• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jesus Christ’s Resurrection Is Probably The Best-Documented Historical Event Ever

Nonsense. I have the historical Gospels and epistles. You guys have hot air and nothing of substance to knock down the resurrection. YOU HAVE NOTHING.
Don't forget to mention you also have your Satanic looking arsenal of angry, vicious, rapid hyena pics.
 
The body actually cant reanimate after so long being dead. Its just not possible.


We often use science to determine if what is claimed by historical figures actually happen.

When did facts and logic ever matter to those buried in dogma?
 
Nonsense. I have the historical Gospels and epistles. You guys have hot air and nothing of substance to knock down the resurrection. YOU HAVE NOTHING.

You have religious mythological stories. The only thing historical about them is that they were written in past history. The contents are not accurate historical events.
 
How about we don't respond to this @Logicman any further, until he directly responds to the information he begged for and received multiple times?

How about you people first go back and review the numerous postings where I provided information and evidences for the resurrection? Did all that go over your heads?

These are just some of those postings in this thread. In other threads there are many, many others with additional evidences for the resurrection.

See Post #'s 63, 598, 616, 702, 761, 779, 842, 849, 978.

So open your eyes, Galactic Spin, and do your homework before jumping out with false claims.
 
Last edited:
Rotflmo
Sorry, your circular logic is a joke. You need to prove the dead can un-dead themselves.
Its always the same nonsense.

First show me the scientific studies that demonstrate that God and the supernatural - i.e. a resurrection - do not and cannot exist?

So, science isn't on your side and neither is history.

As for your nonsensical "circular logic" claim, understand this:

The Gospels / New Testament are not circular logic / reasoning. In fact, they weren't even "the Bible" in the first century. What they were, were some two dozen individual manuscripts, written by mostly different authors at different times in different locales. As such, those manuscripts constitute MULTIPLE INDEPENDENT REPORTS OR CONFIRMATIONS for the life of Christ, etc. So, the "circular reasoning" claim is not only sophomoric, but disingenuous as well.
 
How about we don't respond to this @Logicman any further, until he directly responds to the information he begged for and received multiple times?
I'm certainly not going to ask where the resurrection was documented, we'd be here till the next great extinction. Trying to explain something expecting comprehension? Not wasting my time any more on that either.
 
Please speak to my posts...

I have. See this post. https://debatepolitics.com/threads/jesus-christ’s-resurrection-is-probably-the-best-documented-historical-event-ever.478343/post-1076655326

You STILL have not provided any substantive arguments or evidences that demonstrate that the Gospel accounts of the resurrection of Jesus Christ are fictitious. If they were such a load of nonsense you ought to be able to demolish them ten times over. Yet all I get from skeptics like you are one or two kibitzer responses with nothing of substance .

Now do you have anything or not, and please spare me your one liners.
 
I have. See this post. https://debatepolitics.com/threads/jesus-christ’s-resurrection-is-probably-the-best-documented-historical-event-ever.478343/post-1076655326

You STILL have not provided any substantive arguments or evidences that demonstrate that the Gospel accounts of the resurrection of Jesus Christ are fictitious. If they were such a load of nonsense you ought to be able to demolish them ten times over. Yet all I get from skeptics like you are one or two kibitzer responses with nothing of substance .

Now do you have anything or not, and please spare me your one liners.

And you haven't established that they aren't fictitious, even though the content certainly strongly suggests it.
 
First show me the scientific studies that demonstrate that God and the supernatural - i.e. a resurrection - do not and cannot exist?

So, science isn't on your side and neither is history.

As for your nonsensical "circular logic" claim, understand this:

The Gospels / New Testament are not circular logic / reasoning. In fact, they weren't even "the Bible" in the first century. What they were, were some two dozen individual manuscripts, written by mostly different authors at different times in different locales. As such, those manuscripts constitute MULTIPLE INDEPENDENT REPORTS OR CONFIRMATIONS for the life of Christ, etc. So, the "circular reasoning" claim is not only sophomoric, but disingenuous as well.

First show how any method of inquiry has demonstrated that gods and the supernatural can exist.
 
I'm certainly not going to ask where the resurrection was documented, we'd be here till the next great extinction.

See a list of postings supporting the evidences for the resurrection here: https://debatepolitics.com/threads/...-historical-event-ever.478343/post-1076655310

And once again, it shouldn't be too difficult to read a book. The evidence is there, you just refuse to do your homework. Also, I don't recall where you responded to me asking for an example of when you claimed Dr. Habermas 'seemed confused'. Where is that?

Case for Resurrection Habermas.jpg
 
See a list of postings supporting the evidences for the resurrection here: https://debatepolitics.com/threads/jesus-christ’s-resurrection-is-probably-the-best-documented-historical-event-ever.478343/post-1076655310

And once again, it shouldn't be too difficult to read a book. The evidence is there, you just refuse to do your homework. Also, I don't recall where you responded to me asking for an example of when you claimed Dr. Habermas 'seemed confused'. Where is that?

View attachment 67415699

This book contains zero evidence of a resurrection.
 
How about you people first go back and review the numerous postings where I provided information and evidences for the resurrection? Did all that go over your heads?
You presented no evidence. But when you thought you did, all of it was directly addressed.

Quite unlike your very rude and total silent treatment of the information you repeatedly begged for.
 
Rutabagas are a known physical thing. Your qualification that everyone doesn't know they exist is meaningless. When people don't know of something physical, they can be told about it. They don't have to believe in it. With gods, all there is only belief in them, no knowledge at all.
If someone does not have personal experience with something (be it "material" or "immaterial") then, if they accept second (or worse) hand information regarding the existence of that thing, they BELIEVE that that thing is "real".

If someone does not have personal experience with something (be it "material" or "immaterial") then, if they DO NOT accept second (or worse) hand information regarding the existence of that thing, they DO NOT BELIEVE that that thing is "real".

Neither of those two conditions has the slightest bearing on whether or not that thing is "real".
You know that the sun will appear because the sun exists and has a relationship in space with the earth. No belief i required for you to know this. You know that the sun exists at night as well. We have facts that we know about the sun and earth. We don't have to believe anything about them.
I'm quite prepared to bet that the Sun will appear to rise in the East tomorrow morning (to the extent of betting the ranch on it). On the other hand, I do not totally dismiss the possibility that the Sun might "go nova" while I am sleeping and, hence, will NOT appear to rise in the East tomorrow morning (although I don't make any plans that take that possibility into account).
Not sure what gambling has to do with the difference between knowing and just believing.
See above for the difference between "knowing" and "believing". A person can "believe" in something to such a level that they will always act as if that something is "real" and (depending on what that thing is) the odds may very well favour (and to an immense degree) them in their decision based on what they "believe to be real".

I have never, personally, seen a COVID-19 virus. Based on the second-hand (and worse) information that I have received, I am prepared to believe that the COVID-19 virus is "real" and to base my actions on that belief.

There are many others who have, also, not personally seen a COVID-19 virus. Based on the second-hand (and worse) information that they have received (which is the same as the information that I have received), they are NOT prepared to believe that the COVID-19 virus is "real" and they base their actions on that belief.

Now, suppose (just for the sake of argument) that I was the ONLY person in the whole world who believed that the COVID-19 virus was "real".
  • Would that mean that the COVID-19 virus was NOT "real"?

Or, to take another example, if this were the 10th Century and I was the only person in the world who believed that women got pregnant because of the melding of small cells (that neither I nor anyone else had seen) that were contained in the ejaculate of males upon small cells (that neither I nor anyone else had seen) formed in the woman's ovaries.
  • Would that mean that it was not "real" that women got pregnant because of the melding of small cells (that neither I nor anyone else had seen) that were contained in the ejaculate of males upon small cells (that neither I nor anyone else had seen) formed in the woman's ovaries?
 
What reported observations of gods? There are none. That is the point you don't seem to get.
Obviously you have not read any of the "Holy Books" issued (and advertised as totally authoritative) by any religion.

There are at least 15 times that a person is recorded as personally interacting with an "Angel" (a manifestation of "God") in the Christian Bible alone. You might also want to note that "miracles" (a manifestation of the power of "God") are not limited solely to the Christian Religion and that many other religious "Holy Books" contain reports of "miracles" having occurred.

One does not have to accept the accuracy of the recorded evidence of the existence of "Angels" and/or "miracles" to accept that that recorded evidence DOES exist.
 
Not completely. Betting is still a game of chance, research is also testing hypothesis against eachother and more. Not remotely close to gambling :p. Desired results tends to lead to a lot of confirmation bias, when you lose your desired results you still learn something from it and change your desired results quite often.
Betting on a sure thing is still betting.

Research helps you to quantify the odds regarding whatever it is you are going to bet on.

The mathematics behind "Brownian Movement" indicate that it is possible for all of the air molecules in the room that I am currently sitting in to rush down into the lower north-east corner and for that to cause me to explosively decompress. While it is possible that that might happen, I'm not going to take any preventive action to protect myself from it happening because the odds that it will happen are so slight that I simply can't be bothered to do so.
 
Back
Top Bottom