History

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11476
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 327 times
Been thanked: 374 times

History

Post #1

Post by 1213 »

Often it is asked can Christian demonstrate something that happened long time ago to be a fact. I don’t know how to demonstrate any historical matter to be a fact. So, my question is, can you prove any historical matter to be a fact? Please give one example and how would you demonstrate it is a fact and not just someone’s story?

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11476
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 327 times
Been thanked: 374 times

Re: History

Post #31

Post by 1213 »

Goat wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:30 pm How is that a true statement? What is your reasoning, and what evidence causes you to claim that?
People do not write about things that are unimpressive for them. If you disagree, please show one example where person has written about something that was not in some way impressive for him?

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Re: History

Post #32

Post by Goat »

1213 wrote: Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:53 pm
Goat wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:30 pm How is that a true statement? What is your reasoning, and what evidence causes you to claim that?
People do not write about things that are unimpressive for them. If you disagree, please show one example where person has written about something that was not in some way impressive for him?
Yet, people can and do make things up. For example, there was never a person known as 'Scarlett O'hara, and hogswart does not exist as a real place.
“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

User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: History

Post #33

Post by Willum »

[Replying to Goat in post #32]

1213 does not seem to acknowledge that most archives, accounts, ledgers, indeed, most things are boring accounts people do.

Nor how correct you are; who hasn’t written the odd short story for fun.
But writing about elves and magic doesn’t make them real.

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Re: History

Post #34

Post by Goat »

1213 wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 2:32 am
Willum wrote: Wed Sep 02, 2020 3:55 pm ...That Jesus raised the dead, is not even documented by the survivor, or anyone close to him.
...
Someone documented it because we have the Bible. Now, why would someone who is not close to Jesus do it? Why would anyone believe it if it is not from someone that was close to Jesus?
However, when it comes to 'raising someone from the dead' , we have this barrier known as 'how the world works'. We also have examples of 'people making stories up'. When someone makes a claim contrary to how the world as we observe it works, then it i likely that either the interpretation of what the person saw is wrong (the person was only unconscious and not dead, and things got exaggerated), or it could be that a story was made up to give Jesus mystical powers to show his divinity. Either of those scenerios are much more likely that a person actually being dead dead, and then brought back to life. When it comes to 'turning water into wine, and 'walking on water', those are much more likely to be 'things people made up '
“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

User avatar
The Nice Centurion
Sage
Posts: 953
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2022 12:47 pm
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 98 times

Re: History

Post #35

Post by The Nice Centurion »

brunumb wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 8:07 pm
1213 wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:34 pm
Willum wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 8:09 am ...
Lazarus did not record his experience, no one recorded his experience, not even the Bible...
What would it change if we would have his experience written? Would you believe someone’s testimony about that?
That's not the issue. The fact that such an extraordinary event made no significant impression on anybody is what is disconcerting. The same applies to other events like dead saints coming out of their graves and walking the streets. Dead people coming back to life should be making the equivalent of headline news and the stories should have spread like wildfire. As it is, what we have comes across as nothing more than comic book stories of their day.
Spread like wildfire it would maybe today, when we have death certificates for everyone, printed, visable and social media, modern medicine . . .
Even your word "headlines" gives you away; there was no printing machine then.

Coming back from "death" was not that seldom at last until the 19th century. Edgar Allan Poe was obsessed with it.
But which case, besides his obsession, is known until today?
“If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. But if you drown a man in a fish pond, he will never have to go hungry again🐟

"Only Experts in Reformed Egyptian should be allowed to critique the Book of Mormon❗"

"Joseph Smith can't possibly have been a deceiver.
For if he had been, the Angel Moroni never would have taken the risk of enthrusting him with the Golden Plates❗"

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 6002
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6627 times
Been thanked: 3222 times

Re: History

Post #36

Post by brunumb »

The Nice Centurion wrote: Sun Jul 10, 2022 7:01 pm
brunumb wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 8:07 pm
1213 wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:34 pm
Willum wrote: Thu Sep 03, 2020 8:09 am ...
Lazarus did not record his experience, no one recorded his experience, not even the Bible...
What would it change if we would have his experience written? Would you believe someone’s testimony about that?
That's not the issue. The fact that such an extraordinary event made no significant impression on anybody is what is disconcerting. The same applies to other events like dead saints coming out of their graves and walking the streets. Dead people coming back to life should be making the equivalent of headline news and the stories should have spread like wildfire. As it is, what we have comes across as nothing more than comic book stories of their day.
Spread like wildfire it would maybe today, when we have death certificates for everyone, printed, visable and social media, modern medicine . . .
Even your word "headlines" gives you away; there was no printing machine then.

Coming back from "death" was not that seldom at last until the 19th century. Edgar Allan Poe was obsessed with it.
But which case, besides his obsession, is known until today?
You may pick on my choice of wording, but the truth is that word of mouth would have been a significant means of spreading such extraordinary news. How did Jesus allegedly amass such a following? We have all these records of mundane events from back in the day, but miraculous events seem to be confined to just a few 'divinely inspired' writings collected in the form of religious propaganda.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.

Post Reply