I've never said that, ever. Nor do I have to demonstrate that the natural world exists.
I know that because the story isn't written by "the 500" or by the women who supposedly found the empty tomb, or by the "12" or anyone else. We don't have access to those people or their testimony. If I tell you a story I heard from someone else, that's called hearsay and that is what we are dealing with in the passage you quoted. Just read it for yourself. I’ve already pointed this out to you in regards to “the 500.”
It's written in the third person, for starters. And secondly, the passage says as much right at the beginning. My objective method is just to read the passage you provided:
B}For what I received I passed on to you [\b] as of first importance[
a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,
5 and that he appeared to Cephas,[
b] and then to the Twelve.
6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.
7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles,
8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
So … one guy.
We have no evidence for “the 500.” Or "the women." Or "the 12." Just the claim(s).
Nothing from “the women” though, right? Nothing from Peter? Just people claiming somebody else saw something?
Let’s examine what Matthew and Luke had to say about it. Would you care to provide quotes for those as well, please? Let's see what claims we're talking about here.
What?
Historians don't apply different rules for different events. They are consistent. It is you that wants to apply different rules for different events.
You’re claiming that the evidence for the resurrection is “good enough according to historical standards?” Is that it?
I disagree and I don’t’ think you’ve made your case. Historians don’t accept it as historical fact either.
It is in the sense that we can find Trump supporters that are alive today and actually interact with them and ask them questions about their beliefs. We can’t do any of that with the anonymous gospel writers that died many centuries ago. But it’s the same thing in terms of how quickly legends and myths can begin forming.
So you claim.
Trump and his supporters have appeared publicly on many occasions, making claims about supposed election fraud. They seem to sincerely believe it as well.
If you had evidence, perhaps you could convince people.
You mean the creed that was passed on orally for a number of years before being written down? The creed that Paul added onto? (And who knows who or what else?)
You haven’t demonstrated how or why that would have been impossible.
On the flip side, we already know that stories that are passed down orally are subject to all kinds of errors in transmission, embellishments and exaggerations, etc. You know, human nature stuff. Just play a game of telephone with your friends and you’ll see how that works pretty quickly.
What?
No, it does not. Joseph Smith sincerely believed in Mormonism, which he clearly just made up, and even died for that belief. Do you believe Mormonism is true?
So you claim. Why? For the Bible tells me so.
Not really.
So?
I think I already gave a number of examples and reasons.
We know that nature exists. We can define it. We can measure it. We can test it. Etc.
We don’t know the same for the “supernatural” so it makes no sense to appeal to it.
See above.
I don’t think one is necessary. Lots of people have experiences that they attribute to all kinds of things. Doesn’t make them true. Perhaps all of the stories are just completely made up. Perhaps they have some kernel of truth with some massive embellishments.
Where did “his disciples” report “having experiences? What did they say? We’ve already ruled out “group” experiences, at this point, I think.
The best explanation isn’t going to be something that hasn’t been shown to be possible and has never occurred before, in any verifiable way.
