Impracticality of resurrection

[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?

[oldbadger]

God doesn't do bad things.

Correct. Absolutely true.
God doesn't do any things, of course.

I dont drink of the devil's nectar.

Is that an oblique reference to atheists, or that you think beer is the devil's nectar?
Which is it?

[oldbadger]

Which is just fine, because Paul stated in 1 Corin 15:4 that Jesus was raised on the THIRD day...and 1 Corinthians predate Mark....so heyyy

Paul had no real info about Jesus, never writing a sentence about anything that Jesus did during his mission.

And that his letter was written earlier than G-Mark....... you think that makes it more accurate? I think G-Mark was written to put the record straight.

Point?

I don't think that Jesus died. That point was just one of several supporting my opinion.

Ohhh, is that how it happened?

I think so.

Wow. I am baffled. Thanks for filling me in on how things went down.

I could have swore things went differently...but after speaking to you, I just realized how wrong I was.

Appreciate'cha

I accept that....... you just never read about what Jesus did in Jerusalem/Temple on Palm Sunday. .....Looking about, what we might call 'sightseeing'. No regular visitor he....

[We_Are_VENOM]

Correct. Absolutely true.
God doesn't do any things, of course.

Gen 1.

Seems like some doing was getting done.

Is that an oblique reference to atheists, or that you think beer is the devil's nectar?
Which is it?

The latter. I was kidding, tho.

[We_Are_VENOM]

Paul had no real info about Jesus, never writing a sentence about anything that Jesus did during his mission.

This is a twofold inaccuracy.

1.

A: Paul never wrote a sentence about anything Jesus did during his ministry.

B: Therefore, Paul had no real info about Jesus.

Textbook example of a non sequitur.

2. You are simply WRONG about Paul never writing about Jesus' ministry.

1 Corinth 11: 24-26

"For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."

26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes."

Paul wasn't even present at the table, nor was he part of Jesus' flock, yet he has in depth knowledge of the event.

Here, hold this L.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.urband ... l&amp=true

And that his letter was written earlier than G-Mark....... you think that makes it more accurate? I think G-Mark was written to put the record straight.

Good sir, you can think whatever you like...the fact of the matter is; Paul is writing about the Last Supper before the autobiographies of Jesus (the Gospels) were even written/transmitted...which is early, rich historical stuff.

And G-Mark and Paul's writing aren't in conflict, so the idea that Mark is putting the record straight is bologna.

I don't think that Jesus died. That point was just one of several supporting my opinion.

Oh, it must be peaceful out there on your own island.

I accept that....... you just never read about what Jesus did in Jerusalem/Temple on Palm Sunday. .....Looking about, what we might call 'sightseeing'. No regular visitor he....

Please don't accept it. I was KIDDING, mannnn.

[We_Are_VENOM]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #110]

Do know what sarcasm is?

Look up sarcasm and then say to yourself, "ohhh, that's what he was doing".

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #110]

Do know what sarcasm is?

Look up sarcasm and then say to yourself, "ohhh, that's what he was doing".

I absolutely recognized your sarcasm.

I, on the other hand, wasn't being sarcastic.

[oldbadger]

Correct. Absolutely true.
God doesn't do any things, of course.

Gen 1.

Seems like some doing was getting done.

Is that an oblique reference to atheists, or that you think beer is the devil's nectar?
Which is it?

The latter. I was kidding, tho.

Yep.......... you were kidding. Jesus loved his wine and meat, and sometimes drawing criticisms from self righteous nerds.
But then, I think you must have been kidding about Gen 1 as well.

[oldbadger]

This is a twofold inaccuracy.
1.
A: Paul never wrote a sentence about anything Jesus did during his ministry.
B: Therefore, Paul had no real info about Jesus.
Textbook example of a non sequitur.

You cannot hide the fact that Paul never wrote a single sentence about anything that Jesus did by playing with pseudo academic rhetoric, Venom.
I usually have to insert in brackets (apart from those last hours) but thought it might be nice for you to grasp at the straw of the last supper, but it's a truth that Paul either didn't learn about or care about what Jesus did or said during his mission against Temple corruption and greed.

2. You are simply WRONG about Paul never writing about Jesus' ministry.
1 Corinth 11: 24-26
"For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."

26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes."

Paul wasn't even present at the table, nor was he part of Jesus' flock, yet he has in depth knowledge of the event.

Paul had no in-depth interest in Jesus or his mission at all........ never wrote a word about any of it. Maybe that's why some folks don't have a clear 'picture' of what he did during that last week.

Good sir, you can think whatever you like...the fact of the matter is; Paul is writing about the Last Supper before the autobiographies of Jesus (the Gospels) were even written/transmitted...which is early, rich historical stuff.

And G-Mark and Paul's writing aren't in conflict, so the idea that Mark is putting the record straight is bologna.

In future, all depositions put before you earliest will be credited with most truth...?
G-Mark (without the Christian additions and fiddles) is the real account, and Paul wrote none of it.

Oh, it must be peaceful out there on your own island.

Huh? I accept that Mother Nature reigns here...... so we get some peace, and then we get some turmoil, sometiome tragedy.

Please don't accept it. I was KIDDING, mannnn.

I wasn't....... Let's agree on something, can we? Do you accept that Jesus spend his time in the Temple on that last Sunday just looking around at everything?
It's a simple question.... Yes or No..? Then we could look at Monday next?

[We_Are_VENOM]

But then, I think you must have been kidding about Gen 1 as well.

Think again.

[We_Are_VENOM]

You cannot hide the fact that Paul never wrote a single sentence about anything that Jesus did by playing with pseudo academic rhetoric, Venom.

You were already proven wrong on that debacle.

Next..

I usually have to insert in brackets (apart from those last hours) but thought it might be nice for you to grasp at the straw of the last supper, but it's a truth that Paul either didn't learn about or care about what Jesus did or said during his mission against Temple corruption and greed.

Well, regardless of what a skeptic writing some 2,000 years on a message forum thinks, Paul was accepted by Peter and James.

If Peter and James accepted him despite what you say here^, then so can I.

Paul had no in-depth interest in Jesus or his mission at all........ never wrote a word about any of it.

Ignoring what I presented to you won't make 1 Corin 11:23-26 go away.

You were simply, and blatantly WRONG.

So you can keep repeating the falsehood, and I will keep repeating the truth value..

1 Corinth 11:23-26.

Maybe that's why some folks don't have a clear 'picture' of what he did during that last week.

Seems clear to me.

In future, all depositions put before you earliest will be credited with most truth...?
G-Mark (without the Christian additions and fiddles) is the real account, and Paul wrote none of it.

The early you are to the source, the more truth value you will obtain. Historians know and appreciate stuff like that.

I wasn't....... Let's agree on something, can we? Do you accept that Jesus spend his time in the Temple on that last Sunday just looking around at everything?
It's a simple question.... Yes or No..? Then we could look at Monday next?

The question is so irrelevant, that answering yes/no would give it more attention that it deserve.