Historical Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

[ppp]

I told him in another thread that Moses was fictional. He claimed that there was archaeological evidence for Moses, I said that I had never seen any. So he posted some pictures by Ron Wyatt, if you do not know who he is Google him, of modern brass ships valve wheels that he Wyatt claimed were Egyptian chariot wheels. He then became rude and forgot that I had said if asked politely that I would provide him with evidence. He can't seem to remember that.

Oh yeah. I have known of Wyatt since elementary school in the 70s. I was a 5th grader who believed in God in a Podunk rural farming community and still realized he was a joke.

 

[Ebionite]

Evidence of what, exactly?

You can read it here.

Did Jesus create mankind (Adam)?

Do you have reliable sources which provide an alternative explanation for the four-spoken wheel Ron Wyatt photographed in the Red Sea? https://wyattmuseum.com/chariot-wheels-in-the-red-sea/2011-669 Oh my FSM?? You are a hoot! Those are modern day ship's valve wheels That is the work...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

You can read it here.

Did Jesus create mankind (Adam)?

Do you have reliable sources which provide an alternative explanation for the four-spoken wheel Ron Wyatt photographed in the Red Sea? https://wyattmuseum.com/chariot-wheels-in-the-red-sea/2011-669 Oh my FSM?? You are a hoot! Those are modern day ship's valve wheels That is the work...

www.religiousforums.com

You do not ask for a reliable source to refute nonsense. Professionals will not stoop that low. Just as you do not see professional papers refuting creationism. Wyatt is self refuting.

I have doubts that you are even an Ebionite. You seemed to think that Jesus's resurrection was not unreasonable, but from what I have read Ebionites did not believe in magical Jesus.

 

[Ebionite]

He claimed that there was archaeological evidence for Moses, I said that I had never seen any.

What he actually said was:

I doubt that. There is a lack of artifacts that clearly should exist that tell us that it never happened.

 

[Ebionite]

You do not ask for a reliable source to refute nonsense. Professionals will not stoop that low. Just as you do not see professional papers refuting creationism. Wyatt is self refuting.

I have doubts that you are even an Ebionite. You seemed to think that Jesus's resurrection was not unreasonable, but from what I have read Ebionites did not believe in magical Jesus.

No, you don't get to change the terms after the fact.

Because I can link to reliable sources if needed. You do not have to trust me. You could try to find the sources yourself. But if you ask politely for sources I will gladly link them.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What he actually said was:

You are wrong of course. I did say that, but my offer to support them properly came later, before you made any demands for evidence. And then you present Ron Wyatt. I am still laughing at that. I could see where you were likely to go which is why the politely phrase was there. I

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, you don't get to change the terms after the fact.

I did not do that. I gave the terms before you asked for support. The post where I laid out the terms is still there. It was before you demanded evidence. LOL!! In fact you quoted me telling you that you had to be polite. It is right there in your quote. Whooo boy!

 

[Ebionite]

I did not do that.

Yes you did.

From: "Because I can link to reliable sources if needed"

To: "You do not ask for a reliable source to refute nonsense"

Here are the links again:

Historical Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

I told him in another thread that Moses was fictional. He claimed that there was archaeological evidence for Moses, I said that I had never seen any. So he posted some pictures by Ron Wyatt, if you do not know who he is Google him, of modern brass ships valve wheels that he Wyatt...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes you did.

From: "Because I can link to reliable sources if needed"

To: "You do not ask for a reliable source to refute nonsense"

Here are the links again:

Historical Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

I told him in another thread that Moses was fictional. He claimed that there was archaeological evidence for Moses, I said that I had never seen any. So he posted some pictures by Ron Wyatt, if you do not know who he is Google him, of modern brass ships valve wheels that he Wyatt...

www.religiousforums.com

LOL! You quoted me telling you that you had to be polite. I warned you ahead of time that you needed reliable sources and you shot yourself in the foot with Ron Wyatt. Oh my.

 

[Ebionite]

LOL! You quoted me telling you that you had to be polite. I warned you ahead of time that you needed reliable sources and you shot yourself in the foot with Ron Wyatt. Oh my.

There's no reason to believe a word you say. Your credibility is gone.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There's no reason to believe a word you say. Your credibility is gone.

Projection. The record is still there. I told you that you had to be polite before you asked for evidence. It appears that you may have a problem with reading comprehension. You even quoted my warning.

 

[Ebionite]

Projection. The record is still there. I told you that you had to be polite before you asked for evidence. It appears that you may have a problem with reading comprehension. You even quoted my warning.

Yes, saying "reliable sources, thanks" and "as serious as a heart attack" is the height of rudeness, right?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, saying "reliable sources, thanks" and "as serious as a heart attack" is the height of rudeness, right?

Your memory appears to be rather poor.

You demanded evidence after being corrected. You do not get to do that. You could have asked politely but you were rude.

No one with any education at all takes Ron Wyatt seriously. I posted an article for you to read where the author pointed out just a few of his problems. That man was just trained as an nurse anesthetist. That takes at least some education, but it does not prepare one to be an archaeologist at all. The man was a con artists. Plane and simple.

Ron Wyatt - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Ebionite]

Your memory appears to be rather poor.

You demanded evidence after being corrected. You do not get to do that. You could have asked politely but you were rude.

Wrong, you didn't correct me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Wrong, you didn't correct me.

I did, but you are in denial.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If you are demanding scientific evidence for things that are outside the realm of science, what do you expect?

Scientific evidence is the verifiable kind.
That's my standard.

If you make unfalsifiable claims, or in other words: untestable claims, then what do you expect me to do with them?

I can't test them, i can't verifiy their truth value. There is no way to distinguish them from false claims.

What reason would I have to believe such a claim?

Sorry but when you make extra-ordinary claims, you should understand that it won't just be believed at face value.
You will require some good evidence. The more extra-ordinary the claims, the better the evidence would have to be.

And yes, to me, evidence must be of the verifiable kind.
That's my standard of evidence.

If it's not verifiable, what use does it have? Is it even evidence then? Is it then not just another claim?

 

[Ebionite]

I did, but you are in denial.

Like you lied about the proof, you mean?

You made the false claim about Ron Wyatt, not me.

How can you be a True Christian™ if you don't take the Eden story literally?

To treat the Bible as if it were perfect is a form of idolatry.

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

Scientific evidence is the verifiable kind.
That's my standard.

If you make unfalsifiable claims, or in other words: untestable claims, then what do you expect me to do with them?

I can't test them, i can't verifiy their truth value. There is no way to distinguish them from false claims.

What reason would I have to believe such a claim?

Sorry but when you make extra-ordinary claims, you should understand that it won't just be believed at face value.
You will require some good evidence. The more extra-ordinary the claims, the better the evidence would have to be.

And yes, to me, evidence must be of the verifiable kind.
That's my standard of evidence.

If it's not verifiable, what use does it have? Is it even evidence then? Is it then not just another claim?

Historical evidence is not anywhere near as reliable, but one things that historians do is to pretty much ignore religious claims. So Romulus and Remus, the involvement of gods in the Trojan war, and the miracles of Jesus all get the same treatment by historians.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes those hypothesis have strong explanatory power.

So you are simply casually going to pretend you don't see the fat fallacious assumed conclusion in those?
Maybe you are not pretending and you really don't see it. It might explain a few things.

They might faill for other reasons, but they do have explanatory power.

Yes that is how explanatory power works.

First you assume that the hypotheis is true

Then you determine if the truth of that hypothesis successfully explains the fact to be explained.

So now that you seem to understand the concept of explanatory power, are you ready to grant that resurrection hypothesis has better explanatory power than psychosis?

It's like talking to a brick wall.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It certainly is part of the record.

So is bigfoot, sasquatch and hercules.

If people these days what to define the historical record as being only those parts that do not contain any supernatural elements, that is their prerogative but has no bearing on what the actual record tells us.

Being part of the record doesn't mean it isn't fiction.