The Instigator
Percivil
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Apophis66
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Did the ressurection really occur?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/14/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,027 times Debate No: 113903
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (17)
Votes (0)

 

Percivil

Pro

Argument:

History prooved it:https://www.desiringgod.org...

Us christians/catholics believe that we have to spread the good news. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, then the christian faith will not be in the picture in todays world. Why? There is no good news to spread. It is also mentioned that people such as the disciples saw him(as mentioned in the bible). If it did not occur,why would the disciples write that in the bible? Also, if jesus did not rise from the dead, miracles would not have occured. Miracles such as the miracle of lanciano(https://en.m.wikipedia.org...)would not have occured as jesus is officially dead.

Basically,if he did not rise from the dead,the christian faith would be at a huge risk now or probrably wont exist by now.
Apophis66

Con

The only basis Christians have for the resurrection claim in the Gospels are other claims in the Gospels. Using a book to prove itself is circular reasoning. In addition the gospels were written by the Christian inner circle and are highly biased sources and we simply have no other contemporary source about Jesus where we can get the other side of the argument or any indication Jesus even existed much less any specific claim in the gospels happened. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and proving biased sources with themselves doesn't come close to cutting it.

I will also be arguing that a lot of events claimed by the gospels like the census at Jesus's birth, Herod's slaughter of the newborns, three days of darkness, the dead rising from their graves, and the big controversy about Jesus are not referenced anywhere by contemporaries at the time. The gospels often give conflicting accounts of things and their accounts of the discovery of the empty tomb after Jesus's resurrection are in complete conflict and show that the central claim of the gospels is made up. The writers of the gospels also had a habit of completely misinterpreting the bible to create fulfillments of prophesies and often copied from each other.

I will also discuss non-cannon Christian books that are fraudulent and discuss how supernatural claims can be made up and how this was done in the founding of other religions like the Mormon church which has a similar situation in many ways.
Debate Round No. 1
Percivil

Pro

Argument:
If Jesus didnt rise from the dead,there would not be a thing known as christianity in todays world. His purpose of his death was to save us from sin and when he ascended to heaven to let us have everlasting life(Jesus died "so that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life." "John 3: 16.). When we christians/catholics refer to everlasting life,we mean that when we part this world,we can go to heaven and not be tortured in hell. Which is why we have confession as well to have a chance to repent and once again have everlasting life. If jesus didnt die,even if the christian faith still existed,there would be no confession,no god to confess your sins to. But for the fact that we have confession,its pretty obvious he came back from the dead.

Rebuttal(s):
"The only basis Christians have for the resurrection claim in the Gospels are other claims in the Gospels." Yes I agree with that fact that gospels are our only basis are gospels but ladies and gentlemen we investigated some of these claims. I"ll touch on one now:
When jesus suposedly rised from the dead,he got out of his tomb of which the gospels claimed that the stone was rolled away and there was nothing but an empty tomb. Archeologists have affirmed this:https://www.google.com.sg.... Scientists did as well affirm the tomb:https://news.nationalgeographic.com...

"I will also be arguing that a lot of events claimed by the gospels like the census at Jesus's birth, Herod's slaughter of the newborns, three days of darkness, the dead rising from their graves, and the big controversy about Jesus are not referenced anywhere by contemporaries at the time. "Save your breath, we found noahs ark,the shroud of turin and many more:
Shroud of turin:https://images.google.com.sg......
Noahs ark:https://images.google.com.sg......
Other stuff we found:https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org...
Apophis66

Con

The Tomb

I am taking a couple quotes from your source:
"In the innermost chamber of the site said to be the tomb of Jesus"
"Hiebert said he thinks the second slab, which is grey and features a small etching of a cross, dates to the 12th century. "

They don't actually know for sure where Jesus' tomb is, this is only claimed by people in the middle ages to be his tomb. All they found was a slab in this tomb from the 12th century. Doesn't prove Jesus rose from the dead.

Noah's Ark

Noah's Ark has nothing to do with Jesus. That is another debate for another time.

Shroud of Turin

A picture of Jesus doesn't prove he rose from the dead.

"If Jesus didnt rise from the dead,there would not be a thing known as christianity in todays world."

"If jesus didnt die,even if the christian faith still existed,there would be no confession,no god to confess your sins to."


People can believe things that are false you know. Even if Jesus didn't rise from the dead Christians can still believe it.

Contradicting Accounts of the Empty Tomb

When we look at the independent accounts of the finding of the empty tomb the different authors of the gospels completely contradict each other. Below I summarize their accounts and it should become very obvious to you that they are in conflict:

Matthew:
Two Marys go to the tomb, and when they arrive there is a big earthquake, an angel comes down and rolls back the stone and the guards fainted. The angel tells the women not to be afraid and Jesus has risen and to tell the disciples. The women go to tell the apostles but Jesus meets them and they continue to tell the apostles.

Mark:
The Marys and Salome when walking to the tomb to put spices on the body ask who is going to roll the stone for them. But they find that the stone has already been removed and when they enter the tomb they find an angel who says Jesus has risen and not to be afraid and to tell the apostles especially Peter. The women fled with terror and didn't tell anyone. The later part: Mark 16:9-end was found to be fraudulent and was added in later by someone because it wasn't in the earliest versions of the book.

Luke:
The Marys and Joanna go to the tomb and find the stone rolled away and that the body is missing. Suddenly two angels appear and tell them the body is missing and the reason why. The women tell the apostles but they don't believe the women. Peter runs to the tomb and finds nothing. Jesus later meets the apostles.

John:
Mary goes to the tomb and finds it empty. She runs to Peter and tells him that someone has stolen Jesus and she doesn't know where he has been moved to. Peter and other disciples run to the tomb but find nothing. Mary remains outside the Romb crying when two angels appear and ask her why she is crying. She answers and when she turns around she sees Jesus. he tells her he is risen and to go tell the disciples. She runs and tells them. Jesus later appears to the disciples.
Debate Round No. 2
Percivil

Pro

Argument:
As mentioned in my previous argument,god died for us so that we would have everlasting life. And by everlasting life I mean when we part this life,we would still have life in heaven. Think about it,if god didnt rise from the dead,there would be no way he could be in a spiritual form as well as hes pretty much dead and his mission to make us a place in heaven failed. Right now you would think in your mind that there is no evidence that jesus is in some supernatual form now right? Think of an answer now before carrying on including the spectators. Ladies and gentlemen I highly recommend you to think of your answer first before moving on.(continue once you have thought of an answer)So with your answer in mind,read this:http://www.beliefnet.com.... People have seen christ in near death experiences. This not only prooves the existence of god,but also prooves that he has risen from the dead to make us a place in heaven.

Rebuttals:
The reason why I brought up the shroud of turin is that the cloth did not contain jesus"s body as mentioned by the bible.

"People can believe things that are false you know. Even if Jesus didn't rise from the dead Christians can still believe it." It was written in the bible. But why would the disciples want to lie anyways about the ressurection?

Although I agree with the fact that the different books said things which arent similar to another,it still talks about the same thing. It always says that jesus was alive:

Matthew:
The angel tells the women not to be afraid and Jesus has risen and to tell the disciples.

Mark:
But they find that the stone has already been removed and when they enter the tomb they find an angel who says Jesus has risen and not to be afraid and to tell the apostles especially Peter.

Luke:
Suddenly two angels appear and tell them the body is missing and the reason why.

John:
he tells her he is risen and to go tell the disciples.

So 4 people who wrote the same thing may had altered it a li"ll but they still say the same thing:Jesus had risen from the dead and the tomb was empty. Hence your evidence just supported me...not you....congrats....

"They don't actually know for sure where Jesus' tomb is, this is only claimed by people in the middle ages to be his tomb. All they found was a slab in this tomb from the 12th century. Doesn't prove Jesus rose from the dead." So if it isnt what is it?

I brought up noahs ark as you said some things in the bible were never prooven to be true. But if noahs ark was found,I think its pretty safe to say the bible is true.
Apophis66

Con

Near Death Experiences

According to the medical community near death experiences are the mind hallucinating under extreme trauma. Parts of the NDEs like floating out the body and the tunnel of light can be simulated by stimulation and oxygen deprivation to the left temporal lobe. Only a minority of people who temporarily die report having an NDE and only some of them have a religious NDE much less one with Jesus. There have also been NDEs for other religions and Indians have reported seeing Indians Gods. There have been many cases where the NDEs conflict with what really happened and among the tiny minority who saw Jesus there are conflicting reports of his appearance. The medical community doesn't see any convincing evidence NDEs are anything more than just an illusion.
https://www.scientificamerican.com...
http://www.atheistrepublic.com...
https://infidels.org...
https://www.near-death.com...

Shroud of Turin

Just because a cloth from the middle ages doesn't have the corpse of Jesus in it doesn't prove it had anything to do with him or that he rose from the dead.

Conflicting Accounts of Empty Tomb

All you did was cherry pick parts of the accounts to make them look consistent. Most of the accounts say the women found the stone already removed but Matthew says they saw an angel come down and remove it. John says that Mary found the tomb empty and told everyone that someone had stolen the body but the other accounts say that they encountered an angel who told them Jesus had risen and they told the apostles Jesus had risen except Mark who says they didn't tell anyone.

Jesus Tomb Discovery

Just read your source about the tomb. Its a 12th century tomb with unproven claims that it is the tomb of Jesus when there are hundreds of tombs.

Noah's Ark

Noah's Ark if true only proves Genesis and the Jewish religion and doesn't verify that the later Christian religion is true or that Jesus rose from the dead. Genesis and the gospels were written by completely different religions, thousands of years apart, and in very different cultures. And by the way your link to Noah's Ark evidence only goes to an empty google images page so you haven't presented any evidence for this claim anyway.

Lack of Outside Sources

One of the most convincing proofs against the gospels is the lack of outside sources verifying their events. There is no contemporary source that even verifies Jesus existed and no record from the many who opposed him attacking him. There is no record of any killing of all the little children in Bethlehem, a major city in Palestine, or any resentment from rebellious Jews. There is no record of any Roman Census at Jesus' birth that forced people to go to their city of birth. There is no outside contemporary record of the trial of Jesus or controversy over what should happen to him or that he supposedly rose from the dead. No records exist of the three days of darkness at Jesus' death and superstitious people at the time were obsessed with stars and natural phenomena and yet failed to report this incredible event. No records exist that the dead rose from their graves and walked into Jerusalem. Its almost like this all was just made up by the gospels 50 years later written by biased Christians.
Debate Round No. 3
Percivil

Pro

Argument:
The disciples died horrible deaths because they proclaimed the good news. Years before their death after jesus supposedly rose from the dead,he told they would die. Now how does a hallucination know whats going to happen in the future? And if they were hallucinating,they would have woken up from it. Then again for severe cases,one wont wake up from it. But for the fact that it is confirmed the place they were murdered according to the bible was the exact same place they were buried:https://churchpop.com...

Hallucination? I think not.

Question:just out of pure curiosity,how can you be convinced the ressurcection did occur? Just answer me honestly. This is a MUST answer.

Rebuttals:
"Its almost like this all was just made up by the gospels 50 years later written by biased Christians." And how sure are you that happened? Since miracles do occur and its been recorded,its pretty obvious god does exist.

Rebuttal on the lack of outside sources:
Although we cant proove that children were killed in Bethlehem or stuff like that, there is proof of noahs ark:https://images.google.com.sg...
This shows that things like noahs ark did exist hence the bible"s stories are true. Also the things like the shroud of turin and stuff like that prooves that the stories in the bible are true.

To go back to the part where you showed that the stories in the various books are in conflict,let me explain:
Have you ever watched a movie with friends, and then after, when you asked those who watched to recount the story, everyone gives a different perspective? Some may have seen things which others didn't even notice. Different parts of the movie may have impacted some people so much, that they recall it in detail, but some may not even remember that part. However, everyone should be able to agree on the core message of the story. This is the same with the gospel accounts. The gospel writers took the accounts from different sources. For example, a source who knew Mary Magdelene well, could have narrated only her experience. That was not to say that her other friends were not there too. Mark says that the women fled with terror and initially did not tell anyone even though they were commanded by the angel to do so. However, a couple of lines later, in the same narrative, Mark talks about Mary Magdelene's encounter with Jesus, and that she told the disciples. Mark was writing this account for the Christians who were being persecuted, and perhaps this narrative was to give them courage in their fear.

Anyway, the main message of the all the gospel narratives, which all are consistent is that THE TOMB WAS EMPTY, and that Jesus had risen. Like the for Star Wars movies, you and I may narrate it very differently as there are different aspects of the movie which impact us differently. But I think that both of us will agree that the central message of the Star Wars saga is the triumph of good over evil, the value of friendship and the sacrifice of heroes. So it is like that with the 4 gospels. Different perspectives, but the central message is the same.

Anyway, if you want a more detailed explanation of the differing accounts, go to this website: http://blog.adw.org...
Apophis66

Con

"The disciples died horrible deaths because they proclaimed the good news."

The Mormon church was founded in the early 1800s by Joseph Smith and he claimed to have restored the true Christianity and that he was a prophet of God. The Mormons were persecuted intensely with many being killed, and driven from their homes and eventually Joseph Smith was killed in a jail and the Mormons fled to Utah. These Mormon leaders died or lost everything for their beliefs while claiming miracles and supernatural events. Many of them probably were lying but if they admitted it they would have lost all their friends and their enemies would have been even angrier.

"Years before their death after jesus supposedly rose from the dead,he told they would die."

We don't know exactly when the gospels were written, some estimate they were written from 70-90 AD but estimates are wide-ranging. If they were written after the apostles were killed then they aren't true predictions. Also, given the intense persecution at the time their deaths weren't hard to guess without any supernatural powers.

"But for the fact that it is confirmed the place they were murdered according to the bible was the exact same place they were buried:"

Your link doesn't say nothing about Jesus predicting anything.

"Since miracles do occur and its been recorded,its pretty obvious god does exist."

You have presented no proven miracles so far.

"there is proof of noahs"

This is a picture of a circular hill. No Ark.

Conflicting Reports of the Empty Tomb

Its not merely that they remembered different things. I pointed out in the last round their stories conflict greatly even when the supposed writers of the gospels supposedly had experienced this together and had years to talk about it with each other. Yes, the stories share the empty tomb in common but they conflict on everything else. Due to this level of contradiction these reports are completely unreliable.

John narrates only Mary's experience but if the other women were with her, and this is the same encounter as the other books talk about, then why does John say that she ran telling the disciples that Jesus had been stolen, while Matthew and Luke say that they met angels and told the disciples Jesus had risen, and Mark say they met angels and told no-one? In all the stories the number of angels, location of the angels, and what they said completely differ. And Mark didn't say they initially told no-one, he said they told no-one and ended the story there. Why would he end the story like that when they excitedly told the apostles Jesus had risen?

Ludicrous Philosophy

The philosophy of Christianity makes no sense. Why should we be punished for Adam's sins by living in a painful world? How does Jesus being tortured atone for our sins? If your grandma wanted to take the death penalty for you should any court agree with that? Punishment is only for the criminal and can't be transferred like debt. Why does someone doing something wrong in the past even when he was a completely different person mean that he must be put through eternal physical torment instead of just teaching and reforming him? How does being even slightly imperfect make one deserving of eternal torture? How is torturing people from eternity at all ethical? If someone changes in hell then why should he be kept punished for all eternity?

How is it fair for God to give some people genes and mental illnesses that make them less likely to live a good life and then punish them? Why give different people lives that make it very unlikely that they will succeed (living in abusive family or non-Christian country) and then judge them the same as people with great lives? Why only test us for 70 years with these unfair conditions rather than giving us many chances to train in multiple tests until we all succeed rather than just one test where if we are given a bad hand then go to hell forever? Why does God create natural disaster and diseases in the world that tear so many apart when he is supposedly against us hurting each other? Why doesn't he move to stop evil people from destroying people's lives like any superhero would?

Why is God's condition for salvation faith in him when God doesn't present obvious readily available evidence that Christianity is true and the evidence is so weak that 66% of the world believe in other religions? Why eternally torture people for logical skepticism, having faith in another religion, or just being logically wrong about Christianity? Why reward us for believing in the unseen in the lucky religion rather than purely by our deeds? And if he cares so much about belief then why doesn't he just come down and visit us like any father would so we know God exists like Christians do?

You might claim that we just don't know the mind of God, but thats an assumption this horrendous philosophy is from God's mind. From logic we can be confident this philosophy makes no sense and couldn't come from God's mind. This philosophy makes less sense then Nazism. If Nazis just claimed that our refutations have rebuttals we just don't know yet I hope you could see through that.
Debate Round No. 4
Percivil

Pro

Argument:
Dont really have much to say so just found an article you should read:https://billygraham.org...

Rebuttals:
"These Mormon leaders died or lost everything for their beliefs while claiming miracles and supernatural events." Question:Instead of claiming miracles and supernatural events,why didnt they say,"Jeez I had a hallucination?"

"Many of them probably..."So it cant be confirmed considering the fact that the definition of probrably according to google is:almost certainly; as far as one knows or can tell. So whatever you stated next cant be affirmed.

"Your link doesn't say nothing about Jesus predicting anything." Jesus predicting a disciple"s death in the bible, was when he said to Peter in John 21:18-19 -
"Amen, Amen, I say to you, when you were younger, you used to dress yourself and go where you wanted; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go." He said this signifying what kind of death he would glorify God. And when he had said this, he said "follow me."

You will notice that "signifying what kind of death he would glorify God." was put in by the gospel writer who would added this after Peter had died, and made the connection. So, literally speaking, Jesus did not plainly tell Peter how he would die, but he did tell Peter how his life would be. And of course, Jesus did tell Peter and his disciples (including us) to "to take up the cross n follow Him". This would mean that He knew his followers would have suffering (challenges) in their lives.
As for predicting their death, there was no need to predict. The message of following Him also means that His followers will Rise.

"You have presented no proven miracles so far." Read the scientific analysis of the miracle of lanciano:https://www.catholiceducation.org... This says it all.

"This is a picture of a circular hill. No Ark." The ark became a hill after grass and everything grows on it. Take it as how historical artifacts are buried underground when they were once on the surface of the ground.

"Yes, the stories share the empty tomb in common but they conflict on everything else." Did you not read my example? I could say Thanos snapped his fingers and half the universe died and Thanos died but my friend could affirm the fact that half the universe died but Thanos didnt die. So in conclusion:It can be affirmed that half the universe did die. Same thing applies here.

"Why would he end the story like that when they excitedly told the apostles Jesus had risen?" No was in the tomb. What else? Jesus did appear in front of them later so it prooves he did come back from the dead. So it covers whatever you said next.

"Why should we be punished for Adam's sins by living in a painful world?" Adam wasnt the only sinner. Unless you"re saying you"re 100% pure and you"ve never sinned in your life,we are all sinners. We already sinned by putting jesus to death,which is why jesus said,"Father forgive them for they know not what they are doing."

"How does Jesus being tortured atone for our sins? "Back then,lambs were killed for ones sins. The sinner would lay his or her hand on the lamb to "transfer" their sins to the lamb and they are slaughtered for it. Jesus wasnt known as the lamb of god for nothing.

"If your grandma wanted to take the death penalty for you should any court agree with that?" Um no...? My previous rebuttal answers why Jesus did so.

"How is it fair for God to give some people genes and mental illnesses that make them less likely to live a good life and then punish them?" Technically its a blessing in disguise if you look at the bigger picture. Take Jessica Cox as an example:shes disabled but still has a good life and a social motivater. So what if you are disabled? God is testing them to see if they can adapt and continue life with whatever illness. Another possibility is that its Satan who did all that. He after all does alot of bad stuff. This not only applies to the conditions you stated but to disasters as well and all the bad stuff you can think of.

"Why is God's condition for salvation faith in him when God doesn't present obvious readily available evidence that Christianity is true and the evidence is so weak that 66% of the world believe in other religions?" They maybe havent looked at the evidence yet.

"Why eternally torture people for logical skepticism, having faith in another religion, or just being logically wrong about Christianity?" If you affirmed that statement,tell me why no one in countries like Singapore has been killed or tortured for not believing in christianity?

"Why reward us for believing in the unseen in the lucky religion rather than purely by our deeds?" We are rewarded by both.

"And if he cares so much about belief then why doesn't he just come down and visit us like any father would so we know God exists like Christians do?" I guess the time is not right yet? Who knows? Maybe theres some prophecies unfufilled? And besides,he sort of has because people have seen him so yea.
Apophis66

Con

Well, we are at the end already. Thanks for the debate, this is one of my favorite topics.

Question:Instead of claiming miracles and supernatural events,why didnt they say,"Jeez I had a hallucination?"

You are catholic but now you seem to be defending Mormonism? Thats an interesting twist I wasn't expecting. If they said they had a hallucination then they wouldn't have any followers.

Peter in John 21:18-19 -
18 "Amen, Amen, I say to you, when you were younger, you used to dress yourself and go where you wanted; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go." 19 He said this signifying what kind of death he would glorify God. And when he had said this, he said "follow me."


Verse 18 is just so vague and can mean a million different things. Verse 19 is commentary by the writer who interprets verse 18 to mean Peter's death by Crucifixion. Peter was killed in 64 AD and the book of John could have easily been written years or even decades after his death and verse 19 is just the writer subjectively trying to fit verse 18 to a later event.

And of course, Jesus did tell Peter and his disciples (including us) to "to take up the cross n follow Him". This would mean that He knew his followers would have suffering (challenges) in their lives.

Thats also not much of a prediction. They were already getting persecuted so further persecution was easily predictable.

Read the scientific analysis of the miracle of lanciano:https://www.catholiceducation.org...... This says it all.

Just because people in the dark ages claim crazy miracles or witches casting spells doesn't make any of this true.

The ark became a hill after grass and everything grows on it. Take it as how historical artifacts are buried underground when they were once on the surface of the ground.

Your proof already assumes the hill is the ark which is circular reasoning. So if a hill kind of looks like a bunny, does that mean it was once a giant bunny?

I could say Thanos snapped his fingers and half the universe died and Thanos died but my friend could affirm the fact that half the universe died but Thanos didnt die. So in conclusion:It can be affirmed that half the universe did die.

So if you two guys are claiming that there is this alien names Thanos with superpowers with no evidence we should just believe you? And if you two can't even get your facts straight like whether he died or not then how do we know the other parts of your story is true? Contradictions are the #1 thing cops look for when spotting liars and unreliable witnesses.

No was in the tomb. What else? Jesus did appear in front of them later so it prooves he did come back from the dead. So it covers whatever you said next.

You didn't answer why Mark claimed the women told nobody when according to the other authors the women excitedly told the apostles when they heard from the angels their master was risen from the dead and their faith was confirmed. And that later part in Mark 16 that claims that Jesus appeared in front of them is probably a forgery because earliest versions of the chapter doesn't have it. And I am getting this claim from Bible Gateway.
https://www.biblegateway.com...

Adam wasnt the only sinner. Unless you"re saying you"re 100% pure and you"ve never sinned in your life,we are all sinners.

Genesis didn't say we were being punished with hard lives for our own sins. God put this curse on humanity as a punishment for Adam and Eve disobeying God in the Garden.

We already sinned by putting jesus to death,which is why jesus said,"Father forgive them for they know not what they are doing."

Only a few people killed Jesus. The vast majority of humanity had nothing to do with it.

Back then,lambs were killed for ones sins. The sinner would lay his or her hand on the lamb to "transfer" their sins to the lamb and they are slaughtered for it. Jesus wasnt known as the lamb of god for nothing.

How does killing an animal somehow absolve you of your responsibility for your actions? According to the idea of justice when someone does something bad they deserve the punishment and justice is about giving them what they deserve. Punishing an innocent person is unjust because it punishes the innocent. Even if he volunteered it is unjust to punish an innocent person and let a guilty person go without justice. Would you be fine with a child rapist's kind old mother taking his life sentence and allowing him to go free? if justice was transferable then why do you have a problem with it?

Technically its a blessing in disguise if you look at the bigger picture. Take Jessica Cox as an example:shes disabled but still has a good life and a social motivater. So what if you are disabled? God is testing them to see if they can adapt and continue life with whatever illness.

I am talking about the genes that affect our minds that can influence our moral choices and impact whether we get into heaven. Some people are born with more kind, peaceful, and faithful names and many are born without them and can even have psychopathic, bipolar, or gay natures/genes. Why does God rig our minds and then punish us eternally when we screw up? Why not give us all amazing natures like he already gives some people?

Another possibility is that its Satan who did all that. He after all does alot of bad stuff. This not only applies to the conditions you stated but to disasters as well and all the bad stuff you can think of.

And why did God just let Satan screw up his plan?

They maybe havent looked at the evidence yet.

Most Christians I know haven't even looked into this "evidence" themselves and most just believe because of faith or other reasons. Not that many people are well versed in Christian theology just like you aren't well versed in Hindu theology. Why should people be punished with eternal torment for not arriving at the logical conclusion? That seems really extreme.

If you affirmed that statement,tell me why no one in countries like Singapore has been killed or tortured for not believing in christianity?

The bible makes it very obvious that non-believers will go to hell.

John 3:36:
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

Its pretty obvious that the philosophy of Christianity is definitely not divine and couldn't have come from the mind of God and was instead made up by flawed humans. Without divinity Jesus definitely didn't rise from the dead.

I can keep going by attacking anti-capitalist, pro-communist, overly pacifist, pro-divine right of kings, anti-slave escape, male chauvinist, homophobic, anti-divorce, pro-virginity verses in the bible but I think I have made my point.
Debate Round No. 5
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by rrbb 3 years ago
rrbb
As a Mormon we believe in a literal Resurrection, and so was Christ. In the resurrection, our bodies will undergo a much more significant change than simply not having blood, but we can only speculate on what this change will be
The distinction between 'just flesh and bone' and flesh and bone and blood was one that was common in the early years of the Church. And it was a view that was developed (not just by LDS members) to try and harmonize several different passages of scripture. The challenge is that these sorts of categories don't really match up well with what we know about our physical bodies today - which isn't limited to ideas of flesh and bone but to an understanding of complex systems, and molecular biology and genetics.
Part of our challenge is the reliance on Biblical translations to create these ideas. One of the proof texts used in this discussion historically has been the resurrected Jesus, talking to his apostles in Luke 24:39:
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have."
But no blood is mentioned. However, the Greek word used here for flesh isn't a word that means somehow flesh without blood -
Flesh in the New Testament usually includes blood by definition. It encapsulates the idea of the physical body with all of its parts (including blood). And this is how Jesus is using it in this context. Jesus isn't teaching us some great mystery about the resurrection, merely pointing out to his apostles that he does in fact have a very real body. And this sort of thing is true in other places. Our attempts at times to parse scripture to help us understand questions that aren't explained clearly sometimes leads us into this sort of speculation. I think that we do far better looking at the descriptions we have have glorified beings (God, for example, as he appears to Joseph Smith) for an understanding of the nature of the resurrected body rather than at our own physica
Posted by Just-Call-Me-PK 3 years ago
Just-Call-Me-PK
Sure, it"s in my previous comment below. A few examples being, Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny the younger, Babylonian talmud. I am also still waiting for your evidence showing that writings have to be as contemporary as you would like for it to be a fact?
Posted by Apophis66 3 years ago
Apophis66
I don't recall you giving a source that backs up the gospels. I look through your posts and cannot find it. Since my eyes must be failing me please re-post this source.
Posted by Just-Call-Me-PK 3 years ago
Just-Call-Me-PK
Besides the ones i provided? What evidence do you have that if its not as contemporary as you would like then it follows it is not true?
Posted by Apophis66 3 years ago
Apophis66
So what contemporary records by other sources back up the gospels?
Posted by Just-Call-Me-PK 3 years ago
Just-Call-Me-PK
Luckily there is plenty of this in the case of Jesus, overwhelmingly in fact. As historical figures go, he has the most evidence.
Posted by Apophis66 3 years ago
Apophis66
What if there was an antobiography of George Washington when there is no other historical reference to him even existing or any historical reference that the claimed revolutionary war even happened or that the US was ever occupied by Britain? How likely is it that a revolution from a major world power and the destruction of many cities would go without any other reference from anybody else?
Posted by Just-Call-Me-PK 3 years ago
Just-Call-Me-PK
But as I showed, just because writings of events are not at the exact time they happened doesn"t mean they are not accurate, on the contrary. What are you basing this idea on? Why is it a fact that it must be written at the exact time? This would mean the huge majority of biographical writings are lies. Also we know from the evidence it was written before the destruction of the temple in ad 70. If you want to look at non Christian evidence check out Tacitus, Pliny the younger, Josephus, Babylonian talmud, for starters. It is also worth noting many other factors such as the price of parchment which was really expensive, the fact that some apostles were illiterate, also trying to find time to write whilst trying to avoid persecution. So many factors to consider.
Posted by Apophis66 3 years ago
Apophis66
Ad 60 is 30 years later and isn't contemporary. Thats a generation later. Also it was written by a bias source from the Christian inner circle. We are also not completely sure when it was written and some claim it was written as late as 140 AD. We can try to look for clues in the book and guess when it was written but the reality is that we just don't know for sure.

You'd think that if Jesus was such a famous and controversial figure someone among the Jews or the Romans at the time would have written about the arguments against him, his growing support, or his trial. Someone among the Romans would have mentioned they had a big census where they forced everyone to move to their hometowns, or a Jewish source angrily mention Herod's killing of the innocents, the three days of darkness, or the dead rising from their graves.
Posted by Just-Call-Me-PK 3 years ago
Just-Call-Me-PK
268 years* apologies.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.