Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

Notice – The ministries featured in this section of TheologyWeb are guests of this site and in some cases not bargaining for the rough and tumble world of debate forums, though sometimes they are. Additionally, this area is frequented and highlighted for guests who also very often are not acclimated to debate fora. As such, the rules of conduct here will be more strict than in the general forum. This will be something within the discretion of the Moderators and the Ministry Representative, but we simply ask that you conduct yourselves in a manner considerate of the fact that these ministries are our invited guests. You can always feel free to start a related thread in general forum without such extra restrictions. Thank you.

Deeper Waters is founded on the belief that the Christian community has long been in the shallow end of Christianity while there are treasures of the deep waiting to be discovered. Too many in the shallow end are not prepared when they go out beyond those waters and are quickly devoured by sharks. We wish to aid Christians to equip them to navigate the deeper waters of the ocean of truth and come up with treasure in the end.

We also wish to give special aid to those often neglected, that is, the disabled community. This is especially so since our founders are both on the autism spectrum and have a special desire to reach those on that spectrum. While they are a special emphasis, we seek to help others with any disability realize that God can use them and that they are as the Psalmist says, fearfully and wonderfully made.

General TheologyWeb forum rules: here.
See more
See less

Book Plunge: Can Christians Prove The Resurrection?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by psstein View Post
    He's not considered a specialist in life of Jesus/historical Jesus, so no, he's not a scholar of that field. He has produced no scholarly work about anything outside textual criticism. He's a scholar of textual criticism.
    Again, I think you are being disingenuous. Bart Ehrman is a New Testament scholar. He is an expert regarding the beliefs and history of early Christians. His subspecialty is textual criticism. You are trying to discount every thing he says outside of textual criticism as non-expert opinion. Again, I see that as no different than someone telling a general ophthalmologist that he is not an expert of the eyes because he is not a retina subspecialist.

    Drop the nonsense.
    Last edited by Gary; 02-08-2016, 12:54 AM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Gary View Post
      Again, I think you are being disingenuous. <...>
      Drop the nonsense.
      Oh, the irony.
      Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

      Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
      sigpic
      I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

      Comment


      • It looks like the only reply we ever get is "brainwashed!"

        or "Generalizations!"

        or "assumptions!"

        Someone tell me when there's something really worth responding to. It's not worth it if you receive the same drivel back every time.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
          It looks like the only reply we ever get is "brainwashed!"

          or "Generalizations!"

          or "assumptions!"

          Someone tell me when there's something really worth responding to. It's not worth it if you receive the same drivel back every time.
          Have you run out of ad hoc excuses why the family could not have taken the body, Nick?

          "Jews would never move a body"---proven wrong.
          "If the Sanhedrin requested a crucifixion, the body always went to them"---no source ever given. Ad hoc.
          "Jesus' tomb had the seal of Caesar on it. Not even Pilate could open the tomb and move the body."---no source ever given. Ad hoc.
          "The entire family of Jesus were members of the Church"---unprovable.
          "No Jew would ever believe the Resurrection claim without seeing a resurrected body." ---false. A few Jews in Asia Minor allegedly believed based only on "searching the Scripture" and hearing about Paul's "heavenly vision".
          "No Jew would ever believe in a dying/rising Messiah unless seeing the body themselves." false. The Jews in Asia Minor never saw a body.

          You are out of excuses, Nick. I have proven that it is possible and plausible that someone moved the body, giving rise to an "empty tomb". I have shown that Paul only had a vision, by his own admission. Visions are not reality. I have shown that your "Honor-Shame Society" argument is full of holes because the Jews in Asia Minor believed a shameful, never heard of before belief based simply on searching an ancient holy book and believing that someone's "heavenly vision" was reality. I have given a possible motive for Paul's conversion and demonstrated that strange conversions do happen. I have demonstrated that we have zero evidence of any alleged witnesses being given the opportunity to recant seeing a resurrected body to avoid martyrdom. I have shown that a significant percentage, and maybe even a majority, of scholars do not believe that the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses.

          I have proven that your evidence for an alleged, never-heard-of-before-or-since supernatural event is pathetically weak.

          You can continue to make excuses why you will not address these facts, but the truth is you are defeated. Period.

          Comment


          • Attention Readers of Theology Web: If Nick Peters ever again claims that there is very strong evidence (9 out of 10) to prove the bodily Resurrection of Jesus as an historical event, ask him this one question:

            "Can you prove that your generalizations about the beliefs and habits of first century Jews, Romans, and other pagans never had exceptions?"

            ---If he says there were never any exceptions, you can consider Nick a liar or a fool.
            ---If he says that exceptions are "possible, but unlikely", then he has just defeated his own argument. By definition a "miracle" is the most unlikely of all explanations for an event. If an alternative, non-miracle explanation is "possible", by definition, it is more probable/likely to be the correct explanation.
            Last edited by Gary; 02-08-2016, 12:14 PM.

            Comment


            • delete.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                You cannot prove that Joseph was already dead and you know it. Yet another of your many, many assumptions.
                When Jesus is referred to as "son of Mary," most serious commentators (i.e. not Gary) think that Joseph is dead. This is a very common practice in 2nd Temple Judaism.

                Read Maurice Casey's book if you dare to educate yourself. Maurice Casey was an agnostic or an atheist.
                Last edited by psstein; 02-08-2016, 05:38 PM.

                Comment


                • You can babble all you want about "assumptions and generalizations," but you need to recognize that the culture they were in was such that these customs were only abandoned in time of war.

                  In time of peace, they were adhered to. The burden is to show that they were not adhered to.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                    Again, I think you are being disingenuous. Bart Ehrman is a New Testament scholar. He is an expert regarding the beliefs and history of early Christians. His subspecialty is textual criticism. You are trying to discount every thing he says outside of textual criticism as non-expert opinion. Again, I see that as no different than someone telling a general ophthalmologist that he is not an expert of the eyes because he is not a retina subspecialist.

                    Drop the nonsense.
                    Textual criticism has traditionally been called "lower criticism" for a reason. Higher criticism, or historical-critical work, requires different knowledge and skills. That's why notable NT scholars with history PhDs (e.g. Richard Bauckham) tend to work in higher criticism. Some of Bauckham's work on the background of Acts has been phenomenal.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by psstein View Post
                      When Jesus is referred to as "son of Mary," most serious commentators (i.e. not Gary) think that Joseph is dead. This is a very common practice in 2nd Temple Judaism.

                      Read Maurice Casey's book if you dare to educate yourself. Maurice Casey was an agnostic or an atheist.
                      Once again, you are basing your supernatural claims on generalizations and assumptions. I am not saying that I believe that Joseph was still alive, just that we have no proof that he wasn't.

                      It is amazing to me how you always appeal to a scholar in a desperate attempt to confirm all your many generalizations. Let me let you in on a secret, Stein. NO ONE living today knows if any exceptions to your generalizations occurred twenty centuries ago. NO ONE. So even if your scholars agree with your generalizations, they CANNOT assure you that exceptions did not occur. And for most educated people in our society, an exception to a generalization is more probable than a miracle. By definition, a miracle is the least probable of any explanation for an event.

                      Now some conservative Christians might take issue with that. "You can't claim that for most educated people in our society, a miracle is the least likely explanation for any event!" they might say. "Prove it".

                      Happily!

                      I assert that even among conservative Christians, for the vast majority of events in their everyday lives, a miracle explanation is the last explanation they will assume to be the cause of the event. Let's give some examples of conversations between two Christians:

                      Example 1:

                      Roger: My car keys were missing since yesterday, but I have them now!
                      William: It's a miracle! Jesus found your keys and brought them to you!

                      Is that what most Christians would first assume as the explanation for the found keys? No way. The first assumption would be that Roger had misplaced them or someone else had taken them. Only when all other natural explanations were exhausted would most Christians assume that the re-appearance of Roger's keys was due to a miracle.

                      Example 2:

                      Bob: My car has been acting up for three months now but finally it is running perfectly!
                      John: It's a miracle! Jesus fixed your car!

                      Is that the first assumption most Christians would make. No way. The first assumptions that most everyone, including most Christians, would be: Bob took his car to the mechanic; he worked on it himself; he changed the air filter; he used a new motor oil; or the problems had been caused by the previous cold weather. Only after all these explanations had been exhausted would Christians assume that a miracle had occurred; that Jesus had fixed Bob's car by a supernatural act.

                      Example 3:

                      Betty: I have been suffering from cancer for two years but I am now cured!
                      Judy: It's a miracle! Jesus cured your cancer!

                      Is that the first assumption most Christians would make? No way. The first assumption that everyone, including the overwhelming majority of Christians would make is: Betty had undergone chemotherapy or her cancer had been surgically removed. Only after eliminating all the natural causes for a cure would most people consider a miracle as the cause of Betty's cancer cure.

                      So telling skeptics that a miracle explanation is not the least likely explanation for any event is pure rubbish. A miracle explanation is the least assumed explanation in your everyday life today, so why shouldn't it have been true two thousand years ago??
                      Last edited by Gary; 02-08-2016, 10:46 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by psstein View Post
                        You can babble all you want about "assumptions and generalizations," but you need to recognize that the culture they were in was such that these customs were only abandoned in time of war.

                        In time of peace, they were adhered to. The burden is to show that they were not adhered to.
                        No, sorry, Stein. In our culture, the onus is always on the person making the claim, not on the one skeptical of the claim. You are claiming that the customs of first century Jews were never, without exception, abandoned except in times of war. Prove it. Prove to everyone reading that no exception to this generalization ever happened except during a war.

                        You can't.

                        And you know it.
                        Last edited by Gary; 02-08-2016, 10:15 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by psstein View Post
                          You can babble all you want about "assumptions and generalizations," but you need to recognize that the culture they were in was such that these customs were only abandoned in time of war.

                          In time of peace, they were adhered to. The burden is to show that they were not adhered to.
                          As a non-supernaturalist, Gary cannot accept the Resurrection as a possible event. Therefore, something else must have happened. Doesn't really matter what, but Gary is quite willing to let his imagination run wild dreaming up scenarios, no matter how implausible. If you shoot one down, he doesn't care; he'll just dream up something else.
                          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                          sigpic
                          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                            As a non-supernaturalist, Gary cannot accept the Resurrection as a possible event. Therefore, something else must have happened. Doesn't really matter what, but Gary is quite willing to let his imagination run wild dreaming up scenarios, no matter how implausible. If you shoot one down, he doesn't care; he'll just dream up something else.
                            OBP: When something unexpected happens in your everyday life, is your first assumption that it is a miracle? I highly doubt it. Your first assumption for the vast majority of events in your life is a natural explanation. Only when the natural explanations are ruled out due you consider a miracle explanation.

                            That is what I am doing with the first century Christian claim of a supernatural raising of a dead body. I am not ruling out the possibility of a miracle, I am just considering more probable, non-miracle explanations first.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                              OBP: When something unexpected happens in your everyday life, is your first assumption that it is a miracle? I highly doubt it. Your first assumption for the vast majority of events in your life is a natural explanation. Only when the natural explanations are ruled out due you consider a miracle explanation.
                              Sure. On the other hand, I know a miracle when I see one.
                              That is what I am doing with the first century Christian claim of a supernatural raising of a dead body.
                              No, you are not. You are waving away evidence and concocting ad hoc explanations to get around the possibility of a miracle.
                              I am not ruling out the possibility of a miracle, I am just considering more probable, non-miracle explanations first.
                              Yes, you are ruling out the possibility of a miracle. Quit being disingenuous, you hypocrite.
                              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                              sigpic
                              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                                Sure. On the other hand, I know a miracle when I see one.

                                No, you are not. You are waving away evidence and concocting ad hoc explanations to get around the possibility of a miracle.
                                Yes, you are ruling out the possibility of a miracle. Quit being disingenuous, you hypocrite.
                                Please tell us how you know a miracle when you see one. Please describe one such event in your life.

                                I give as much probability for the reality of your miracle claim as YOU give for the reality of the miracle claim of Muslims that Mohammad flew on a winged horse to heaven and the Hindu claim that the Buddha caused a water buffalo to speak in a human language for forty five minutes. All three claims could be true, but based on the documented incidence of such events in cumulative human history, their probability is very low.

                                I am being rational regarding all THREE claims. I'm sorry that offends you.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-15-2024, 10:19 PM
                                14 responses
                                74 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-13-2024, 10:13 PM
                                6 responses
                                60 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-12-2024, 09:36 PM
                                1 response
                                23 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-11-2024, 10:19 PM
                                0 responses
                                22 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-08-2024, 11:59 AM
                                3 responses
                                44 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Working...
                                X