The Resurrection, Something Borrowed, Something New, But Certainly not True

[calamity]

Who knows better? I don't really see that anyone knows at all much less better. There are those that believe they know, of course, or say they know. In the context of science these people sound poorly informed. But they do get 100 points on persistence.

Look at it this way. Would it not be silly to assume that the resurrection myth of one small area of desert about 2000 years ago is real while arguing all the other resurrection myths seen throughout the world in all recorded history are myths?

Hint--there is only one reasonable answer.

 

[joG]

Look at it this way. Would it not be silly to assume that the resurrection myth of one small area of desert about 2000 years ago is real while arguing all the other resurrection myths seen throughout the world in all recorded history are myths?

Hint--there is only one reasonable answer.

Maybe we just aren't smart enough to understand the dichotomy. We believe that subsystems cannot comprehend the system as a while and we are certainly a very small subsystem indeed.

 

[calamity]

Maybe we just aren't smart enough to understand the dichotomy. We believe that subsystems cannot comprehend the system as a while and we are certainly a very small subsystem indeed.

Would it not make more sense to just dismiss the fairy tale than spin it into some yarn of subsystems beyond our understanding? I mean, seriously, we are just talking about anther silly myth similar to many seen around the world, 99.999% of which we dismiss. What's so special about the resurrected Jewish guy?

 

[OlNate]

Ah, the Christmas myth. Three kings, mangers, and stars leading everyone to the holy grail--or something to that effect.

lol...your theological knowledge base is astounding, you should really be lecturing at the seminary. Though you seem to be trying to fast forward the story. Bringing up the resurrection and the grail (from the last supper) at Christmas is like bringing up the Super Bowl in September.

 

[calamity]

lol...your theological knowledge base is astounding, you should really be lecturing at the seminary. Though you seem to be trying to fast forward the story. Bringing up the resurrection and the grail (from the last supper) at Christmas is like bringing up the Super Bowl in September.

I'm using the second definition of "grail"

2. a thing that is being earnestly pursued or sought after:

 

[beancounter]

Bitter diatribe?


Hahahahaha Hello, Pot. Trying to smear the kettle again? :lol:

So ironic......

It's your far out over-reaching claims (which even the author you gave for reference doesn't support), is the reason I'm scoffing at certain atheists' claims!

I bet some atheists also scoff at other atheists - like the new atheists - for their ridiculous claims!


I tend to believe the New Atheists, are a different breed.







Devolution?

A self proclaimed philosopher, is calling a scientist intellectually lazy? Seriously?

Scientific facts trumps philosophical concepts..always.

 

[OlNate]

I'm using the second definition of "grail"

2. a thing that is being earnestly pursued or sought after:

Nice recovery! lolz

 

[tosca1]

lol...so, you deny that almost every culture on earth which we know of had a resurrection myth. Why am I not surprised?

Where did you get that I deny there are dead-coming-back-to-life- myths???
Why would it be surprising that every culture would have it?
Even today, we hear of people who'd been declared dead come back to life....why couldn't there been nothing of the sort in ancient times? Does that kind of phenomenon chooses culture?

https://www.koreaboo.com/news/82-year-old-korean-man-declared-dead-doctors-suddenly-wakes/

'Dead' Filipino child who woke up at her own funeral pronounced dead again | The Independent


Indian man declared dead wakes up minutes before his autopsy is about to begin* | Daily Mail Online

'Dead' man comes back to life at own funeral and cries | Metro News



Why wouldn't that become an inspiration to some writers?
A lot of fiction are based on some non-fiction.



I'm saying - there's no parallel with Jesus' Resurrection. Big difference.
Even your own source had said so.
You need to hone your comprehension skills. It takes practice.

Lol. Just shows how bang-on I am.....

 

[gfm7175]

Christians think they have a unique event...Christ Rising from the dead. But, of course, that myth has been around for ages. Long before the sandal wearing hippie ever walked the dunes between Jerusalem and Galilee, rode an ass in Damascus or faced his fate on a cross planted atop a hill, mythical characters were rising from the dead.



So, really, what we have here is myth sharing. Clearly, since Jesus came after all these other resurrected characters from what amount to fairy tales, reason dictates the Jesus myth too is a fairy tale.

Now, of course, Christians will say those other resurrections are myths but the resurrection of Jesus was real. Of course, we know better. Fact remains, Jesus myth is just as contrived as the Osirus and Achilles myths. Is there any doubt?

The problem with your assertion is that it is unfortunately a non-sequitur...

You seem to be arguing this:
1) "Rising from the dead" stories have been told in the past.
2) Those stories turned out to be myths.
3) The Jesus resurrection story was told after those other mythical stories were told.
4) Therefore, the Jesus' resurrection story is also a myth.

Huh? How can 4 be a conclusion of 1-3?

1) My parents have claimed to be millionaires in the past.
2) Their past claims turned out to be untruthful.
3) I claimed to be a millionaire after my parents' untruthful claims were made.
4) Therefore, my claim of being a millionaire is also untruthful.

I think that should clear up all doubt that your conclusion is a non-sequitur and therefore invalid.

 

[calamity]

The problem with your assertion is that it is unfortunately a non-sequitur...

You seem to be arguing this:
1) "Rising from the dead" stories have been told in the past.
2) Those stories turned out to be myths.
3) The Jesus resurrection story was told after those other mythical stories were told.
4) Therefore, the Jesus' resurrection story is also a myth.

Huh? How can 4 be a conclusion of 1-3?

1) My parents have claimed to be millionaires in the past.
2) Their past claims turned out to be untruthful.
3) I claimed to be a millionaire after my parents' untruthful claims were made.
4) Therefore, my claim of being a millionaire is also untruthful.

I think that should clear up all doubt that your conclusion is a non-sequitur and therefore invalid.

Well, it certainly takes a leap of faith to believe either that the Christian resurrection myth is the real deal or that you are a "millionaire."

 

[calamity]

Where did you get that I deny there are dead-coming-back-to-life- myths???
Why would it be surprising that every culture would have it?
Even today, we hear of people who'd been declared dead come back to life....why couldn't there been nothing of the sort in ancient times? Does that kind of phenomenon chooses culture?

https://www.koreaboo.com/news/82-year-old-korean-man-declared-dead-doctors-suddenly-wakes/

'Dead' Filipino child who woke up at her own funeral pronounced dead again | The Independent


Indian man declared dead wakes up minutes before his autopsy is about to begin* | Daily Mail Online

'Dead' man comes back to life at own funeral and cries | Metro News



Why wouldn't that become an inspiration to some writers?
A lot of fiction are based on some non-fiction.



I'm saying - there's no parallel with Jesus' Resurrection. Big difference.
Even your own source had said so.
You need to hone your comprehension skills. It takes practice.

Lol. Just shows how bang-on I am.....

Oh, good. So, you agree that if Jesus came back to life, it's just another ho-hum case of some dude who wasn't really dead after all. I'll buy that.

 

[Tigerace117]

So, are you willing to accept that the Jesus myth is really describing something that happened 3000 years earlier than AD 35, and happened in maybe in China, India or ancient Egypt instead of Jerusalem? Or, are you saying that lots of Jesuses have existed and were resurrected? Pick one.

I'm saying that the idea of resurrection myths being commonplace doesn't actually prove anything.

 

[HowardBThiname]

The problem with your assertion is that it is unfortunately a non-sequitur...

You seem to be arguing this:
1) "Rising from the dead" stories have been told in the past.
2) Those stories turned out to be myths.
3) The Jesus resurrection story was told after those other mythical stories were told.
4) Therefore, the Jesus' resurrection story is also a myth.

Huh? How can 4 be a conclusion of 1-3?

Granted, #4 is not a valid conclusion of first three assertions. However, if the first three are valid the fourth is a "distinct possibility."

 

[HowardBThiname]

Where did you get that I deny there are dead-coming-back-to-life- myths???
Why would it be surprising that every culture would have it?
Even today, we hear of people who'd been declared dead come back to life....why couldn't there been nothing of the sort in ancient times? Does that kind of phenomenon chooses culture?

https://www.koreaboo.com/news/82-year-old-korean-man-declared-dead-doctors-suddenly-wakes/

'Dead' Filipino child who woke up at her own funeral pronounced dead again | The Independent


Indian man declared dead wakes up minutes before his autopsy is about to begin* | Daily Mail Online

'Dead' man comes back to life at own funeral and cries | Metro News



Why wouldn't that become an inspiration to some writers?
A lot of fiction are based on some non-fiction.



I'm saying - there's no parallel with Jesus' Resurrection. Big difference.
Even your own source had said so.
You need to hone your comprehension skills. It takes practice.

Lol. Just shows how bang-on I am.....

Being "declared" dead is not the same as being dead.

Muslims also believe Jesus existed, but they do not believe he was crucified or killed. The Quran states that.

They don't believe any blood sacrifice was necessary or required and they believe Jesus physically ascended, while alive, at the behest of Allah. Neither do they believe Jesus was anything other than a man, a prophet, who found favor with God.

You can no more prove that they are wrong than posters here can prove that Jesus was not resurrected, but, a little common sense on everyone's part should tell us that all that stories of supernaturalism are most likely not true.

 

[Tigerace117]

You agree that there is no evidence of the Jesus resurection. OK. Good.

You agree that you think your opinion is important and literally no one else does. Ok. Good.

 

[gfm7175]

Well, it certainly takes a leap of faith to believe either that the Christian resurrection myth is the real deal or that you are a "millionaire."

Sure, one can discuss levels of probability, but in the end, you can't make the claim that Jesus' resurrection is a myth simply because other mythical resurrection stories were told before the Jesus story came into existence. Your argument is not invalidating the Jesus resurrection story in any way... At best, you could make the claim that Jesus' resurrection is a highly improbable event because _____________.

 

[gfm7175]

Granted, #4 is not a valid conclusion of first three assertions. However, if the first three are valid the fourth is a "distinct possibility."

Exactly, if he changed his conclusion to "highly improbable" instead of "a definite myth", and removed the timing element because that would be irrelevant information, his conclusion could be stated in a way that would logically follow... But as it currently stands, his conclusion does not logically follow and is invalid...

 

[Tim the plumber]

Originally Posted by Tigerace117 View Post
Considering that this all happened thousands of years ago, and there's only so much "evidence" to go around, it's not too surprising that there isn't too much "hard" evidence.

Originally Posted by Tim the plumber View Post
You agree that there is no evidence of the Jesus resurection. OK. Good.

You agree that you think your opinion is important and literally no one else does. Ok. Good.

You said that there "isn't too much "hard" evidence". That is there is no evidence for it. There is good clear evidence for the accuracy of the account of the erruption of Pompeii by Pliny the younger though.

Neither is my opinion.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Exactly, if he changed his conclusion to "highly improbable" instead of "a definite myth", and removed the timing element because that would be irrelevant information, his conclusion could be stated in a way that would logically follow... But as it currently stands, his conclusion does not logically follow and is invalid...

The Jesus resurection story is as probable as the loop the loop story of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

You can't prove it did not happen!

 

[joG]

Would it not make more sense to just dismiss the fairy tale than spin it into some yarn of subsystems beyond our understanding? I mean, seriously, we are just talking about anther silly myth similar to many seen around the world, 99.999% of which we dismiss. What's so special about the resurrected Jewish guy?

You mean the Myth that we know?

 

[calamity]

You mean the Myth that we know?

Well, come to think of it, that many who buy into the Jesus myth probably do not know much, if anything, about the other myths may explain everything.

 

[calamity]

Sure, one can discuss levels of probability, but in the end, you can't make the claim that Jesus' resurrection is a myth simply because other mythical resurrection stories were told before the Jesus story came into existence. Your argument is not invalidating the Jesus resurrection story in any way... At best, you could make the claim that Jesus' resurrection is a highly improbable event because _____________.

...because people who are actually dead do not come back to life.

 

[tosca1]

A self proclaimed philosopher, is calling a scientist intellectually lazy? Seriously?

Scientific facts trumps philosophical concepts..always.

:roll:


Seriously? How the heck did you come up with that from that video?

He referred to Dawkins as a layman when it comes to Philosophy and theology.
Who 's talking about scientific facts?


Really.......you, too? Comprehension deficiency must be so common in your group! :lol:

 

[roguenuke]

"Likely" isn't the same thing as evidence. It's really a matter of opinion, frankly, despite the fact that some feel that their opinion makes them intellectually superior.

Unless, of course, you believe what the New Testament states; I do believe that would count as soft evidence at the least. There is little chance people will allow themselves to be tortured to death for a lie.

There is scientific evidence against him having performed miracles. The very fact that they would not be referred to as "miracles" if they had a scientific basis.

 

[tosca1]

...because people who are actually dead do not come back to life.

They don't normally do. However....there are cases that show some do.

If the doctor certified the person dead - of course, wouldn't you assume the person is actually dead?
If you won't rely on a doctor's medical know-how......how do you know a person is "actually" dead?

C'mon....give me your answer.