Let's cut to the chase. Do you have any evidence?

[no evidence no belief]

I feel like we've been beating around the bush for... 6000 years!

Can you please either provide some evidence for your supernatural beliefs, or admit that you have no evidence?

If you believe there once was a talking donkey (Numbers 22) could you please provide evidence?

If you believe there once was a zombie invasion in Jerusalem (Mat 27) could you please provide evidence?

If you believe in the flying horse (Islam) could you please provide evidence?

Walking on water, virgin births, radioactive spiders who give you superpowers, turning water into wine, turning iron into gold, demons, goblins, ghosts, hobbits, elves, angels, unicorns and Santa.

Can you PLEASE provide evidence?

[JohnA]

Spontaneous, lets define:
1.performed or occurring as a result of a sudden inner impulse or inclination and without premeditation or external stimulus.

This is different from having Jesus providing the external stimulus. If you want me to concede the issue that I didn't make properly, I will. People do rise from the dead, but they do so spontaneously without external influence. There is no evidence that another human has power to make another person come back to life as told in the Lazarus story.

Fair enough for now.

I explain them the same way that I explain how David Koresh was wrong. Jim Jones was also. They were true believers and gave up their lives also. Marshall Applewhite is no different. People who claim to have been abducted by aliens are just as valid as Paul and James. Do you believe a person who claims to have been abducted by aliens? If not, why?

You are still offering a mash up of strung together ad hoc explanations to account for the all the facts. When there is one single explanation that powerfully explains all the data - Jesus rose from the dead.

But your scripture and dodma clearly states that your belief is based on faith.
So, how can there be evidence if all you have is faith?

You are merely arguing that your scripture and dogma is incorrect. And you use this this argument to argue that your scripture is correct.

I posted this here as well (in more detail) and am sure you will work your way though this and offer more self-refuting/imploding dogma for this:
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 589#601589

Good luck!

[Goose]

What in your view makes the bodily resurrection more plausible than, say, mass hallucination? I'm asking this because I want to discus the matter with you and not attack someone else's thoughts that I may already know.

You're asking the wrong question. What we personally think may or may not be plausible is irrelevant to what actually happened. We should be asking what is the best explanation that accounts for all the facts with scope and power. A mass hallucination hypothesis would not account for Paul's conversion. You'll need another ad hoc explanation for Paul.

[Star]

What in your view makes the bodily resurrection more plausible than, say, mass hallucination? I'm asking this because I want to discus the matter with you and not attack someone else's thoughts that I may already know.

You're asking the wrong question. What we personally think may or may not be plausible is irrelevant to what actually happened. We should be asking what is the best explanation that accounts for all the facts with scope and power. A mass hallucination hypothesis would not account for Paul's conversion. You'll need another ad hoc explanation for Paul.

Your conversion argument is the perfect example of an argument from ignorance.

You don't understand how Paul could have converted if your religion isn't true.

We, on the other-hand, see people converting to and from various religions all the time. It's not proof of anything other than your disingenuousness. People are easily fooled, especially superstitious people who lived thousands of years ago

[Nickman]

Spontaneous, lets define:
1.performed or occurring as a result of a sudden inner impulse or inclination and without premeditation or external stimulus.

This is different from having Jesus providing the external stimulus. If you want me to concede the issue that I didn't make properly, I will. People do rise from the dead, but they do so spontaneously without external influence. There is no evidence that another human has power to make another person come back to life as told in the Lazarus story.

Fair enough for now.

I explain them the same way that I explain how David Koresh was wrong. Jim Jones was also. They were true believers and gave up their lives also. Marshall Applewhite is no different. People who claim to have been abducted by aliens are just as valid as Paul and James. Do you believe a person who claims to have been abducted by aliens? If not, why?

You are still offering a mash up of strung together ad hoc explanations to account for the all the facts. When there is one single explanation that powerfully explains all the data - Jesus rose from the dead.

It is not ad hoc. Do you believe a person who says that they were abducted by aliens? Say that a person comes to you and tells you they were abducted by aliens. They tell you that they used to be a militant adversary to those who claimed they were abducted by aliens. But one night, when they were sleeping, they were abducted by aliens. Now they are witness to alien abduction. They tell you that their life has been changed forever and that the aliens want us to be good to each other. Would you believe them?

[Goose]

How is not? Would your contention be this is an ordinary every day type of occurrence? If so, when was the last time you witnessed the leader of a country stabbed to death in broad daylight by a large group of politicians?

The size of the group means nothing. Assassinations occured regularly in history.

http://listverse.com/2007/10/28/the-10- ... sinations/

False. Caesar doesn't die like everyone else - that's the point - as most people die ordinary by natural causes. Caesar dies extraordinarily. I'm sure how you can argue his death was ordinary.

I guess MLK, JFK, Malcom X, and Abraham Lincoln are extraordinary too.

In other words, both stories are extraordinary.

No they are not. Assassinations are common, regardless of how many people do it. Ever heard of Gaddafi?

Wiki
Muammar Gaddafi, the deposed leader of Libya, died on 20 October 2011 during the Battle of Sirte. Gaddafi was found hiding in a culvert west of Sirte and captured by National Transitional Council forces. He was killed shortly afterwards. The NTC initially claimed he died from injuries sustained in a firefight when loyalist forces attempted to free him, although videos of his last moments show rebel fighters beating him before he was shot dead.

You need to check your reasoning here. You are begging the question by assuming every alleged assassination you are referencing was in fact an assassination. I could do the same and trot out a list of alleged resurrections throughout history with the assumption they really were resurrections thus making resurrections seem as though they have occurred regularly throughout history as well. Thus making resurrections, by your reasoning, just as ordinary as assassinations.

[Goose]

Tell you what, Goose. I'm NOT familiar with the minimal facts approach, so mayhap you'd be kind enough to go ahead and lay out your proofs for me?

The Minimal Facts Approach is to look at historical facts that a wide range of scholars tend to hold to, even some critics. They are roughly as follows.

1. The disciples believed that Jesus rose from the dead and made appearances.
2. Paul converted because of his experience.

It is good to keep in mind that Paul never met Jesus, ever. His conversion had nothing to do with seeing Jesus. His conversion came, according to Paul and the account by Luke, after Paul had some kind of seizure and illness and later reported he'd seen Jesus in a vision. It is also good to keep in mind that Paul's writings pre date the gospel accounts and that Paul seems oblivious to those accounts.

We don't need Paul to have met Jesus. In fact, I would argue it strengthens the case that he did not since we need a powerful explanation for his conversion. Setting aside the fact the NT in no way records Paul as having a seizure, even if he had you then need other ad hoc explanations for James' conversion and the disciples belief that Jesus had appeared to them.

[Goose]

I had a good chuckle at this. It's true that you only need one example to falsify his premise, however, you don't have one. Jesus rising from the dead is a fairy tale. Lazarus Syndrome, if you read your article, has many possible medical explanations for it. Even still, that's NOT rising from the dead. These patients were already in the process of being resuscitated.

I certainly do have a counter example. And you are right there are, as the article claims, "Various mechanisms have been suggested as explanation for the phenomenon." This suggests that they don't really know what causes the phenomenon. The explanations put forward are speculative - educated guesses. What is indisputable is "the patient was pronounced dead" according to the article and subsequently returned to life unassisted. Dead, then alive. That is by definition a resurrection and thus falsifies the premise dead people don't come back to life.

[micatala]

to suggest that there exists no evidence for the supernatural is technically the same as suggesting that there is no supernatural. .

So is suggesting that there exists as yet no evidence to support string theory technically the same as suggesting that string theory is wrong?

No, to suggest that we don't have evidence at this point is also correct. These guys were just picking on a technicality. Minor issue.

Dear Doctor instantc,

. . . .


Please elaborate Doctor instantc. You need to now convince us that your assertions hold any water (and in no way do I wish to allege that you are anything short of a genius).

Thank you.

Moderator Comment

You have used this address for Instantc several times now in this thread.

Creating modified versions of the usernames of others is not really civil. Please simply address other members using their chosen monikers.



Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Goose]

Assassinations/murder in Ancient Rome were NOT extraordinary! For your edification, here is a list of assassinated Roman emperors:

See my post to Nickman, post #1143. You're committing the same fallacy Nickman is.

[Goose]

So Goose, you are arguing that the bible is wrong when it says faith is a belief based on no evidence (Heb11:1) since you have evidence for the resurrection of Jesus to claim to KNOW that Jesus was a supernatural god.

Firstly, I don't agree with your interpretation of Hebrews 11. Secondly, and more importantly, this is a Red Herring since the thread is asking for Christians to give evidence for their beliefs or admit they have none.