Let's cut to the chase: did the resurrection happen?

[Haven]

Recently, there have been a lot of threads on topics related to the resurrection of Jesus (empty tomb, supernaturalism vs. naturalism, historical records, and so on). I think it may be helpful to discuss the big picture: did the resurrection of Jesus happen or not? This thread is the place to discuss it: offer any argument for or against the resurrection. Hopefully this will be a good discussion.

Debate question: Was Jesus resurrected from the dead?

_________
Thread rules:
1) Offer evidence or logical argument. Simply providing Bible quotes isn't sufficient.
2) Faith, while valid on a personal level, isn't evidence for a claim. Provide empirical evidence from history, textual criticism, physics, and so on, not simply statements of faith.
3) Be kind to each other. All of us, regardless of our religious position, are conscious beings deserving of respect and civility.

[DefenderofTruth]

.

Fine, if he doesn't care to look at the evidence that is his own choice.

When one offers Youtube videos as "evidence" their position is no more credible than offering comic books as evidence -- or Sunday school pamphlets and coloring books.

Bit irrational if you ask me, but hey if that is how you will justify not even looking into the answers i give to your every own questions.. Fine.. You asked, i gave an answer are sourced two different sources which you ignored both, because one was a "youtube video"... Im not going to force you to look at anything i source, but you might as well just retract the question for all I'm concerned.

And just to note, you haven't scoured a single thing in this entire debate. In fact i don't think i have ever seen you source anything, but thing i source something you are too good to look at... Ok Z, suit yourself... How about we get back on topic and you answer post 51...

This "what if you seen the Devil, how would you know?" has proved to be a meaningless debate...

DoT, I disagree with Z, here. I think that offering a YouTube as evidence is a fine tactic. You're basically saying that a presentation provides a better breakdown/summary of points in a better manner than would be advantageous in words on this site. It's like referencing a book or journal.

However, it would be wise of you to explain the primary points of the Youtube so that there is a clear understanding of what premises and conclusions the viewer is expected to deal with. Why should the viewer be convinced of what you are proposing? How does the video do a better job explaining than your explanation of those points?

I believe if you gave a summary of the main points in the video and expressed why the video does a better job of evidencing those points it would help advance the debate.

Ya ok, thanks for the reply.

Let me elaborate the. First of all, Christians believe that Christ Crucified is the Power of God. I think there is evidence of this, Christ is certainly the Cornerstone of the temple and even holds power in His name. That is why christianity believes that if you confess Christ, that has power. Christians believe just confessing Christ's name is the power of God. Christ is a rock in which God has made as a stumbling block and even as foolishness, God did that to the message of Christ Crucified. We see people stumble on the rock that is Christ, we see peoples perspective that the message is foolishness. We relate to Christ like that and the scripture doesn't hide that fact. But it is also known (in scripture) that Christ is the power of God. This is why i believe we see irrational objections to Christ, not all the time but a lot.

Anyways the very name has power imbedded in it. Go read the 3 epistles of John, that is how we test spirits to see wether it is a spirit from God or not. Actually the "anti-christ" is first talked about in these books. People make the anti-christ out to be a single person in the world but they don't know that the 'anti-christ' is an actual spirit anyone can hold. It is the "spirit of the anti-christ". This is how the scripture says you can tests spirit, and this was Z's question.

The youtube video i linked is the testimony of a man who experienced this, not in people like you or i, but in an actual "spirit" they came to him. He was a non believer and claims to have been visited by a spirit that claimed to be God but as soon as he tested the spirit in Christ's name it was revealed otherwise. The spirit was actually of the Divil and it was a result of using the name of Christ to test the spirit.


So this is just answers to the question that Z had... Thats all it was. This guy wasn't even a believer and had no knowledge of what the Bible said about it, but Christ's name proved to be effective in this story... so.. It is just addressing the question Z asked... It is 2 separate sources, one from the Bible and another from an atheist (that later converted)..

[Hatuey]

[Replying to post 61 by DefenderofTruth]

Nicely summarized, DoT!

Let's imagine a nearly identical claim, position, and testimonia-via-YouTube for another religious belief. (Say Islam or Mormon). Do you think you would be more or less receptive than Z? Why or why not?

[DefenderofTruth]

[Replying to post 61 by DefenderofTruth]

Nicely summarized, DoT!

Let's imagine a nearly identical claim, position, and testimonia-via-YouTube for another religious belief. (Say Islam or Mormon). Do you think you would be more or less receptive than Z? Why or why not?

Well id like to see it... hypothetical questions aren't as valid as a real question.. But i would like to refer you to post 39 of this thread. I think i answered this question in #39.

[Hatuey]

[Replying to post 63 by DefenderofTruth]

Over the decades, I have seen hundreds of arguments and testimonials for various beliefs. I have found none of them to be particularly credible, but they all ask me to believe because SOME people were convinced. When I have pressed for a reason more than that some people are convinced, I am invariably told that the position is "true," and therefore within my best interests to believe.

Do you believe, as I do, that if you were indoctrinated into a different religion (or belief-set) that your arguments and testimonials would be similar and just as worthy/unworthy?

[Korah]

[Replying to post 63 by DefenderofTruth]
Yes, I referred back to #39.
Instead of a lot of reasoning or facts to support Christian beliefs,
you acknowledge that supernatural intervention could make you believe something else.
Certainly consider any such vision or intervention, but....
Pray about it.
Examine your conscience. Might you have been recently dabbling in the occult or other gateways to demonic spirits entering you?
Just wanted to enter a note of skepticism here. Trust no one, but nevertheless follow your heart if you know it's pure and are sure you did not leave yourself open to demonic deception.
May you find the Truth (more Truth, I assume) and it set you free. Be aware Truth can be an awful burden. Maybe, yeah here it comes,
"You can't stand the Truth!" as Jack Nicholson's character shouted.

[Zzyzx]

.

Bit irrational if you ask me, but hey if that is how you will justify not even looking into the answers i give to your every own questions.. Fine..

Is it irrational to discount Youtube videos (or comics or coloring books) or unverifiable bible tales as evidence in debate?

You asked, i gave an answer are sourced two different sources which you ignored both, because one was a "youtube video"... Im not going to force you to look at anything i source, but you might as well just retract the question for all I'm concerned.

There was mention of something in John. Kindly provide citation / URL

And just to note, you haven't scoured a single thing in this entire debate. In fact i don't think i have ever seen you source anything, but thing i source something you are too good to look at... Ok Z, suit yourself...

What, exactly, should I "source?" Have I made claims that were not substantiated if challenged?

One might correctly observe that I make no claims of knowledge that I do not possess. I leave that to those who attempt to defend ancient tales, opinions and beliefs as though they were true and accurate.

How about we get back on topic and you answer post 51...

Okay – if you are done complaining about my posts.

I don't know what you are trying to imply here buddy...

I asked you the question because i am curious about what your side of the debate is, given the questions you are asking.

Well "Buddy", my position is that there is no credible assurance that the tale of "resurrection" (dead bodies coming back to life) is truthful and accurate or anything other than product of human imagination. Citing the tales themselves as "proof" of truth may be convincing in church but we are not in church.

Would you like me to provide reference to forensic biological description of decomposition processes that occur after death of a human and are regarded as irreversible? I have done that several times in various threads – to responses such as "That didn't happen in my favorite stories of long ago and far away" or "God can do anything – I just know it."

This "what if you seen the Devil, how would you know?" has proved to be a meaningless debate...

It may not be meaningless to those who realize that there is no credible means offered to determine the identity of a supposed supernatural entity. Muslims claim to see Mohammad while Christians claim to see Jesus and others claim to see aliens (or Elvis).

[DefenderofTruth]

[Replying to post 63 by DefenderofTruth]

Over the decades, I have seen hundreds of arguments and testimonials for various beliefs. I have found none of them to be particularly credible, but they all ask me to believe because SOME people were convinced. When I have pressed for a reason more than that some people are convinced, I am invariably told that the position is "true," and therefore within my best interests to believe.

Do you believe, as I do, that if you were indoctrinated into a different religion (or belief-set) that your arguments and testimonials would be similar and just as worthy/unworthy?

No way do i believe in the slightest. I realize that i have always had my own thinking, and my own freewill, apart from everyone else. My parents never had any influence on me. My parents did go to church on Sundays, which i tried to weasel out of every chance i got, but they never talked with me about God. I would bring cigarettes to summer camp and do whatever i wanted...

But its funny looking back at it, i realize now that i always wanted to be transformed and free to worship God. I had that tug in my heart my entire life, i see that now, to be excepted for just me. The problem was my own fault. It was kind of scary to take that leap of faith and it didn't happen. I instead turned to my sin, which the Bible prophesies. If you fail to glorify God and give thanks to God you will be turned over to your own sin (Romans 1). I dropped out of school, did a lot of drugs, and basically lived in my own sin.

I was later sold to those who reject God, a group of people who claim to heal addiction and change lives but also reject Christ. I liken it to a cheap knockoff of a rebirth (which i had a tug in my heart all my life). I was not indoctrinated, and the Bible did nothing but show truth.

I think the very idea of a "rebirth" goes against indoctrination. We all have our own freewill. Even the Bible says those who follow their parents above God do not deserve to be a apostle of Christ (somewhere in Matthew). It has always been a personal choice. And in fact i looked to any other religion before Christ. It's irrational because Christ is true.


It wasn't believers that opened my eyes, it was nonbelievers. It was the nonbelievers who surrounded me, i don't think i ever knew a Christian or had a Christian friend my entire life. Looking back i suspect my childhood best friend might have been a Christian but i can not say that for certain. I never knew Christians out of Church, and i barely knew anyone in church. But I surely knew hordes of nonbelievers. I was one of many in the broad path of destruction, the Bible makes it known. It was when i realized these people meant nothing to me when i was finally free to search God. Where they failed to have meaning, Christ succeeded. I had never received the clarity the Bible gave to me.


That was just my path and how it played out, and scripture is right in line with my personal life. Before i was a Christian and after, scripture depicts the details of my life and the world around me. And i do not think it is a coincident that scripture depicts my personal life and the world around me so well. It is because it is the message of God.

[Hatuey]

[Replying to post 65 by Korah]

I thought it was "...handle the truth."

[Hatuey]

[Replying to post 67 by DefenderofTruth]

But you were raised in a country where 90% of the population was "Christian" right? If you had been raised in a country where 90% of the population professed Islam, do you still think you would be Christian?

[DefenderofTruth]

.

Bit irrational if you ask me, but hey if that is how you will justify not even looking into the answers i give to your every own questions.. Fine..

Is it irrational to discount Youtube videos (or comics or coloring books) or unverifiable bible tales as evidence in debate?

You asked, i gave an answer are sourced two different sources which you ignored both, because one was a "youtube video"... Im not going to force you to look at anything i source, but you might as well just retract the question for all I'm concerned.

There was mention of something in John. Kindly provide citation / URL

And just to note, you haven't scoured a single thing in this entire debate. In fact i don't think i have ever seen you source anything, but thing i source something you are too good to look at... Ok Z, suit yourself...

What, exactly, should I "source?" Have I made claims that were not substantiated if challenged?

One might correctly observe that I make no claims of knowledge that I do not possess. I leave that to those who attempt to defend ancient tales, opinions and beliefs as though they were true and accurate.

How about we get back on topic and you answer post 51...

Okay – if you are done complaining about my posts.

I don't know what you are trying to imply here buddy...

I asked you the question because i am curious about what your side of the debate is, given the questions you are asking.

Well "Buddy", my position is that there is no credible assurance that the tale of "resurrection" (dead bodies coming back to life) is truthful and accurate or anything other than product of human imagination. Citing the tales themselves as "proof" of truth may be convincing in church but we are not in church.

Would you like me to provide reference to forensic biological description of decomposition processes that occur after death of a human and are regarded as irreversible? I have done that several times in various threads – to responses such as "That didn't happen in my favorite stories of long ago and far away" or "God can do anything – I just know it."

This "what if you seen the Devil, how would you know?" has proved to be a meaningless debate...

It may not be meaningless to those who realize that there is no credible means offered to determine the identity of a supposed supernatural entity. Muslims claim to see Mohammad while Christians claim to see Jesus and others claim to see aliens (or Elvis).

It may not be meaningless to those who realize that there is no credible means offered to determine the identity of a supposed supernatural entity. Muslims claim to see Mohammad while Christians claim to see Jesus and others claim to see aliens (or Elvis).

The quote above is just a generalization of what you think is true. Ya you probably should link some sources..

Sense you refuse to even look at my sources, saying "there is no credible means offered to determine the identity of a supposed supernatural entity." before you even examine the evidence (irrational rejection of my response to a question you posed). What did you think i would answer? You posed a question about the Devil (which you don't even believe) and i gave you the response Christians believe (which, again, you don't even believe... shocking...)

But I was kind enough to spell it out for you in post #61... How about you don't pose questions you don't even believe to be true? How about that?