Atheism truth, is nonexistent

[Tart]

Can we all just agree, right off the bat, that there is no amount of burden of proof atheism can bare to establish that it is accurate and correct? That atheism has no valid right to claim any truth claims about God, whether He does or does not exist, they simply cant make any determining claims of truth in the regard of Gods existence... And all the truth claims, and positive evidence rest on the side of Christianity (between atheism is Christianity that is)...

Can we just agree, there is no truth claims atheism can make?

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 59 by FarWanderer]

The question of guards becomes secondary when you consider that the existence of Joseph of Arimathea and the tomb itself are both questionable. Neither has any provenance.

"In contrast to many other places mentioned in the Bible, there is no evidence that Arimathea existed (despite attempts to equate it to Ramallah, Ramah, etc). The name Arimathea means "best disciple town", so it's a bit suspicious as an invention. Joseph himself is never mentioned again, and does not appear in extra-Biblical sources. It's also unclear whether Joseph would have had the time to bury Jesus as described, with the necessity to negotiate with the Romans, buy cloth, get the body, and place it in the tomb by nightfall. And a prominent Jew would not have been able to handle a corpse before Passover without becoming unclean. There is also the contradiction that the Sanhedrin is supposed to have unanimously condemned Jesus to death (according to Mark), and yet supposedly Joseph was on the council."
(https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Joseph_of_Arimathea)

The tomb was allegedly only occupied for a few hours so wouldn't the owner have subsequently used it for himself and his family? Why are there no records of it. Joseph and his heirs would have regarded the tomb as a very special place based on what happened and it surely would not have simply disappeared from history. It all certainly smacks of contrived fiction.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 60 by Tart]

Im just trying to make sense of the evidence... At what point do we establish fictional events in the Gospels? Where do we draw the lines? Clearly we are drawing the lines on speculation at this point... Evidence is important, positive evidence...

You have a story and nothing to support that story. There is no empirical evidence that anything in the story actually occurred.

[Tart]

[Replying to post 60 by Tart]

Im just trying to make sense of the evidence... At what point do we establish fictional events in the Gospels? Where do we draw the lines? Clearly we are drawing the lines on speculation at this point... Evidence is important, positive evidence...

You have a story and nothing to support that story. There is no empirical evidence that anything in the story actually occurred.

You think the entire Bible is fiction?

[Tart]

I mean, that could be an actual explanation of the entire story, which is what im searching for, if it was true... The Bible is entire fiction, would explain everything in the Bible if it was true...

The problem with it is, that is laughable... No one believes such things, and is clearly just a gross generalization in a debate forum...

Id encourage you to go investigate the evidence...

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 60 by Tart]

Im just trying to make sense of the evidence... At what point do we establish fictional events in the Gospels? Where do we draw the lines? Clearly we are drawing the lines on speculation at this point... Evidence is important, positive evidence...

You have a story and nothing to support that story. There is no empirical evidence that anything in the story actually occurred.

You think the entire Bible is fiction?

Putting aside the minor truths in the Bible, it is largely a work of fiction. Religious propaganda. Is your thinking along the lines that because real places and existing people are mentioned in the James Bond books, that is enough evidence to conclude that the stories are accounts of real events?

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 64 by Tart]

Id encourage you to go investigate the evidence...

None of the supernatural events described in the Bible are supported by any empirical evidence. There is nothing to investigate. The fact that some places or people mentioned in the Bible can be verified does not in any way validate the story itself.

[Tart]

Who's real in James Bond?

[Tart]

Yes, i have yet to see any fictional person that is anywhere comparable to the historical evidence of Jesus Christ, and i invite anyone to bring anything of fiction or myth to the evidence of Jesus...

I have yet to see anyone...

[Goat]

Perhaps it doesnt make sense, becuase you dont want it to make sense....

"Jesus is the Messiah" give us an explanation for the scripture in all, as whole... All the prophets, the fulfillment of the law, the promises, the witnesses, dozens or scores of people and sources, are supported by this explanation... They all support each other, and support Jesus as the Messiah...

I would suggest people who dont agree with that, it is becuase they dont want to agree with it... Its very clearly, easily to see. The Bible has references from all over depicting this exact narrative. The people who disagree, are people who want to impose there beliefs, as not accepting Christ, on the evidence...

The thing is the claims in the bible are the claims, not the evidence. The way that the Christians view the Messiah, and the way that they reinterpreted the Jewish scriptures to try to reinvent the concept of the Messiah seems overly complicated.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 59 by FarWanderer]

The question of guards becomes secondary when you consider that the existence of Joseph of Arimathea and the tomb itself are both questionable. Neither has any provenance.

"In contrast to many other places mentioned in the Bible, there is no evidence that Arimathea existed (despite attempts to equate it to Ramallah, Ramah, etc). The name Arimathea means "best disciple town", so it's a bit suspicious as an invention. Joseph himself is never mentioned again, and does not appear in extra-Biblical sources. It's also unclear whether Joseph would have had the time to bury Jesus as described, with the necessity to negotiate with the Romans, buy cloth, get the body, and place it in the tomb by nightfall. And a prominent Jew would not have been able to handle a corpse before Passover without becoming unclean. There is also the contradiction that the Sanhedrin is supposed to have unanimously condemned Jesus to death (according to Mark), and yet supposedly Joseph was on the council."
(https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Joseph_of_Arimathea)

The tomb was allegedly only occupied for a few hours so wouldn't the owner have subsequently used it for himself and his family? Why are there no records of it. Joseph and his heirs would have regarded the tomb as a very special place based on what happened and it surely would not have simply disappeared from history. It all certainly smacks of contrived fiction.

If this were a teleplay, a script for a TV show, I'd classify Joey of Ari as a literary device, something invented out of whole cloth merely so as to say here's how Jesus got into a tomb. Think about it. He's a rich man, whom Jesus has supposedly said will not get into heaven. He's in with the ruling powers of Jerusalem, but not only that...he's a secret disciple of Jesus! Wow...when did that happen? Surely such a high ranking member of Jesus's group would have been mentioned beforehand in the stories, Jesus himself would have mentioned it to the apostles.
That's honestly how it feels to me. Someone somewhere at some point in the spreading of the Jesus rumours thought to themselves "Nuts, how did Jesus get into the tomb? The only thing that makes sense...is if the tomb owner was a Jesus disciple! That MUST have been how it went down!" and then, through the magic of the Telephone effect, this grew into a quote unquote actual person named Joseph of Best Disciple Town.
Think about it. After Jesus gets into the tomb, Joey vanishes completely. He disappears as quickly as he appeared in the story. When the rumours start spreading about Jesus coming back, the Jewish high priests, and/or Pilate dont call him in and ask him what is going on. Why wouldn't they? Jesus was in his tomb, after all, and according to Gospel Matthew, that tomb had guards and seals.