Total Posts:31|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Resurrection of Jesus - vs. - Moon Split

Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2012 2:42:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The arguments for each are almost exactly the same. The question is, why should I accept the RoJ over the moon split (or vice versa)?
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2012 2:45:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/28/2012 2:43:45 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Because I say so.

I now believe in Jesus.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2012 2:53:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/28/2012 2:45:09 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 5/28/2012 2:43:45 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Because I say so.

I now believe in Jesus.

Jesus? I was thinking Muhammad (pbuhiewpyw).
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.
TheAsylum
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2012 3:07:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.

Okay, we agree then, the moon split happened, the resurrection didn't.
stubs
Posts: 1,887
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2012 3:16:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/28/2012 2:42:16 PM, Microsuck wrote:
The arguments for each are almost exactly the same. The question is, why should I accept the RoJ over the moon split (or vice versa)?

I would look at the historical validity of the claims.
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 1:52:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/28/2012 3:07:40 PM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.

Okay, we agree then, the moon split happened, the resurrection didn't.

No you think the moon-split. I know the resurrection happened. If you ever got down on your knees and confessed your heart to Jesus then you would what I am talking about. But you wont you got science to worship, right?
TheAsylum
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 1:56:16 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 1:52:18 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:07:40 PM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.

Okay, we agree then, the moon split happened, the resurrection didn't.

No you think the moon-split. I know the resurrection happened. If you ever got down on your knees and confessed your heart to Jesus then you would what I am talking about. But you wont you got science to worship, right?

Those kind of arguments don't work on this website. You can't just appeal to faith here. Refer to the following photo (it's a quote by Sam Harris) for why such arguments are not valid and will not be successful on this website: http://imgur.com...
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 2:02:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 1:56:16 AM, jat93 wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:52:18 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:07:40 PM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.

Okay, we agree then, the moon split happened, the resurrection didn't.

No you think the moon-split. I know the resurrection happened. If you ever got down on your knees and confessed your heart to Jesus then you would what I am talking about. But you wont you got science to worship, right?

Those kind of arguments don't work on this website. You can't just appeal to faith here. Refer to the following photo (it's a quote by Sam Harris) for why such arguments are not valid and will not be successful on this website: http://imgur.com...

LOL. I do not care if it sucessful or not. Pray to science see if it answers your prayers.
TheAsylum
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 2:17:05 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 2:02:12 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:56:16 AM, jat93 wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:52:18 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:07:40 PM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.

Okay, we agree then, the moon split happened, the resurrection didn't.

No you think the moon-split. I know the resurrection happened. If you ever got down on your knees and confessed your heart to Jesus then you would what I am talking about. But you wont you got science to worship, right?

Those kind of arguments don't work on this website. You can't just appeal to faith here. Refer to the following photo (it's a quote by Sam Harris) for why such arguments are not valid and will not be successful on this website: http://imgur.com...

LOL. I do not care if it sucessful or not. Pray to science see if it answers your prayers.

People who adhere to the scientific method don't pray to it.

Pray to god for something significant that would require his aid and couldn't merely be done by you and see if it answers your prayers. I'm under the impression that most of the time the answer is no, or the prayer was answered but not the way you requested, or the answer is temporarily on hold.

Or better yet. Try praying to a jug of milk instead. Or a tree stump. You will get the same objective/statistical results as if you pray to God, I guarantee it. Prayer doesn't work (as a means of changing God's will/receiving objective things from him).

Besides, if God is perfect and has a similarly perfect plan, who are you to ask him to change it? Wouldn't that seem to imply that those who pray don't have faith in God's supposedly perfect plan for the world and those who inhabit it...?
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 2:18:36 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 2:02:12 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:56:16 AM, jat93 wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:52:18 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:07:40 PM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.

Okay, we agree then, the moon split happened, the resurrection didn't.

No you think the moon-split. I know the resurrection happened. If you ever got down on your knees and confessed your heart to Jesus then you would what I am talking about. But you wont you got science to worship, right?

Those kind of arguments don't work on this website. You can't just appeal to faith here. Refer to the following photo (it's a quote by Sam Harris) for why such arguments are not valid and will not be successful on this website: http://imgur.com...

LOL. I do not care if it sucessful or not. Pray to science see if it answers your prayers.

Really Scott ? wanna play that game ? It could be taken that your implying that God has answered prayers of yours, is that what you believe ?

God isn't restoring the limbs of hacked babies, but hey, he helps you out right ? God clearly takes an interest in your affairs more so than the babies with hacked off limbs, right Scott ? I am sure that is quite tenable in your view isn't it Scott ?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 2:23:01 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 2:17:05 AM, jat93 wrote:
At 5/29/2012 2:02:12 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:56:16 AM, jat93 wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:52:18 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:07:40 PM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.

Okay, we agree then, the moon split happened, the resurrection didn't.

No you think the moon-split. I know the resurrection happened. If you ever got down on your knees and confessed your heart to Jesus then you would what I am talking about. But you wont you got science to worship, right?

Those kind of arguments don't work on this website. You can't just appeal to faith here. Refer to the following photo (it's a quote by Sam Harris) for why such arguments are not valid and will not be successful on this website: http://imgur.com...

LOL. I do not care if it sucessful or not. Pray to science see if it answers your prayers.

People who adhere to the scientific method don't pray to it.

Pray to god for something significant that would require his aid and couldn't merely be done by you and see if it answers your prayers. I'm under the impression that most of the time the answer is no, or the prayer was answered but not the way you requested, or the answer is temporarily on hold.

Or better yet. Try praying to a jug of milk instead. Or a tree stump. You will get the same objective/statistical results as if you pray to God, I guarantee it. Prayer doesn't work (as a means of changing God's will/receiving objective things from him).

Besides, if God is perfect and has a similarly perfect plan, who are you to ask him to change it? Wouldn't that seem to imply that those who pray don't have faith in God's supposedly perfect plan for the world and those who inhabit it...?

Prayer works for me. It dont for you. Though I do not ask for supernatural activities and such. Nor do I pray for myself and what I want, I only ask forgiveness and for others. Only a non-beleiver would want paranormal things that God does not care about. He does not have to prove anything, that is your fallacy. You must prove something, and you havent.
TheAsylum
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 2:24:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 2:18:36 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 5/29/2012 2:02:12 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:56:16 AM, jat93 wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:52:18 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:07:40 PM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.

Okay, we agree then, the moon split happened, the resurrection didn't.

No you think the moon-split. I know the resurrection happened. If you ever got down on your knees and confessed your heart to Jesus then you would what I am talking about. But you wont you got science to worship, right?

Those kind of arguments don't work on this website. You can't just appeal to faith here. Refer to the following photo (it's a quote by Sam Harris) for why such arguments are not valid and will not be successful on this website: http://imgur.com...

LOL. I do not care if it sucessful or not. Pray to science see if it answers your prayers.

Really Scott ? wanna play that game ? It could be taken that your implying that God has answered prayers of yours, is that what you believe ?

God isn't restoring the limbs of hacked babies, but hey, he helps you out right ? God clearly takes an interest in your affairs more so than the babies with hacked off limbs, right Scott ? I am sure that is quite tenable in your view isn't it Scott ?



Your example is nonsense.
TheAsylum
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 2:31:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 2:23:01 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/29/2012 2:17:05 AM, jat93 wrote:
At 5/29/2012 2:02:12 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:56:16 AM, jat93 wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:52:18 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:07:40 PM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.

Okay, we agree then, the moon split happened, the resurrection didn't.

No you think the moon-split. I know the resurrection happened. If you ever got down on your knees and confessed your heart to Jesus then you would what I am talking about. But you wont you got science to worship, right?

Those kind of arguments don't work on this website. You can't just appeal to faith here. Refer to the following photo (it's a quote by Sam Harris) for why such arguments are not valid and will not be successful on this website: http://imgur.com...

LOL. I do not care if it sucessful or not. Pray to science see if it answers your prayers.

People who adhere to the scientific method don't pray to it.

Pray to god for something significant that would require his aid and couldn't merely be done by you and see if it answers your prayers. I'm under the impression that most of the time the answer is no, or the prayer was answered but not the way you requested, or the answer is temporarily on hold.

Or better yet. Try praying to a jug of milk instead. Or a tree stump. You will get the same objective/statistical results as if you pray to God, I guarantee it. Prayer doesn't work (as a means of changing God's will/receiving objective things from him).

Besides, if God is perfect and has a similarly perfect plan, who are you to ask him to change it? Wouldn't that seem to imply that those who pray don't have faith in God's supposedly perfect plan for the world and those who inhabit it...?

Prayer works for me. It dont for you. Though I do not ask for supernatural activities and such. Nor do I pray for myself and what I want, I only ask forgiveness and for others. Only a non-beleiver would want paranormal things that God does not care about. He does not have to prove anything, that is your fallacy. You must prove something, and you havent.

How do you know if God has answered your prayers for forgiveness or not? Does he tell you so? Could it be that he's just not listening? The reason I suggested praying for material or even supernatural things is because those would prove God's existence under some circumstances if he did indeed fulfill them.

Like, if an amputee prayed for a regrown limb. Why does god not heal amputees? Or mothers in poverty stricken countries praying this very moment to god to save the lives of their starving children? Their prayers will go unanswered.

However, I'm glad your god is good enough to answer your prayers for forgiveness. Given all the significantly more important/substantial prayers he doesn't answer, you'd think his performance would be a bit disappointing, but I guess the fact that he grants you forgiveness for the way he created and engineered you shows that he is pretty successful and awesome after all.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 2:31:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 2:23:01 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/29/2012 2:17:05 AM, jat93 wrote:
At 5/29/2012 2:02:12 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:56:16 AM, jat93 wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:52:18 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:07:40 PM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.

Okay, we agree then, the moon split happened, the resurrection didn't.

No you think the moon-split. I know the resurrection happened. If you ever got down on your knees and confessed your heart to Jesus then you would what I am talking about. But you wont you got science to worship, right?

Those kind of arguments don't work on this website. You can't just appeal to faith here. Refer to the following photo (it's a quote by Sam Harris) for why such arguments are not valid and will not be successful on this website: http://imgur.com...

LOL. I do not care if it sucessful or not. Pray to science see if it answers your prayers.

People who adhere to the scientific method don't pray to it.

Pray to god for something significant that would require his aid and couldn't merely be done by you and see if it answers your prayers. I'm under the impression that most of the time the answer is no, or the prayer was answered but not the way you requested, or the answer is temporarily on hold.

Or better yet. Try praying to a jug of milk instead. Or a tree stump. You will get the same objective/statistical results as if you pray to God, I guarantee it. Prayer doesn't work (as a means of changing God's will/receiving objective things from him).

Besides, if God is perfect and has a similarly perfect plan, who are you to ask him to change it? Wouldn't that seem to imply that those who pray don't have faith in God's supposedly perfect plan for the world and those who inhabit it...?

Prayer works for me. It dont for you.

Tell us how prayer has worked for you.......

Though I do not ask for supernatural activities and such.

God doing something is a supernatural activity.

Nor do I pray for myself and what I want, I only ask forgiveness and for others. Only a non-beleiver would want paranormal things that God does not care about.

Bullsh*t. You don't pray for the healing of limbs of babies cause deep down you know it won't happen, and then you would have to confront that, but hey just pray for things that don't require Gods intervention, so if those things happen you can tell yourself pray works.

Oh God doesn't care about the well being of the babies ok........

He does not have to prove anything, that is your fallacy. You must prove something, and you havent.

Your the one running your mouth, but hey, like any good coward once you are called out you hide behind God/religion.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 7:10:08 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 1:52:18 AM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:07:40 PM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/28/2012 3:01:07 PM, ScottyDouglas wrote:
Who needs to supply proof? What is the need of faith and belief then if it able to be known by all as fact? I know it is true, just like I know I am typing on this laptop.
The difference is you need to actually see it or touch it or examine it. I do not.

Okay, we agree then, the moon split happened, the resurrection didn't.

No you think the moon-split. I know the resurrection happened. If you ever got down on your knees and confessed your heart to Jesus then you would what I am talking about. But you wont you got science to worship, right?

So then faith is unnecessary?

BTW, 2 things:
1. I have gotten down n my knees, confessed, and prayed. I did so (and stuff similar to it) for several months when my faith started to slip.
2. I don't worship science and the concept of doing so doesn't make any sort of sense. Science is a methodology, not a religion.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 7:25:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
You're all being insane when talking to ScottyDouglas. Refer back to the picture: if they do not want to be sane, then the discussion is over. When their sanity and logic returns to them, then they can be talked to. (I am expecting now him to say that logic is faith, or God is logic, or some other equivocation).
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 7:53:38 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/28/2012 2:42:16 PM, Microsuck wrote:
The arguments for each are almost exactly the same. The question is, why should I accept the RoJ over the moon split (or vice versa)?

That's clearly false. Regarding Christ we have 3 basic facts that most historians agree upon, the empty tomb, Christ's post-mortem appearences, & the origin of the Christian faith, which goes contrary to every predisposition otherwise.

Many different hypothesis have been invented to explain those 3 basic facts, though none of them compare to the hypothesis, "God raised Christ from the dead." Mainly because this hypothesis has more explanatory scope / power, less ad hoc given the context, mutiply attested, etc.

It doesn't seem the so called moon-split enjoys such confirmation.
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 8:00:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 7:53:38 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 5/28/2012 2:42:16 PM, Microsuck wrote:
The arguments for each are almost exactly the same. The question is, why should I accept the RoJ over the moon split (or vice versa)?

That's clearly false. Regarding Christ we have 3 basic facts that most historians agree upon, the empty tomb, Christ's post-mortem appearences, & the origin of the Christian faith, which goes contrary to every predisposition otherwise.


I would say that those 3 facts are the early Christian belief in those things, not necessarily that they occurred.
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 1:31:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 8:00:06 AM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/29/2012 7:53:38 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 5/28/2012 2:42:16 PM, Microsuck wrote:
The arguments for each are almost exactly the same. The question is, why should I accept the RoJ over the moon split (or vice versa)?

That's clearly false. Regarding Christ we have 3 basic facts that most historians agree upon, the empty tomb, Christ's post-mortem appearences, & the origin of the Christian faith, which goes contrary to every predisposition otherwise.


I would say that those 3 facts are the early Christian belief in those things, not necessarily that they occurred.

First you have adequately explain the origin of the belief before you explain away the facts. Otherwise you're offering a circular argument.
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 1:34:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 8:00:06 AM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/29/2012 7:53:38 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 5/28/2012 2:42:16 PM, Microsuck wrote:
The arguments for each are almost exactly the same. The question is, why should I accept the RoJ over the moon split (or vice versa)?

That's clearly false. Regarding Christ we have 3 basic facts that most historians agree upon, the empty tomb, Christ's post-mortem appearences, & the origin of the Christian faith, which goes contrary to every predisposition otherwise.


I would say that those 3 facts are the early Christian belief in those things, not necessarily that they occurred.

First you'll have to explain the origin of the Christian belief before explaining away the facts. Otherwise it's circular. But regardless of that I doubt you'll be able to put up strong enough case against the countless scholars, both secular and non-secular, who affirm such facts. Yes it's an argument from authority but it's warranted on here.
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 1:37:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 1:31:40 PM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 5/29/2012 8:00:06 AM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/29/2012 7:53:38 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 5/28/2012 2:42:16 PM, Microsuck wrote:
The arguments for each are almost exactly the same. The question is, why should I accept the RoJ over the moon split (or vice versa)?

That's clearly false. Regarding Christ we have 3 basic facts that most historians agree upon, the empty tomb, Christ's post-mortem appearences, & the origin of the Christian faith, which goes contrary to every predisposition otherwise.


I would say that those 3 facts are the early Christian belief in those things, not necessarily that they occurred.

First you have adequately explain the origin of the belief before you explain away the facts. Otherwise you're offering a circular argument.

?

This seems like an entirely different thing than what I was responding to.
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 1:40:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 1:34:34 PM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 5/29/2012 8:00:06 AM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/29/2012 7:53:38 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 5/28/2012 2:42:16 PM, Microsuck wrote:
The arguments for each are almost exactly the same. The question is, why should I accept the RoJ over the moon split (or vice versa)?

That's clearly false. Regarding Christ we have 3 basic facts that most historians agree upon, the empty tomb, Christ's post-mortem appearences, & the origin of the Christian faith, which goes contrary to every predisposition otherwise.


I would say that those 3 facts are the early Christian belief in those things, not necessarily that they occurred.


First you'll have to explain the origin of the Christian belief before explaining away the facts. Otherwise it's circular. But regardless of that I doubt you'll be able to put up strong enough case against the countless scholars, both secular and non-secular, who affirm such facts. Yes it's an argument from authority but it's warranted on here.

Produce the data then. From what I understand, Habermas collected data on what scholars believed the first christians believed.

I'm not even sure how you would go about showing that scholars believe that we can empirically show that those three facts are true, which I would think would be a necessary step in order to say that they do, in fact, hold that those things happened. If they can't demonstrate this, then it's an empty appeal to authority.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 1:56:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 7:53:38 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
That's clearly false. Regarding Christ we have 3 basic facts that most historians agree upon, the empty tomb,

Depends on when the tomb was empty. Most historians who arent christian wouldnt agree that the tomb was empty as early as recorded in the gospels.

Christ's post-mortem appearences,

Depends on what type of appearance. If you are talking about Christs appearance like those experienced by christians today, then yes, it is a fact that people believed they experienced such things. But his actual physical appearance, then no.

& the origin of the Christian faith, which goes contrary to every predisposition otherwise.

What do you mean by origin? Islam must have an origin too. All religions must.
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 2:06:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 1:56:03 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 5/29/2012 7:53:38 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
That's clearly false. Regarding Christ we have 3 basic facts that most historians agree upon, the empty tomb,

Depends on when the tomb was empty. Most historians who arent christian wouldnt agree that the tomb was empty as early as recorded in the gospels.

Personally I'm not convinced there was a tomb and I'm not convinced that the early Christians believed that the tomb *WOULD* be empty. I think later Christians developed this.
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 4:44:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I would say that those 3 facts are the early Christian belief in those things, not necessarily that they occurred.

First you have to adequately explain the origin of the belief before you explain away the facts. Otherwise you're offering a circular argument.

?

This seems like an entirely different thing than what I was responding to.
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 4:47:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 1:40:24 PM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/29/2012 1:34:34 PM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 5/29/2012 8:00:06 AM, Meatros wrote:
At 5/29/2012 7:53:38 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 5/28/2012 2:42:16 PM, Microsuck wrote:
The arguments for each are almost exactly the same. The question is, why should I accept the RoJ over the moon split (or vice versa)?

That's clearly false. Regarding Christ we have 3 basic facts that most historians agree upon, the empty tomb, Christ's post-mortem appearences, & the origin of the Christian faith, which goes contrary to every predisposition otherwise.


I would say that those 3 facts are the early Christian belief in those things, not necessarily that they occurred.


First you'll have to explain the origin of the Christian belief before explaining away the facts. Otherwise it's circular. But regardless of that I doubt you'll be able to put up strong enough case against the countless scholars, both secular and non-secular, who affirm such facts. Yes it's an argument from authority but it's warranted on here.

Produce the data then. From what I understand, Habermas collected data on what scholars believed the first christians believed.

I'm not even sure how you would go about showing that scholars believe that we can empirically show that those three facts are true, which I would think would be a necessary step in order to say that they do, in fact, hold that those things happened. If they can't demonstrate this, then it's an empty appeal to authority.

Habermas's position is on the fringes of ssholarship (much like the infidel.org world) Try the world's leading Jewish historian, Pinchas Lapide et al.
Meatros
Posts: 1,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 4:50:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 4:47:13 PM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
Habermas's position is on the fringes of ssholarship (much like the infidel.org world) Try the world's leading Jewish historian, Pinchas Lapide et al.

hmm haven't heard of him. You wouldn't have any linkies would you?
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2012 4:52:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/29/2012 1:56:03 PM, tkubok wrote:
At 5/29/2012 7:53:38 AM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
That's clearly false. Regarding Christ we have 3 basic facts that most historians agree upon, the empty tomb,

Depends on when the tomb was empty. Most historians who arent christian wouldnt agree that the tomb was empty as early as recorded in the gospels.

Christ's post-mortem appearences,

Depends on what type of appearance. If you are talking about Christs appearance like those experienced by christians today, then yes, it is a fact that people believed they experienced such things. But his actual physical appearance, then no.

This would be an explanation of the fact. But to posit all people had the same vision at once is arbitrary and implausible.

& the origin of the Christian faith, which goes contrary to every predisposition otherwise.

What do you mean by origin? Islam must have an origin too. All religions must.

Exactly what you think I mean by origin. Islam was in the context of Islam on the verge of Islam. But nobody, in all of Judaism expected their Messiah to be tortured and killed before the people, then rise 3 days later thus vindicating his claims. In fact you would have to convince me that a group of common men, who were all but defeated and burned out, suddenly gained wind in their sails (either because they were deceived or deceivers) and totally turned the world upside down.