Impracticality of resurrection

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
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

Impracticality of resurrection

Post #1

Post by Willum »

That a man, or men were brought back from the dead is often trivialized, by saying “God can do anything.“

Resurrection, is practically, very difficult. It would be easier to blacken 1000 stars, have a married bachelor, create a triangle with angles whose sum exceeds 180, and so on, than it would be to resurrect a body three days dead.

I find the statement, “God can do anything,” intellectually lazy, and as a justification, poor, one any eight-year-old could come up with, and write it in a book.

Further, for all of its impossibility, it is not a very effective way to tell the truth. A reasonable man, even several reasonable eyewitnesses and several accounts of such an event, would explain it more reasonably as a large scale deception or magicians trick.

Certainly an omniscience deity could trivially discover a better way.

The topic for debate is twofold, why would an omniscient God use such an ineffective method for communicating the truth, and why, would any reasonable person to believe this method?
Last edited by Willum on Sat Jun 11, 2022 6:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
We_Are_VENOM
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1632
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:33 am
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Impracticality of resurrection

Post #131

Post by We_Are_VENOM »

Athetotheist wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 10:05 pm Just calling me wrong-wrong-wrong is hardly a substitute for refuting the positions I've taken.
"You're wrong, and here's why.."

or

"You're wrong, and that's that"

It is kind of like choosing between working a full day, or working a half day.

Just depends on how you feel at the time.
Or is it the info in the link I posted that you can't refute?
Sure, go with that.
Venni Vetti Vecci!!

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 931 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Impracticality of resurrection

Post #132

Post by TRANSPONDER »

'Wrong and here's why' seems to be just because you disagree. We need some decent reasons, otherwise we see no case., which must imply that you haven't one.

User avatar
oldbadger
Guru
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 220 times

Re: Impracticality of resurrection

Post #133

Post by oldbadger »

We_Are_VENOM wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 9:59 am
Paul didn't write down anything about the Baptist, Jesus, their missions, any incidents, and I don't think he cared much about them.
OR, he wasn't writing with/for those intended purposes.

Ever think of that one?
[/quote]
Absolutely! He didn't give a hoot about any of it. Yes, I thought about that one.

User avatar
oldbadger
Guru
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 220 times

Re: Impracticality of resurrection

Post #134

Post by oldbadger »

We_Are_VENOM wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 10:45 am
If the Bible doesn't care about what happened during that last week excluding the things that it recorded about the last week, then neither do I.

Your concerns, as genuine as they are...pertains to a whole lot of NOTHING.
I don't think you know much about that last week.
Oh well, if you're not involved with the historical research side of things, then you're not.

User avatar
We_Are_VENOM
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1632
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:33 am
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Impracticality of resurrection

Post #135

Post by We_Are_VENOM »

oldbadger wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 5:43 pm I don't think you know much about that last week.
Oh well, if you're not involved with the historical research side of things, then you're not.
I am, I'm just not involved with whatever it is you are going on about.
Venni Vetti Vecci!!

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 931 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Impracticality of resurrection

Post #136

Post by TRANSPONDER »

I know. I recall that you said somewhere that you didn't think it mattered that Paul said nearly nothing about the things that Jesus did, but a lot about the significance of this resurrection. You can opt out of the discussion if you want, but it is just one of the bothersome things about the evidence. I'm struck by how many Jesus -ish things Paul said but in a context that looked like he was saying it himself. For this and many, many other reasons, I reckon that the Gospels are based on Paul's teachings rather than Jesus'. It would make sense. After the Jewish wars, Jewish Christianity was on the back foot, and Christianity was being taught by Paul's converts with the stories having Jesus recite the things that Paul said.

I wonder whether that remark about the powers of darkness is said by Luke whom (I believe) adapted his gospel to reflect what was in Paul's letters. I'll see whether Luke said it (prediction ;) )There you go Luke 22. 53 When I was daily with you in the temple, ye stretched forth no hands against me: but this is your hour, and the power of darkness. And the Paul passage.

hang on, I'm also looking up this one
I Cornthians 2:8
None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Because this might be reflected in Father. forgive them' (the Romans) which again i predict ought to be in Luke.

Yes Luke 23. 34Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” And they divided up his clothes by casting lots.

I can predict where something should be and it so often pans out and i can even guess why it is in that Gospel and no other and even what it means.

Can you see why I am thinking this method works?

User avatar
We_Are_VENOM
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1632
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:33 am
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Impracticality of resurrection

Post #137

Post by We_Are_VENOM »

oldbadger wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 5:39 pm Absolutely! He didn't give a hoot about any of it. Yes, I thought about that one.
Wow, here we have another text book example of a non sequitur.

1. Paul didn't write down anything about the Baptist, Jesus, their missions, any incidents.

2. Therefore, Paul did not care about the Baptist, Jesus, their missions, or any incidents.

Aristotle is turning over in his grave with that kind of illogical thinking.
Venni Vetti Vecci!!

User avatar
oldbadger
Guru
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 220 times

Re: Impracticality of resurrection

Post #138

Post by oldbadger »

We_Are_VENOM wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 7:57 pm
oldbadger wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 5:43 pm I don't think you know much about that last week.
Oh well, if you're not involved with the historical research side of things, then you're not.
I am, I'm just not involved with whatever it is you are going on about.
QED
.......'whatever it is'...... eh?
I don't think you have any idea about what Jesus and his disciples were 'involved with.
That's why I asked a simple question or two.
Is there such a thing as 'blind faith'?

User avatar
oldbadger
Guru
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 220 times

Re: Impracticality of resurrection

Post #139

Post by oldbadger »

We_Are_VENOM wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 10:54 pm
Wow, here we have another text book example of a non sequitur.

1. Paul didn't write down anything about the Baptist, Jesus, their missions, any incidents.

2. Therefore, Paul did not care about the Baptist, Jesus, their missions, or any incidents.

Aristotle is turning over in his grave with that kind of illogical thinking.
This my first laugh of the day.
You, hiding behind Aristotle and your version of his logic!

Aristotle would be grinning....ever so!
Aristotle was a Deist, didn't believe in an involved God, nor miracles, and you keep referring to him.
You aren't a closet Deist by any chance? :D

And how you manage to convince yourself that Paul was interested in what Jesus or his disciples did is just a wonder to me.
And you don't seem to have taken full interest in what Jesus did, either. All I mentioned was about what Jesus did in the TEmple on Palm Sunday, and then later asked if you know what he did on the next Tuesday....... and there's nothing in reply.

This is all clicking together.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 931 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Impracticality of resurrection

Post #140

Post by TRANSPONDER »

oldbadger wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 1:19 am
We_Are_VENOM wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 10:54 pm
Wow, here we have another text book example of a non sequitur.

1. Paul didn't write down anything about the Baptist, Jesus, their missions, any incidents.

2. Therefore, Paul did not care about the Baptist, Jesus, their missions, or any incidents.

Aristotle is turning over in his grave with that kind of illogical thinking.
This my first laugh of the day.
You, hiding behind Aristotle and your version of his logic!

Aristotle would be grinning....ever so!
Aristotle was a Deist, didn't believe in an involved God, nor miracles, and you keep referring to him.
You aren't a closet Deist by any chance? :D

And how you manage to convince yourself that Paul was interested in what Jesus or his disciples did is just a wonder to me.
And you don't seem to have taken full interest in what Jesus did, either. All I mentioned was about what Jesus did in the TEmple on Palm Sunday, and then later asked if you know what he did on the next Tuesday....... and there's nothing in reply.

This is all clicking together.
As dismissal of all problems. Yes. I don't know how Aristotle would see it, but I'd say any reasonable person would wonder why Paul, who was preaching Christianity, pushing his arguments and making various claims wouldn't repeatedly refer to what Jesus had done and said what the Disciples had told him. But there is almost nothing - just this odd last supper saying. The one source of information seems to be Paul having tea and biscuits (II Cor 12.2) with Jesus in heaven and getting confirmation of whatever he believes in that way.

Lolling and waving all objections away may work fine for Believer -denialism, just as dismissing any serious omissions in the gospels. After all, that method seems to have been applied over a couple of hundred years of Bible -study. But for those who do not do faithbased denial, I don't think it washes anymore.

Post Reply