Good question P4JC.Pastor4Jesus wrote:
What would it take to prove that Jesus rose from the dead. giving that it happened way before cameras etc were invented?
P4JC
What would it take to prove that Jesus rose from the dead?
Moderator: Moderators
-
McCulloch
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24063
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
- Location: Toronto, ON, CA
- Been thanked: 3 times
What would it take to prove that Jesus rose from the dead?
Post #1Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
-
Pastor4Jesus
- Sage
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:41 am
- Location: Far East TN Mountains
Post #51
I may of too much liberty with the assumption that the atheist readership would even admit that the crucifixion happened! So maybe we should present evdience for that first?
P4JC
P4JC
When Selfish Gene author Richard Dawkins challenged physicist John Barrow on his formulation of the constants of nature at last summer Templeton-Cambridge Journalism Fellowship lectures, Barrow laughed and said, “You have a problem with these ideas, Richard, because you aren''t really a scientist. You''re a biologist ! (Woo Hoo you go Barrow!)
-
McCulloch
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24063
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
- Location: Toronto, ON, CA
- Been thanked: 3 times
Post #52
You would be correct. Please proceed with the evidence that the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth by the Romans actually happened.Pastor4Jesus wrote:I may of too much liberty with the assumption that the atheist readership would even admit that the crucifixion happened! So maybe we should present evidence for that first?
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
-
JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2573 times
Post #53
"With all due respect", that's a stupid, inflammatory statement.Pastor4Jesus wrote:With all due respect, from my experience, most atheists would not believe that God was real even if he came down from heaven and took over the world.
Vague prophecies are unverifiable.Pastor4Jesus wrote: Stay tuned! That may happen, but some other things prophesied MUST happen first! The bible tells us that when a few profound things happen, the time of the second coming is nay (near!). The (Jewish) temple still must be rebuilt which just might start WW3. Then there is the prophesy that the Russia will invade Israel along with an mid eastern nation...Iran maybe? I.e. Iran and Russia...
P4JC
Does the Bible name Russia specifically, or does it just mention some army from the north?
This is important because while we're all watching Russia, Lichtenstein could be ready to pounce!
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
-
JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2573 times
Post #54
Just present something and quit carrying on about what evidence you seem to think you posses.Pastor4Jesus wrote:I may of too much liberty with the assumption that the atheist readership would even admit that the crucifixion happened! So maybe we should present evdience for that first?
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
-
Tired of the Nonsense
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 5680
- Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:01 pm
- Location: USA
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #55
Pastor4Jesus wrote:
I may of too much liberty with the assumption that the atheist readership would even admit that the crucifixion happened! So maybe we should present evdience for that first?
Tired of the Nonsense answers:
The thought police decided that my old name was inflammatory so I am now Tired of the Nonsense. I think the name Elvis Presley was taken.
It's well documented historically that the Romans used crucifixion as a means of executing non-Roman citizens during this period. Was Jesus crucified? Well it's not implausible and I for one am not arguing against it. It's when we come to the story of the resurrection however that we we have a serious plausibility problem. Clearly you don't agree. What would possibly make you reach the conclusion that the implausible is not only plausible, but in fact actually occurred?
I may of too much liberty with the assumption that the atheist readership would even admit that the crucifixion happened! So maybe we should present evdience for that first?
Tired of the Nonsense answers:
The thought police decided that my old name was inflammatory so I am now Tired of the Nonsense. I think the name Elvis Presley was taken.
It's well documented historically that the Romans used crucifixion as a means of executing non-Roman citizens during this period. Was Jesus crucified? Well it's not implausible and I for one am not arguing against it. It's when we come to the story of the resurrection however that we we have a serious plausibility problem. Clearly you don't agree. What would possibly make you reach the conclusion that the implausible is not only plausible, but in fact actually occurred?
Last edited by Tired of the Nonsense on Fri Nov 13, 2009 10:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Post #56
What starts the implausibility of the entire crucifixion story is the account of the trial of Jesus. It is against Jewish law and custom and historical accounts. It is very polemic against the Jews, which is what you would expect from a community that isTired of the BS wrote:Pastor4Jesus wrote:
I may of too much liberty with the assumption that the atheist readership would even admit that the crucifixion happened! So maybe we should present evdience for that first?
Tired of the BS answers:
It's well documented historically that the Romans used crucifixion as a means of executing non-Roman citizens during this period. Was Jesus crucified? Well it's not implausible and I for one am not arguing against it. It's when we come to the story of the resurrection however that we we have a serious plausibility problem. Clearly you don't agree. What would possibly make you reach the conclusion that the implausible is not only plausible, but in fact actually occurred?
insulted that they got kicked out of being able to worship in the same services for heresy
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
Post #57
The thread is already derailing. Is the thread going to focus on the historical details of Jesus' life or the supernatural claim re: his ressurection? I think the two need to remain separate. Mixing them will only contribute to each side drawing faulty and premature conclusions. We shall see... 
-
Tired of the Nonsense
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 5680
- Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:01 pm
- Location: USA
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #58
Goat wrote:
What starts the implausibility of the entire crucifixion story is the account of the trial of Jesus. It is against Jewish law and custom and historical accounts. It is very polemic against the Jews, which is what you would expect from a community that is insulted that they got kicked out of being able to worship in the same services for heresy.
Tired of the Nonsense answers:
The thought police decided that my old name was inflammatory so I am now Tired of the Nonsense. I think the name Elvis Presley was taken.
There are various aspects of the story that don't really mesh well with normal Jewish practice. For the Jewish leadership to have even stepped foot in a place as inherently unclean as a graveyard on a high holy day is another example. But since these aspects of the story don't essentially defy the known laws of physics, there is no real point in debating them. The resurrection story is another matter altogether.
What starts the implausibility of the entire crucifixion story is the account of the trial of Jesus. It is against Jewish law and custom and historical accounts. It is very polemic against the Jews, which is what you would expect from a community that is insulted that they got kicked out of being able to worship in the same services for heresy.
Tired of the Nonsense answers:
The thought police decided that my old name was inflammatory so I am now Tired of the Nonsense. I think the name Elvis Presley was taken.
There are various aspects of the story that don't really mesh well with normal Jewish practice. For the Jewish leadership to have even stepped foot in a place as inherently unclean as a graveyard on a high holy day is another example. But since these aspects of the story don't essentially defy the known laws of physics, there is no real point in debating them. The resurrection story is another matter altogether.
-
cnorman18
Post #59
As a member in good standing of the Thought Police, I thought I'd correct that impression.Tired of the Nonsense wrote:
The thought police decided that my old name was inflammatory so I am now Tired of the Nonsense. I think the name Elvis Presley was taken.
We don't allow members to use the term "BS" in regard to the arguments of others; THAT is inflammatory as well as offensive (to some). It's simply a matter of consistency; you don't get a special privilege to use the term because you put it in your username. This is, after all, a family site.
Have you tried "Chuck Berry"?
-
Flail
proofs
Post #60In the area of proofs, I imagine that many men were crucified in the day...However, proving that one of them was a God and thereater arose from the dead is another matter all together...even more difficult in the area of proofs is the notion that Jesus' mom was a virgin and that no man, including her husband, had ever copulated with her at which time God himself impregnanted her ...that's impossible to swallow on hearsay dont you think?...come on now....
