Historicity of Claimed Miracles

[outhouse]

...as long as the existence of God is possible and he miraculous events are through him.

That is apologetics not HISTORY.


That is why nothing considered a miracle has any historical credibility.

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

That is apologetics not HISTORY.

The point was...as long as God is possible, miracles are possible. I don't know what you are talking about here.

That is why nothing considered a miracle has any historical credibility.

If it happened in history, then it is historical. The Resurrection is said to have happened in history, so therefore it is historical.

 

[outhouse]

The point was...as long as God is possible, miracles are possible. I don't know what you are talking about here.

Yet "your" god is unproven, as well as all others.


Scientifically no god exist exist as there has never been anything to test for any of them.


If you have evidence, please provide it because faith is lacking evidence.

If it happened in history, then it is historical.

NO

That is not how history works. If there is evidence we can make a claim but history can never be reproduced. We can only try to repaint the best we can using plausibility.

The first thing a college professor tells you is you cannot recreate history 100%

The Resurrection is said to have happened in history, so therefore it is historical.

:biglaugh:


It does not work that way, no matter how bad you want it too.



Unicorns are said to exist, yet it is mythology. dead people walking round are said to have existed, yet we know it to be mythology.



You NEED evidence, credible evidence. Otherwise it might be better for you to stay in the same faith section, where faith is more acceptable.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Where is the evidence?

A guy wrote a book claiming that 500 witnesses saw it, including many who are stil alive.

Also, most of the political elite, Kim Jong's entourage, have testified that they saw it.

I have no problems believing that miraculous events are possible with ANYONE, not just Kim Jong Il...as long as the existence of God is possible and he miraculous events are through him.

I think Kim Jong probably claimed to be god-on-earth. If so, then you are likely to believe the miracles associated with his birth?

Me, I doubt it. But I think I was born a skeptic. It happens to some people.

 

[Ingledsva]

There's much better historicity for Kim Jong Il, the first leader of N. Korea, than for Jesus, wouldn't you agree?

Absolutely.

ING - Far-Far more evidence for Kim Jong Il.

And when Kim Jong Il was born, the seasons spontaneously changed from winter to spring, among other miraculous events.

Where is the evidence?

ING - LOL! The point exactly. Just writings like for your Jesus.

Do you believe that? If not, why believe the Jesus stories but not the Kim Jong stories?

I have no problems believing that miraculous events are possible with ANYONE, not just Kim Jong Il...as long as the existence of God is possible and he miraculous events are through him.

ING -Kim Jong Il didn't believe in any God.


Here are some of his "miracles" LOL!


His birth was foretold by a swallow and heralded by a double rainbow.


When he was born, a new star appeared in the night sky.


He had the ability to alter the weather simply through the power of thought.


He was a genius as an infant, with North Korean biographies stating that he had learned to walk at just 3 weeks and was talking at 8 weeks.


This made up miracle crap is so funny.



*

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

Yet "your" god is unproven, as well as all others.

There is evidence which convinces me that "my" God exists.

Scientifically no god exist exist as there has never been anything to test for any of them.

And logically, time cannot be extended into eternity past. So therefore, time had a beginning. Nothing within nature could of given time its beginning, so a transcendent cause is necessary.

If you have evidence, please provide it because faith is lacking evidence.

I don't know what kind of evidence will convince you.

NO

That is not how history works. If there is evidence we can make a claim but history can never be reproduced. We can only try to repaint the best we can using plausibility.

The first thing a college professor tells you is you cannot recreate history 100%

I don't know how the above is relevant to anything I said, but ok.

Unicorns are said to exist, yet it is mythology. dead people walking round are said to have existed, yet we know it to be mythology.

Show me evidence of any group of people in history ever claiming to have physically seen a unicorn, and believing that they seen it. I will wait.

You NEED evidence, credible evidence. Otherwise it might be better for you to stay in the same faith section, where faith is more acceptable.

My faith is strengthened by the evidence.

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

A guy wrote a book claiming that 500 witnesses saw it, including many who are stil alive.

Also, most of the political elite, Kim Jong's entourage, have testified that they saw it.

Ok, and what I am saying is as long as the existence of God is possible, then that event which you are describing is possible.

I think Kim Jong probably claimed to be god-on-earth. If so, then you are likely to believe the miracles associated with his birth?

Anyone can claim to be anything...Jesus claimed he was the Son of God, and prophesized his own death and Resurrection...and his prophecy came true. So since his action spoke louder than his words, I will go on the side of Jesus Christ. You can go on the side of Kim Jong. I will place my bet on the man who said he would rise from the dead, and he actually did it.

Me, I doubt it. But I think I was born a skeptic. It happens to some people.

I think I was born a believer then. It happens to most "chosen" people.

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

ING - Far-Far more evidence for Kim Jong Il.

And? There is more evidence for Kim Jong II than there is for Socrates also. Lets doubt that Socrates ever lived too. And King Tut...and Ghangis Khan. Either deny the existence of these other men of ancient history, or continue to commit the taxi cab fallacy....driving around in a taxi and making stops to all of these other men's location, but once you approach the location of Jesus, you keep going instead of coming to a stop.

 

[idav]

And? There is more evidence for Kim Jong II than there is for Socrates also. Lets doubt that Socrates ever lived too. And King Tut...and Ghangis Khan. Either deny the existence of these other men of ancient history, or continue to commit the taxi cab fallacy....driving around in a taxi and making stops to all of these other men's location, but once you approach the location of Jesus, you keep going instead of coming to a stop.

If people started saying Socrates could walk on water and sprouted wings, it would be reason to doubt the credibility of the "historical" source.

 

[outhouse]

Show me evidence of any group of people in history ever claiming to have physically seen a unicorn, and believing that they seen it. I will wait.



.

Your bible claims it true.


Job. 39:9-10 KJV, "Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? 10Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?"
•Psalm 22:21 KJV, "Save me from the lion’s mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns."
•Isaiah 34:7 KJV, "And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness."
•See also KJV in Num. 23:22; Nu. 24:8; Deut. 33:17; Psalm 29:6; 92:10.

 

[outhouse]

There is evidence which convinces me that "my" God exists.


.

That's your personal right.

Doesn't mean it is credible or historical.

 

[Ingledsva]

There is evidence which convinces me that "my" God exists.

...


My faith is strengthened by the evidence.

There is no evidence, it is faith alone.




*

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

If people started saying Socrates could walk on water and sprouted wings, it would be reason to doubt the credibility of the "historical" source.

You would doubt the credibility only if you presupposed the non-occurence of miracles. You start with a presupposition, but the truth value of that presupposition COULD be false.

 

[Ingledsva]

Ok, and what I am saying is as long as the existence of God is possible, then that event which you are describing is possible.



Anyone can claim to be anything...Jesus claimed he was the Son of God, and prophesized his own death and Resurrection...and his prophecy came true. So since his action spoke louder than his words, I will go on the side of Jesus Christ. You can go on the side of Kim Jong. I will place my bet on the man who said he would rise from the dead, and he actually did it.


I think I was born a believer then. It happens to most "chosen" people.

Jesus' only claim was that he was a son of God, as we all could be, according to him.


In other words - not an actual son, or God, or part of a trinity.


What prophecies? He said certain things had to happen, - some of them because he was claiming to be the Messiah of Tanakh, and he set out to make them happen.


He said he would rise from the dead. That was the standard belief of his group. They would rise to heaven, rather then stay in the pit/grave. Not a zombie rising - and walking around. That junk was added in long after he was dead.


*

 

[George-ananda]

There is no evidence, it is faith alone.

*

There is evidence, not Proof. So people of faith can point to evidence supporting their belief.

For example Paul describing eyewitnesses in Corinthians is evidence for the resurrection, not Proof. One can debate and hold different opinions on the quality of the evidence. But to say 'There is no evidence, it is faith alone.' is wrong.

 

[George-ananda]

That junk was added in long after he was dead.


*

Peter and Paul and the apostles for instance were contemporaries of Jesus. The Wikipedia article I showed earlier explains how belief in the 'risen Christ' goes back to the earliest traceable information about Christianity.

I'm not a Christian but I think ant-Christians go too far in making their claims. 'Junk' you say, eh.

 

[Ingledsva]

ING - Far-Far more evidence for Kim Jong Il.

And? There is more evidence for Kim Jong II than there is for Socrates also. Lets doubt that Socrates ever lived too. And King Tut...and Ghangis Khan. Either deny the existence of these other men of ancient history, or continue to commit the taxi cab fallacy....driving around in a taxi and making stops to all of these other men's location, but once you approach the location of Jesus, you keep going instead of coming to a stop.

LOL! Doesn't work.


I have no problem with Jesus having existed as a real person, - just like Tutankhamen, or Genghis khan.


The problem is the fantasy, added to people like the Rabbi Iesous.


There is absolutely no proof of any of the mythology or miracles.



And again - stop misusing the "Taxi Cab Fallacy." You obviously don't understand how it works.



*

 

[Ingledsva]

Peter and Paul and the apostles for instance were contemporaries of Jesus. The Wikipedia article I showed earlier explains how belief in the 'risen Christ' goes back to the earliest traceable information about Christianity.

I'm not a Christian but I think ant-Christians go too far in making their claims. 'Junk' you say, eh.

1. The contemporaries of Jesus did not likely write the books. Then we have the Nicene Councils, and parts experts say appear to have been added later, etc.


2. Of course they had the "risen Christ," that was the idea they taught, all believers - RISE, - But not from the grave like zombies. It just means they rise to heaven rather then staying in the pit/grave.


3. I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-BULL.


Rabbi Iesous could have existed, but I believe the Jesus is God/trinity ideas, and Zombie-Jesus walking around, is just junk that was added later, partly from misunderstanding.


*

 

[George-ananda]

1. The contemporaries of Jesus did not likely write the books. Then we have the Nicene Councils, and parts experts say appear to have been added later, etc.


*

I referred to 1Corinthians:

From Wikipedia article on First Epistle to the Corinthians in Authorship section:

There is near consensus among historians and Christian theologians that Paul is the author of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, typically classifying its authorship as "undisputed" (see Authorship of the Pauline epistles). The letter is quoted or mentioned by the earliest of sources, and is included in every ancient canon, including that of Marcion.

 

[George-ananda]

2. Of course they had the "risen Christ," that was the idea they taught, all believers - RISE, - But not from the grave like zombies. It just means they rise to heaven rather then staying in the pit/grave.

I just don't think that your belief can satisfactorily explain the first century excitement over the risen Christ.

I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-BULL.

So am I.