Violating 'Law'

[POI]

Wild claims are a dime a dozen. We hear them all the time, and they come in all forms, shapes, and sizes. The term 'wild' is somewhat subjective in and of itself and ultimately lies within the eye of the beholder. A 'wild' claim to you may not seem so 'wild' to me, and vice versa. Further, some of these 'wild' claims are a little more believable than others. And others, are instead downright dismissed without any initial consideration what-so-ever.

In this particular case, let's investigate claim(s) surrounding deemed clinically dead bodies; which are also presumed to be decomposing, due to 'natural law'. And these claim(s) assert that these dead and decomposing bodies violated "natural law" by returning to life. (See Matthew 27:52-53 and/or John 11:44 for reference). Do we agree that these are 'wild' claim(s)? Assuming we agree here, let's trek forward...

A believer in these assertions comes along and makes the following statement:

These people were so convinced in their experience and so believable and completely credible that others have fully accepted their testimony on the basis of their character, having little or even nothing to do with the details of the telling. You tell me something unbelievable and I believe it having not seen what you saw, but believing YOU. And I tell two friends and they tell two friends, and years later a couple of folks decide that this all should be written down and preserved for posterity.

But countless people are convinced of things which are false in reality. Hence, the steadfast and earnest belief itself renders no merit as to (whether or not) the claim is actually true. So maybe this particular arguing point isn't really that convincing after all? Further, the above touches upon the "Halo Effect" and "charisma". Meaning, believable and confident people project authority and likeability, which triggers a cognitive bias where others may assume their claims are accurate. Heck, some of the recipients of these tales told may later even become inspired to write about these received upon claim(s). Further, fallacious reasoning, or the 'appeal to ethos', may be presented here. Meaning, relying solely upon the speaker/presenter(s) character, rather than instead the actual substance. This is also known as "ad verecundiam", or the "appeal to authority".

For debate: I'm not saying that 'natural law' cannot be violated. I'm instead asking why I should believe in these particular expressed 'wild' claim(s), in violating natural law?

[1213]

...
For debate: I'm not saying that 'natural law' cannot be violated. I'm instead asking why I should believe in these particular expressed 'wild' claim(s), in violating natural law?

I understand that POI is interested only answers that he likes. But, for others, I don't say anyone should believe, I can only say, I believe because I trust the Bible. And the reasons why I trust the Bible is: I think the teachings are good and I think it has true information that I don't think humans would have without God's influence.

But, about dead coming back to life, if modern people can believe life came spontaneously, even without God, from non living material in the beginning, why would it be a wild claim, if the same would happen more than once? If "natural law" allows such miracles, I think it is wild to call anything in the Bible a wild claim.

[Mr E]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

For debate: I'm not saying that 'natural law' cannot be violated. I'm instead asking why I should believe in these particular expressed 'wild' claim(s), in violating natural law?

As a semi-pro level debater, that's a shaky start and a wobbly premise to base a case upon. "I'm not saying that natural law cannot be violated."

You're also not saying it can be violated, but because of your wording, that might be supposed. I'll take the opposing premise as your counter and say unequivocally that natural law cannot be violated.

And I love philosophy btw. I'm a student of Socrates, Aristotle and Plato aka 'the trinity.' Of course by observation and within our understanding of it, natural law IS broken all the time, which tells me that our understanding of 'the law' is incomplete and that there is more hidden than understood, naturally.

-ah, but that wasn't your question! You are asking 'why' you should believe in these particular 'wild' claims. I'll agree with @1213 and say-- You absolutely should not. If it seems unlikely, you should greet the claim with some degree of skepticism. If it seems impossible, your approach should be incredulity, until proven otherwise. On the flip, if it's only unlikely and not impossible you should reserve some small portion of your intellect for the off-chance of truth being apprehended beyond your experience and ability to comprehend, in which case you must suspend your disbelief despite your biases.

Look, I get it. You've lost your key fob. This isn't a search for Big Foot. It's not a wild goose chase. Christianity is a perfectly good vehicle and you once rode about town, dressed neatly and smiling politely back and forth to church on Sundays, but now you have lost your keys. You know the keys are real, you once held them in your hand -and this is why you are here searching. You really do want to find them again, and I applaud your effort. I'm going to try to help you by shining a light where ever you look. In all your pockets, under the bed, in your gym bag, beside the nightstand, between the couch cushions. Let's retrace your steps and not give up.

I guarantee that you will find the key in the last place you look, because once you find it, you will stop searching. Until then, all you are doing is focusing your attention on places where you've found no key. This question is a lot like your last question and probably a lot like all of your questions. It's like looking for your key on top of the kitchen cabinets-- it's unlikely to yield a discovery because it's an absurd place to search. Not impossible, just very unlikely. IF you were to find the fob in such a place and you know you never put it there, well that would make for quite a story because it was so unlikely.

Now if we were in a book club and as a group we were reading a book called-- Strange Tales and Unlikely Events, there could be a chapter called 'The Puzzling Case of POI's Missing Key Fob.'
How did it get on top of the kitchen cabinets? Room for much speculation and mystery.... was it some kind of translocation? Supernatural phenom? -- that means "not natural" and in violation of natural law (as we understand it).

And we are exploring together just such a book. It's a book of the supernatural. A strikingly silly place to be surprised by wild stories.

[POI]

As a semi-pro level debater, that's a shaky start and a wobbly premise to base a case upon. "I'm not saying that natural law cannot be violated." You're also not saying it can be violated, but because of your wording, that might be supposed. I'll take the opposing premise as your counter and say unequivocally that natural law cannot be violated.

All I'm saying is that there exist natural law(s) surrounding the fact(s) that dead and decomposing bodies remain doing so. And any dead and decomposing bodies which get up and walk, could only do so by violating this/these particular "natural law(s)".

And I love philosophy btw. I'm a student of Socrates, Aristotle and Plato aka 'the trinity.'

Noted.

Of course by observation and within our understanding of it, natural law IS broken all the time.

Does this include dead and decomposing bodies getting up and walking all the time?

If not, then we agree that dead and rotting bodies do not get up and walk, due to the identified 'natural law'. So, why do you make exception(s) in where the Bible makes such claims to dead and decomposing bodies getting up and walking? So far, you've given a response, in which I have addressed twice now. See the original post for your quote, as well as post #60 of our prior thread.

Look, I get it. You've lost your key fob. This isn't a search for Big Foot. It's not a wild goose chase. Christianity is a perfectly good vehicle and you once rode about town, dressed neatly and smiling politely back and forth to church on Sundays, but now you have lost your keys. You know the keys are real, you once held them in your hand -and this is why you are here searching. You really do want to find them again, and I applaud your effort. I'm going to try to help you by shining a light where ever you look. In all your pockets, under the bed, in your gym bag, beside the nightstand, between the couch cushions. Let's retrace your steps and not give up.

No Mr. E., I later realized that the proverbial 'key fob' may have been a figment of my imagination all along. You presume the proverbial 'key fob' exists and yet have not demonstrated that the 'key fob' is actually real.

You've also mentioned "Bigfoot." I might be searching for something that hasn't even been proven to exist, like 'Bigfoot.' Much like the proverbial asserted mislocated 'key fob', 'Bigfoot' remains unlocated. I guess we need to keep looking?

I guarantee that you will find the key in the last place you look, because once you find it, you will stop searching. Until then, all you are doing is focusing your attention on places where you've found no key. This question is a lot like your last question and probably a lot like all of your questions. It's like looking for your key on top of the kitchen cabinets-- it's unlikely to yield a discovery because it's an absurd place to search. Not impossible, just very unlikely. IF you were to find the fob in such a place and you know you never put it there, well that would make for quite a story because it was so unlikely.

Since you will likely be unable to actually demonstrate the existence of this metaphorical 'key fob' itself, why don't you at least cut to the chase and tell me where I should be looking?

[Mr E]

[Replying to POI in post #4]

Good Morning.

If not, then we agree that dead and rotting bodies do not get up and walk, due to the identified 'natural law'. So, why do you make exception(s) in where the Bible makes such claims to dead and decomposing bodies getting up and walking? So far, you've given a response, in which I have addressed twice now. See the original post for your quote, as well as post #60 of our prior thread.

umm.... it's a miracle. You have a hang up. Maybe just a hang over. It seems you stick your nose often into this book of supernatural encounters, carefully parsing out instances in a concerted effort to diminish and discredit. Like shooting fish in a barrel, right? You are quite the sportsman. It's a book of dreams and visions and spiritual encounters and other dimensional interactions-- and miracles for which we have no corresponding experience to explain. Good God, man-- have you no room in your noodle for things you can't explain? You're in the wrong book.

To belabor the point, you aren't obsessing over hockey. It's not 'the miracle on ice' that captivates you. It's scripture that intrigues you and it demands your attention. Rent free. You should examine why that is. What is it motivating you?

Let's look at exceptions to the rule-- There are ten recorded instances of 'resurrection' from the dead in scripture. You take issue with exactly two of them, because of this supposed 'rotting flesh' issue that plagues you like a disease. Well, actually exactly like a disease. Maybe you are not bothered by the many examples of lepers (walking around with rotting flesh) being healed, or maybe we should just add those examples to your self-determined list of things that didn't happen. Except for those who were healed, and those who witnessed, say it did. (See your quote of me raising the point and post #60 in the previous thread). You can try to discount the accounts recorded, but it comes across as someone sucking a lemon. Maybe it leaves you with a sour taste, but you'll have to deal with it, since you refuse to drink the Kool-Ade or make lemonade from this book that draws you in to such a degree.

No Mr. E., I later realized that the proverbial 'key fob' may have been a figment of my imagination all along. You presume the proverbial 'key fob' exists and yet have not demonstrated that the 'key fob' is actually real.

You've also mentioned "Bigfoot." I might be searching for something that hasn't even been proven to exist, like 'Bigfoot.' Much like the proverbial asserted mislocated 'key fob', 'Bigfoot' remains unlocated. I guess we need to keep looking?

Sorry-- nope. You don't get to change the parameters of my allegories. The car is real (you used to ride in it) and the fob is real. You used to turn it on. Now apparently it turns you on.

Since you will likely be unable to actually demonstrate the existence of this metaphorical 'key fob' itself, why don't you at least cut to the chase and tell me where I should be looking?

You need to look within. Examine yourself. X-ray, MRI, CT, fluoroscopy, dye staining.... because you are the classic Curious George who swallowed the puzzle piece that's been missing from his perfect picture. That's the key- fob, that you need to move forward in that car again.

You mentioned that there are a few folks that you don't interact with here anymore. Seems a tad bit sensitive for someone who claims to be so stimulated by debating. You don't make the rules and you don't get to impose your views on others in a manner where you dictate how they respond. Get used to it.

[POI]

Let's look at exceptions to the rule-- There are ten recorded instances of 'resurrection' from the dead in scripture. You take issue with exactly two of them, because of this supposed 'rotting flesh' issue that plagues you like a disease. Well, actually exactly like a disease. Maybe you are not bothered by the many examples of lepers (walking around with rotting flesh) being healed, or maybe we should just add those examples to your self-determined list of things that didn't happen. Except for those who were healed, and those who witnessed, say it did. (See your quote of me raising the point and post #60 in the previous thread). You can try to discount the accounts recorded, but it comes across as someone sucking a lemon. Maybe it leaves you with a sour taste, but you'll have to deal with it, since you refuse to drink the Kool-Ade or make lemonade from this book that draws you in to such a degree.

My OP references just two examples. I'm focusing on one element at a time. In this case, why you believe that rotting corpses rise again. I mean, 1) do you believe it was exclusive to this book of tales, or 2) is this more of a frequent thing? Please pick one.

Further, you offered no response from the OP or from post 60. Just baseless 'quips.' 3rd attempt... Please address my response to your quoted statement(s) in the OP.

Sorry-- nope. You don't get to change the parameters of my allegories. The car is real (you used to ride in it) and the fob is real. You used to turn it on. Now apparently it turns you on.

Sorry, but yes. After many decades, I realized I was completely talking to myself in prayer. The 'fob', as also with 'Bigfoot', are likely imaginary. Please prove me wrong.

You need to look within. Examine yourself. X-ray, MRI, CT, fluoroscopy, dye staining.... because you are the classic Curious George who swallowed the puzzle piece that's been missing from his perfect picture. That's the key- fob, that you need to move forward in that car again.

I don't recall such prescribed imaging revealing 'god.' You think it could?

You mentioned that there are a few folks that you don't interact with here anymore. Seems a tad bit sensitive for someone who claims to be so stimulated by debating. You don't make the rules and you don't get to impose your views on others in a manner where you dictate how they respond. Get used to it.

LOL! I didn't stop engaging them because I got my feelings hurt. I stopped because the conversations always went nowhere fast. This is a debate forum. If one is not here to actually do that, that's fine. But I am not obligated to engage them.

[Mr E]

My OP references just two examples. I'm focusing on one element at a time. In this case, why you believe that rotting corpses rise again. I mean, 1) do you believe it was exclusive to this book of tales, or 2) is this more of a frequent thing? Please pick one.

Let me ask you-- Do you believe, or do you know-- can cancer be beaten? What about "terminal" cancer? Spontaneous remission. I'm asking if you believe in miracles-- do you?

It's a rather cheap attempt of rock-throwing to dig into a book of miracles in search of examples of things you don't believe in. If you can't accept the idea that Jesus, or Lazarus for that matter --how about Jonah (?) came back to life after three or more days of bodily decay-- then again-- you're spending your time in the wrong sort of book. Try sudoko to pass the time.

These were his recorded words surrounding the life and death and life of Lazarus-

"I am the resurrection and the life."

"The one who believes in me will live even if he dies, and the one who lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?”

I think the "do you believe this?" -question is every bit as much intended for you as it was for Martha. If not-- pray for faith to fall upon your head.

After many decades, I realized I was completely talking to myself in prayer.

Results may vary. Sounds very much like a you problem.

Further, you offered no response from the OP or from post 60. Just baseless 'quips.' 3rd attempt... Please address my response to your quoted statement(s) in the OP.

Yawn. If you are going to want to continue with me without being constantly exasperated you are going to have to learn how to let some things go. There is nothing more tiresome and boring than trying to converse with some one who gets their feet stuck and cannot or will not move on. From the nagging---

At the time of the resurrection of the Christ-- graves were opened and the bodies of many saints who had died were raised. (They came out of the tombs after his resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.)


It's those many people mentioned that your quivering doubt runs up against. I can answer Jesus' question with a yes. I have no pent up angst that keeps me awake at night. For you?--- Ovaltine.

LOL! I didn't stop engaging them because I got my feelings hurt. I stopped because the conversations always went nowhere fast. This is a debate forum. If one is not here to actually do that, that's fine. But I am not obligated to engage them.

No, you don't have to engage them. Neither should you try so hard to enrage them-- unless that really is your mission here. In the end, you'll add me to your list or otherwise speak to the wind.

[POI]

My OP references just two examples. I'm focusing on one element at a time. In this case, why you believe that rotting corpses rise again. I mean, 1) do you believe it was exclusive to this book of tales, or 2) is this more of a frequent thing? Please pick one.

Let me ask you-- Do you believe, or do you know-- can cancer be beaten? What about "terminal" cancer? Spontaneous remission. I'm asking if you believe in miracles-- do you?

I'll address your question(s) and comment(s) as soon as you start to actually address the meat-and-potatoes of the original post. I asked you why you believe that some dead and decomposing humans started walking, (as told from the Bible), and you stated what you stated. I responded to what you had stated, (from post 55 of the other thread), by pointing out the flaws in your response. This original post asks for you to address my response(s). You have avoided this 4 times now.

We will not venture off elsewhere until you address the OP topic. Please focus up. Here is a reminder of what is missed. You stated:

Mr E wrote: ↑Sat Jul 11, 2026 7:34 am
These people were so convinced in their experience and so believable and completely credible that others have fully accepted their testimony on the basis of their character, having little or even nothing to do with the details of the telling. You tell me something unbelievable and I believe it having not seen what you saw, but believing YOU. And I tell two friends and they tell two friends, and years later a couple of folks decide that this all should be written down and preserved for posterity.

(And then I stated):

But countless people are convinced of things which are false in reality. Hence, the steadfast and earnest belief itself renders no merit as to (whether or not) the claim is actually true. So maybe this particular arguing point isn't really that convincing after all? Further, the above touches upon the "Halo Effect" and "charisma". Meaning, believable and confident people project authority and likeability, which triggers a cognitive bias where others may assume their claims are accurate. Heck, some of the recipients of these tales told may later even become inspired to write about these received upon claim(s). Further, fallacious reasoning, or the 'appeal to ethos', may be presented here. Meaning, relying solely upon the speaker/presenter(s) character, rather than instead the actual substance. This is also known as "ad verecundiam", or the "appeal to authority"

At which point, the shenanigans began.

*******************************

Once the OP content is satisfied, I will happily move on --- Just like we both moved on in the last thread topic, to many other things, once we both agreed, or slightly agreed to disagree, on the main point of the OP of that topic.

Thnx

[Mr E]

[Replying to POI in post #8]


I'll address this again. One last time after which I'll no longer indulge your sense of importance to the question. I really don't know how to make it more clear.

These people were so convinced in their experience and so believable and completely credible that others have fully accepted their testimony on the basis of their character, having little or even nothing to do with the details of the telling. You tell me something unbelievable and I believe it having not seen what you saw, but believing YOU. And I tell two friends and they tell two friends, and years later a couple of folks decide that this all should be written down and preserved for posterity.

The people involved AND the contemporary eye witnesses to these events were changed forever. You don't have a long list of contemporary POI's screaming in the temple courts or on street corners saying- "Nope-- Liars! Didn't happen). What you do have in the immediate aftermath of these events is thousands of people being persuaded by the testimony of participants and witnesses, and then billions later saying-- we accept those testimonials. I'll ignore the 'die for a lie' argument, but you can't escape the fact that first century Christians really did face persecution, torture and death for sticking to the story. (Nero, Domitian and the Jews alike).

Don't accuse me of shenanigans, just because you don't like the response, or I'll call double, counter-shenanigans on you. See how that works?

I'm not your personal pacifier.

[POI]

I'll address this again.

What do you mean 'again'? Remember, I asked if you wanted to create a new topic or if you wanted me to? You stated for me to 'choose away.' My response, in the OP, was in direct response to what looks to be THE reason(s) you except these particular WILD claims from the Bible. In post 69 of the other thread, you stated "I too, tailor my conversations toward those who bask in the comfort of doctrine and dogma that they neither understand nor can they defend." Well, this is exactly what I'm doing. I'm going straight for the jugular. And thus far, you have completely dodged the inquiry.

A few lines later, you also stated "Let's roll along merrily to other topics. I guarantee you will be (shocked and amazed) at some of the positions I support." Well, so far, I'm neither.

One last time after which I'll no longer indulge your sense of importance to the question. I really don't know how to make it more clear.

Again, this will be the first. And again, I asked if you wanted to create a topic, and you instead deferred to me, for which you never really addressed in the first place. Anywho....

The people involved AND the contemporary eye witnesses to these events were changed forever...... (and).... What you do have in the immediate aftermath of these events is thousands of people being persuaded by the testimony of participants and witnesses, and then billions later saying--we accept those testimonials

It's as if you did not even see my response in the original post? (i.e. - my unaddressed response(s) from the original post):

Countless people are convinced of things which are false in reality. Hence, the steadfast and earnest belief itself renders no merit as to (whether or not) the claim is actually true. So maybe this particular arguing point isn't really that convincing after all?"

(and)

Further, the above touches upon the "Halo Effect" and "charisma". Meaning, believable and confident people project authority and likeability, which triggers a cognitive bias where others may assume their claims are accurate. Heck, some of the recipients of these tales told may later even become inspired to write about these received upon claim(s).

(and from post 60 of the previous thread)

1) Who exactly, and how exactly do we know this?
2) How do we know what they really actually saw?
3) Were these folks ever really vetted?

Remember Mr. E, we are only referring to the largest and greatest collection of claim(s) ever told here. I also mentioned how, when a WILD claim is ever actually vetted, it quickly seems to unravel or fall apart. In this case however, we have no actual forensic investigation(s) to these WILD claims. Lucky for you, huh?

You don't have a long list of contemporary POI's screaming in the temple courts or on street corners saying- "Nope-- Liars! Didn't happen

We don't have a long list of contemporaries saying anything (for or against).

I'll ignore the 'die for a lie' argument,

Great, because it's a lousy argument to make.

you can't escape the fact that first century Christians really did face persecution, torture and death for sticking to the story. (Nero, Domitian and the Jews alike).

This is a bad argument Mr. E. During this era, the Romans executed believers of other faiths as well. Usually for political subversion or perceived immorality rather than their specific theology. If you are going to continue sticking with this particular argument, then believers in other god(s) carry just as much 'veracity' as yours.

Don't accuse me of shenanigans, just because you don't like the response

I rightfully accused you of shenanigans because you never actually addressed the OP topic. You immediately came in with 'quips'. Please remember, I gave you the opportunity to create a topic. You deferred to me. And when I did, you immediately dodged; and I'm now starting to see why. Your given apologetics offers nothing convincing or even intellectually consistent.