sir William M. Ramsay who spent 15 years digging in biblical lands---is dumb.

Digging holes to support a fiction is rather dumb.

dafydd · 24th December 2012, 05:42 AM

Originally Posted by DOC

Then one has to wonder why it does indeed exist (and is the largest religion in the world) if there was no resurrection, especially when believing it in the 1st century could have got you crucified, beheaded, or covered with wax then impaled on a post and set on fire---not exactly a list of perks.

Nutters have always been with us.

Akhenaten · 24th December 2012, 06:09 AM

Originally Posted by DOC

Originally Posted by Akhenaten

I note that you use the word 'writers' (although goodness knows what they could have been writing on) rather than the word 'witnesses'.

Why is that, DOC?

If someone dug up a 1st century manuscript that said my name is John and I witnessed Jesus Christ rise from the dead, would your beliefs change any?

I don't have any beliefs since I prefer to follow the evidence.

What have you got?

Originally Posted by DOC

ETA Also there is evidence that New Testament writers Matthew, John, and Peter, were apostles, and thus witnesses.

No there's not, as has been amply demonstrated in TTTWND. Is that why you've abandoned that thread and are attempting to spam this one with your 17th Rate apologetics instead?

dafydd · 24th December 2012, 06:37 AM

Originally Posted by DOC

Besides "your" belief that the New Testament was written as fiction name some 1st century Judea fiction.

Given the absence of a publishing industry, any folk tales and legends current at the time will do.

DOC · 24th December 2012, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by dafydd

None of the alleged witnesses wrote anything down, the gospels were not written until later.

How do you know they didn't write anything down. We have no signature of Julius Caesar, the most powerful man in the world at one time. Does that mean he never wrote his name?

ETA

Also we have no contemporary writings in existence concerning Alexander the Great, the man who conquered much of the world, including Jerusalem, except for one offhand remark in a letter, and one inscription. Does that mean no one else at the time of Alexander wrote anything down concerning him.

ddt · 24th December 2012, 01:04 PM

Bingo!

Really, DOC, don't you get tired of rehashing the same old tired, debunked arguments?

How is it with that translation of Luke 2:1-2, BTW? We haven't finished that discussion, I'm still awaiting a reaction to my translation of those verses, and my arguments why the translation you put forth is incorrect.

dafydd · 24th December 2012, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

How do you know they didn't write anything down. We have no signature of Julius Caesar, the most powerful man in the world at one time. Does that mean he never wrote his name?

ETA

Also we have no contemporary writings in existence concerning Alexander the Great, the man who conquered much of the world, including Jerusalem, except for one offhand remark in a letter, and one inscription. Does that mean no one else at the time of Alexander wrote anything down concerning him.

Not that again. That must be the twentieth time that you have rehearsed that broken argument. Alexander and Julius Caesar actually existed and had no miracles attributed to them and were not supposed to have come back to life.

DOC · 24th December 2012, 01:14 PM

Originally Posted by catsmate1

{Archaeologist William M.} Ramsay was an xian apologist, even his fellow xians considered his nonsense embarrassing and detrimental to xianity..

Source?

DOC · 24th December 2012, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by ddt

Bingo!

Really, DOC, don't you get tired of rehashing the same old tired, debunked arguments...

As long as people keep putting up Bible evidence threads, I have the right to keep putting up evidence. If you disagree with my evidence then point out why? If you don't like my posts then block me, it's very simple. Believe it or not there are new people to Randi that have never heard some of this material, and they might be able to offer more information or a different viewpoint.

dafydd · 24th December 2012, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

Source?

Common sense.

DOC · 24th December 2012, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by dafydd

Not that again. That must be the twentieth time that you have rehearsed that broken argument...

And this must be the 20th bible evidence thread. If you're tired of biblical evidence then you should stay out of evidence threads or block me.

dafydd · 24th December 2012, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

And this must be the 20th bible evidence thread. If you're tired of biblical evidence then you should stay out of evidence threads or block me.

You're far too entertaining. Your desperate attempts to find some logic in your belief in a primitive superstition are something to behold.

Slowvehicle · 24th December 2012, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

As long as people keep putting up Bible evidence threads, I have the right to keep putting up evidence. If you disagree with my evidence then point out why? If you don't like my posts then block me, it's very simple. Believe it or not there are new people to Randi that have never heard some of this material, and they might be able to offer more information or a different viewpoint.

...perhaps you should try putting up actual evidence, instead of apologetics...

dafydd · 24th December 2012, 01:49 PM

Doc, why are you a Hindu atheist?

dafydd · 24th December 2012, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by Slowvehicle

...perhaps you should try putting up actual evidence, instead of apologetics...

And stop using the bible to try and prove that the bible is true.

dafydd · 24th December 2012, 01:56 PM

Doc, the Hindus believe in their gods and they have a holy book to prove it. Why is their holy book a fiction and your holy book fact?

TimCallahan · 24th December 2012, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by DOC

Not when you have multiple writers (including one who has been called a 1st class historian) saying Jesus appeared to many other people afterward.

According to the Gospel of Mark, the only evidence of a resurrection is the empty tomb.

According to the Gospel of Luke, the risen Jesus first appeared to two unnamed apostles as they were walking to Emmaus, then to the 11 surviving disciples in Jerusalem.

According to the Gospel of Matthew, the risen Jesus first appeared to Mary Magdalene and "the other Mary" after an angel had appeared to them at the tomb. Then he appeared to the 11 surviving disciples in Galilee - not Jerusalem.

According to the Gospel of John, the risen Christ appeared first to Mary Magdalene in the garden Outside the tomb. Then he appeared to the disciples in Jerusalem. Later, he appeared to them at the "sea" of Galilee.

According to 1 Corinthians 15:5 - , the risen Christ first appeared to Cephas (Peter), then to the 12 (Judas, too?), then to over 500 brethren, then to James, then to "all the apostles," then to Paul.

So, here we have five accounts, none of which agree. Were these witnesses at a trial, their conflicting testimony would be virtually useless.

As to Luke, your "first-class historian," he doesn't even claim to be an eyewitness (Lk. 1:1 - 4).

So, DOC, did Jesus appear to nobody - as Mak has it, first to two women, first to Mary Magdalene alone, first to two guys on the road to Emmaus, or first to Cephas? These can't all be true at the same time.

Did he specifically tell his disciples not to leave Jerusalem, as Luke has it, or did he tell them to specifically leave jerusalem to meet him in Galilee, as Matthew has it? It has to be one or another. They both can't be true.

23rd December 2012, 01:04 PM	#201
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,680	Originally Posted by DOC Actually Jesus' empty tomb shortly after his death as reported by gospel writer Luke (who has been called a first-class historian by Sir William M. Ramsay) is some evidence of a miracle resurrection. It is not proof but it is some historical evidence that a miracle took place. No it isn't. It's just a story in an old story book. That is not evidence.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

23rd December 2012, 01:16 PM	#203
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by dafydd No it isn't. It's just a story in an old story book. That is not evidence. When a person like Luke, who has been called a first class historian by a famous archaeologist, writes something as fact, that is historical evidence.
	Last edited by DOC; 23rd December 2012 at 01:28 PM.

23rd December 2012, 01:33 PM	#205
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,680	Originally Posted by DOC When a person like Luke, who has been called a first class historian by a famous archaeologist, writes something as fact, that is historical evidence. The bible is not historical evidence, it doesn't matter what the old archaeologist called Luke.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

23rd December 2012, 01:35 PM	#206
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,680	Originally Posted by DOC Not when you have multiple writers (including one who has been called a 1st class historian) saying Jesus appeared to many other people afterward. None of the alleged witnesses wrote anything down, the gospels were not written until later.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

23rd December 2012, 01:38 PM	#207
Akhenaten Heretic Pharaoh Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia Posts: 24,749	Originally Posted by DOC When a person like Luke, who has been called a first class historian by a famous archaeologist, writes something as fact, that is historical evidence. Drivel.
	__________________ Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon The Australasian Skeptics Forum

23rd December 2012, 01:09 PM	#202
Rincewind Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 1,182	Actually, DOC, as has been pointed out to you many times, an empty tomb is only evidence of an empty tomb. It's identified as JC's tomb by people with an agenda - notably Constantine's mother, IIRC. So, to call it JC's tomb is just a leap of faith.... And I agree with you - it makes no sense at all for Christianity to exist without a resurrection. However, wanting, and needing a resurrection doesn't make it true.

23rd December 2012, 01:26 PM	#204
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by Rincewind Actually, DOC, as has been pointed out to you many times, an empty tomb is only evidence of an empty tomb. Not when you have multiple writers (including one who has been called a 1st class historian) saying Jesus appeared to many other people afterward.

23rd December 2012, 01:41 PM	#208
Akhenaten Heretic Pharaoh Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia Posts: 24,749	Originally Posted by DOC Originally Posted by Rincewind Actually, DOC, as has been pointed out to you many times, an empty tomb is only evidence of an empty tomb. Not when you have multiple writers (including one who has been called a 1st class historian) saying Jesus appeared to many other people afterward. I note that you use the word 'writers' (although goodness knows what they could have been writing on) rather than the word 'witnesses'. Why is that, DOC?
	__________________ Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon The Australasian Skeptics Forum

23rd December 2012, 01:41 PM	#209
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 27,257	Originally Posted by DOC Actually Jesus' empty tomb shortly after his death as reported by gospel writer Luke (who has been called a first-class historian by Sir William M. Ramsay) is some evidence of a miracle resurrection. It is not proof but it is some historical evidence that a miracle took place. Also one must consider that it doesn't even make sense for Christianity to exist to the extent it does today without a resurrection since the resurrection is the main focal point of the entire religion. Even the apostle Paul said "If Jesus is not risen, our faith is in vain." And according to Bart Ehrman we have historical evidence of Jesus' death as early as 32 CE. Here is what Ehrman (who stated Jesus "certainly existed" on pg. 173) said on page 164 of his new book "Did Jesus exist?": "And it is important to remember that Jews were saying that Jesus was the crucified messiah in the early 30s. We can date their claims to at least 32 CE, when Paul began persecuting these Jews. In fact, their claims must have originated even earlier. Paul knew Jesus's right-hand man, Peter, and Jesus's brother James. They are evidence that this belief in the crucified messiah goes all the way back to a short time after Jesus's death." __ So the fact that we have historical evidence of an empty tomb and historical evidence of the historical figure Paul stating without Jesus rising our faith is in vain and the fact that Christianity is the #1 religion in the world today is some evidence that a resurrection took place since it doesn't make sense for Christianity to even exist today without a resurrection. This is not proof but it is some historical and logical evidence of a miracle resurrection. So the existence of Christianity proves the resurrection and the resurrection proves Christianity. O

23rd December 2012, 01:45 PM	#210
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,680	Originally Posted by Akhenaten I note that you use the word 'writers' (although goodness knows what they could have been writing on) rather than the word 'witnesses'. Why is that, DOC? Perhaps we can have the hearsay discussion with Doc, again.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

23rd December 2012, 01:52 PM	#211
catsmate1 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Dublin (the one in Ireland) Posts: 7,247	Originally Posted by DOC When a person like Luke, who has been called a first class historian by a famous archaeologist, writes something as fact, that is historical evidence. Utter rubbish. You demonstrate (yet again) that you have no understanding of what "evidence" actually means are are willing to lie and distort to shore up your need for belief. Ramsay was an xian apologist, even his fellow xians considered his nonsense embarrassing and detrimental to xianity. As for the "great historian" Luke, we've dealt with this stupidity many times before yet you continue to recycle it.
	__________________ Yes I gave in and configured an avatar.

23rd December 2012, 01:53 PM	#212
catsmate1 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Dublin (the one in Ireland) Posts: 7,247	Originally Posted by dafydd Perhaps we can have the hearsay discussion with Doc, again. I'm sure he'll repeat the lie about Ramsay being an atheist who was converted to xianity by the "evidence".
	__________________ Yes I gave in and configured an avatar.

23rd December 2012, 01:56 PM	#213
Rincewind Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 1,182	Originally Posted by DOC Not when you have multiple writers (including one who has been called a 1st class historian) saying Jesus appeared to many other people afterward. Actually, I've just had a quick look at Luke's book - There's nothing I can see that details where the tomb was. So - it's unbelievable that anybody can be certain that any tomb is the "right" one, unless, of course, you have an agenda, and have no interest in truth, honesty and evidence....

23rd December 2012, 05:25 PM	#214
John Jones Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 3,831	Originally Posted by DOC Not when you have multiple writers (including one who has been called a 1st class historian) saying Jesus appeared to many other people afterward. Not this broken record again! Give it a rest!
John Jones Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 3,831

24th December 2012, 02:27 AM	#215
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by Akhenaten I note that you use the word 'writers' (although goodness knows what they could have been writing on) rather than the word 'witnesses'. Why is that, DOC? If someone dug up a 1st century manuscript that said my name is John and I witnessed Jesus Christ rise from the dead, would your beliefs change any? ETA Also there is evidence that New Testament writers Matthew, John, and Peter, were apostles, and thus witnesses.
	Last edited by DOC; 24th December 2012 at 02:30 AM.

24th December 2012, 02:34 AM	#216
Lowpro Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 4,650	Originally Posted by DOC If someone dug up a 1st century manuscript that said my name is John and I witnessed Jesus Christ rise from the dead, would your beliefs change any? ETA Also there is evidence that New Testament writers Matthew, John, and Peter, were apostles, and thus witnesses. The exact same thing could be said for any cult in the first century. DOC, if a millennia later someone were to pick up "the adventures of huckleberry Finn" which tells the travels of a young whippersnapper traveling down the Mississippi would it be wise for that person to accept this as testament to a factual event? People wrote fiction then as much as they wrote fiction now...
	__________________ "If I actually believed that Jesus was coming to end the world in 2050, I'd be preparing by stocking up on timber and nails" - PZ Myers

24th December 2012, 02:42 AM	#217
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by DOC Actually Jesus' empty tomb shortly after his death as reported by gospel writer Luke (who has been called a first-class historian by Sir William M. Ramsay) is some evidence of a miracle resurrection. It is not proof but it is some historical evidence that a miracle took place. Also one must consider that it doesn't even make sense for Christianity to exist to the extent it does today without a resurrection since the resurrection is the main focal point of the entire religion. Even the apostle Paul said "If Jesus is not risen, our faith is in vain." And according to Bart Ehrman we have historical evidence of Jesus' death as early as 32 CE. Here is what Ehrman (who stated Jesus "certainly existed" on pg. 173) said on page 164 of his new book "Did Jesus exist?": "And it is important to remember that Jews were saying that Jesus was the crucified messiah in the early 30s. We can date their claims to at least 32 CE, when Paul began persecuting these Jews. In fact, their claims must have originated even earlier. Paul knew Jesus's right-hand man, Peter, and Jesus's brother James. They are evidence that this belief in the crucified messiah goes all the way back to a short time after Jesus's death." __ So the fact that we have historical evidence of an empty tomb and historical evidence of the historical figure Paul stating without Jesus rising our faith is in vain and the fact that Christianity is the #1 religion in the world today is some evidence that a resurrection took place since it doesn't make sense for Christianity to even exist today without a resurrection. This is not proof but it is some historical and logical evidence of a miracle resurrection. Originally Posted by tsig So the existence of Christianity proves the resurrection and the resurrection proves Christianity. O That is your statement not mine, read the last sentence of my quote.

24th December 2012, 02:48 AM	#218
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by Lowpro ...People wrote fiction then as much as they wrote fiction now... Besides "your" belief that the New Testament was written as fiction name some 1st century Judea fiction.

24th December 2012, 02:52 AM	#219
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by John Jones Not this broken record again! Give it a rest! As long as people keep saying things like there is no "evidence" of miracles, like was done in this thread, I have the right to respond.

24th December 2012, 03:07 AM	#220
Aepervius Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Bierland. I mean , germany. Posts: 7,891	Originally Posted by DOC When a person like Luke, who has been called a first class historian by a famous archaeologist, writes something as fact, that is historical evidence. I had to make a double take on the date. Youa re still trotting that dumb story about luke being a first class historien ? Woot.
	__________________ Omnes Blessant Ultima necat "I want, and this is my last and most dear wish, I want that the last of the king be strangled with the guts of the last priest" (Jean Meslier / 1664-1729 / Testament) A very early french atheist, a catholic priest in life.

24th December 2012, 04:19 AM	#221
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by Aepervius I had to make a double take on the date. Youa re still trotting that dumb story about luke being a first class historien ? It's only dumb if you think the person who made the statement---archaeologist Sir William M. Ramsay who spent 15 years digging in biblical lands---is dumb.

24th December 2012, 04:33 AM	#222
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by Rincewind ...And I agree with you - it makes no sense at all for Christianity to exist without a resurrection...big print added Then one has to wonder why it does indeed exist (and is the largest religion in the world) if there was no resurrection, especially when believing it in the 1st century could have got you crucified, beheaded, or covered with wax then impaled on a post and set on fire---not exactly a list of perks.
	Last edited by DOC; 24th December 2012 at 04:39 AM.

24th December 2012, 05:39 AM	#223
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,680	Originally Posted by DOC If someone dug up a 1st century manuscript that said my name is John and I witnessed Jesus Christ rise from the dead, would your beliefs change any? No. Fiction is fiction.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

24th December 2012, 05:40 AM	#224
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,680	Originally Posted by DOC It's only dumb if you think the person who made the statement---archaeologist Sir William M. Ramsay who spent 15 years digging in biblical lands---is dumb. Digging holes to support a fiction is rather dumb.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

24th December 2012, 05:42 AM	#225
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,680	Originally Posted by DOC Then one has to wonder why it does indeed exist (and is the largest religion in the world) if there was no resurrection, especially when believing it in the 1st century could have got you crucified, beheaded, or covered with wax then impaled on a post and set on fire---not exactly a list of perks. Nutters have always been with us.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

24th December 2012, 06:09 AM	#226
Akhenaten Heretic Pharaoh Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia Posts: 24,749	Originally Posted by DOC Originally Posted by Akhenaten I note that you use the word 'writers' (although goodness knows what they could have been writing on) rather than the word 'witnesses'. Why is that, DOC? If someone dug up a 1st century manuscript that said my name is John and I witnessed Jesus Christ rise from the dead, would your beliefs change any? I don't have any beliefs since I prefer to follow the evidence. What have you got? Originally Posted by DOC ETA Also there is evidence that New Testament writers Matthew, John, and Peter, were apostles, and thus witnesses. No there's not, as has been amply demonstrated in TTTWND. Is that why you've abandoned that thread and are attempting to spam this one with your 17th Rate apologetics instead?
	__________________ Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon The Australasian Skeptics Forum

24th December 2012, 06:37 AM	#227
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,680	Originally Posted by DOC Besides "your" belief that the New Testament was written as fiction name some 1st century Judea fiction. Given the absence of a publishing industry, any folk tales and legends current at the time will do.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away. Last edited by dafydd; 24th December 2012 at 06:40 AM.

24th December 2012, 12:59 PM	#228
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by dafydd None of the alleged witnesses wrote anything down, the gospels were not written until later. How do you know they didn't write anything down. We have no signature of Julius Caesar, the most powerful man in the world at one time. Does that mean he never wrote his name? ETA Also we have no contemporary writings in existence concerning Alexander the Great, the man who conquered much of the world, including Jerusalem, except for one offhand remark in a letter, and one inscription. Does that mean no one else at the time of Alexander wrote anything down concerning him.
	Last edited by DOC; 24th December 2012 at 01:06 PM.

24th December 2012, 01:04 PM	#229
ddt Mafia Penguin Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 10,406	Bingo! Really, DOC, don't you get tired of rehashing the same old tired, debunked arguments? How is it with that translation of Luke 2:1-2, BTW? We haven't finished that discussion, I'm still awaiting a reaction to my translation of those verses, and my arguments why the translation you put forth is incorrect.
	__________________ Proud member of the Solipsistic Autosycophant's Group Last edited by ddt; 24th December 2012 at 01:06 PM.

24th December 2012, 01:09 PM	#230
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,680	Originally Posted by DOC How do you know they didn't write anything down. We have no signature of Julius Caesar, the most powerful man in the world at one time. Does that mean he never wrote his name? ETA Also we have no contemporary writings in existence concerning Alexander the Great, the man who conquered much of the world, including Jerusalem, except for one offhand remark in a letter, and one inscription. Does that mean no one else at the time of Alexander wrote anything down concerning him. Not that again. That must be the twentieth time that you have rehearsed that broken argument. Alexander and Julius Caesar actually existed and had no miracles attributed to them and were not supposed to have come back to life.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

24th December 2012, 01:14 PM	#231
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by catsmate1 {Archaeologist William M.} Ramsay was an xian apologist, even his fellow xians considered his nonsense embarrassing and detrimental to xianity.. Source?

24th December 2012, 01:26 PM	#232
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by ddt Bingo! Really, DOC, don't you get tired of rehashing the same old tired, debunked arguments... As long as people keep putting up Bible evidence threads, I have the right to keep putting up evidence. If you disagree with my evidence then point out why? If you don't like my posts then block me, it's very simple. Believe it or not there are new people to Randi that have never heard some of this material, and they might be able to offer more information or a different viewpoint.

24th December 2012, 01:31 PM	#233
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,680	Originally Posted by DOC Source? Common sense.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

24th December 2012, 01:43 PM	#234
DOC Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: USA Posts: 7,788	Originally Posted by dafydd Not that again. That must be the twentieth time that you have rehearsed that broken argument... And this must be the 20th bible evidence thread. If you're tired of biblical evidence then you should stay out of evidence threads or block me.

24th December 2012, 01:45 PM	#235
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,680	Originally Posted by DOC And this must be the 20th bible evidence thread. If you're tired of biblical evidence then you should stay out of evidence threads or block me. You're far too entertaining. Your desperate attempts to find some logic in your belief in a primitive superstition are something to behold.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away. Last edited by dafydd; 24th December 2012 at 01:47 PM.