How can you literally believe...

[Shadow Wolf]

I think it should be accepted, that the fully human and fully divine man of Jesus Christ wouldn't have much trouble brining himself back to life.

Why?

What kind of proof would you accept? You set the bar so high that it can't even be met, with ANY kind of evidence.

Objective and independently verified facts that come from more places than those promoting Christian ideology. As I said earlier, mainstream science has the major advantage of being able to draw from a wide variety of disciplines, with each supporting and verifying the rest in various ways. The Christian sources you posted fail to do this, and the only can cite from other Christian-based sources. That is not how science works.
And, let's be honest, for a being who wants to be called and worshiped as god, why shouldn't the bar be set very incredibly high?

Furthermore, I have made the argument that if He did NOT come back from the dead, then His following would have diminished, like all others before Him who claimed to be the Messiah.

Last I knew, many people still believe in Santa Claus, and even from Star Wars many people claim to follow the Jedi religion. Even Hitler still has followers, and though we know he was real, he died many decades ago, and hasn't returned.

So please, if there is any, bring HISTORICAL COUNTER evidence. Thank you.

I don't need to, because you have not proven your position. You say your Messiah died and lived again, I counter by saying no one has ever done such a thing, and now you must provide evidence to support this alleged death and resurrection.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

Why?

Objective and independently verified facts that come from more places than those promoting Christian ideology. As I said earlier, mainstream science has the major advantage of being able to draw from a wide variety of disciplines, with each supporting and verifying the rest in various ways. The Christian sources you posted fail to do this, and the only can cite from other Christian-based sources. That is not how science works.
And, let's be honest, for a being who wants to be called and worshiped as god, why shouldn't the bar be set very incredibly high?

Last I knew, many people still believe in Santa Claus, and even from Star Wars many people claim to follow the Jedi religion. Even Hitler still has followers, and though we know he was real, he died many decades ago, and hasn't returned.

I don't need to, because you have not proven your position. You say your Messiah died and lived again, I counter by saying no one has ever done such a thing, and now you must provide evidence to support this alleged death and resurrection.

Wow...it looks like you have Santa syndrome. I don't remember Santa, Jedi religions or Hitler driving people to endure gruesome martyrdoms for the sake of they're beliefs. The Apostles didn't die for a lie. They didn't preach for a lie, they didn't come up with some kind of false conspiracy theory, so they could be unnecessarily persecuted and killed. I don't remember Santa claiming to be God, I don't remember any Jedi or Hitler claiming to be God either. Why are you bringing up such weak and meaningless arguments? Typical for someone who rejects Christ. If none of this happened, then why is The Church here after 2000 years? Why did Christianity live on, and all other mystery religions die off? This is not only a matter of the intellect, but of the will; or else faith, hope and trust wouldn't be necessary. You could very easily go and live a Christian life, even if YOU aren't completely and totally satisfied with the evidence, because no other religions have nearly as much. Don't you think it's much safer to do that, rather than reject it entirely and risk Hell? I think so.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Why are you bringing up such weak and meaningless arguments?

Because people say things all the time to gain followers. Doesn't make their claims and what they say necessarily true, however. People lie. It's a fact of life.

If none of this happened, then why is The Church here after 2000 years?

It did rule for a very long time, and for another very long time it was at the center of many wars over the course of European history.

Why did Christianity live on

There have also been times when the church held so much political and social power that to deny it was to face very dire and severe consequences. Without the blessing of the church, and king could not even rule or claim the throne.

no other religions have nearly as much.

None of them have any evidence to prove them.

Don't you think it's much safer to do that, rather than reject it entirely and risk Hell? I think so.

I think that's a terrible wager to take, believing in and accepting a god only because you are afraid of the punishment for not doing so.
On the flip side, why should I trust a book that is allegedly god's own book when this book cannot even get something like the value of pi correct?

 

[SoldierofChrist]

Because people say things all the time to gain followers. Doesn't make their claims and what they say necessarily true, however. People lie. It's a fact of life.

It did rule for a very long time, and for another very long time it was at the center of many wars over the course of European history.

There have also been times when the church held so much political and social power that to deny it was to face very dire and severe consequences. Without the blessing of the church, and king could not even rule or claim the throne.

None of them have any evidence to prove them.

I think that's a terrible wager to take, believing in and accepting a god only because you are afraid of the punishment for not doing so.
On the flip side, why should I trust a book that is allegedly god's own book when this book cannot even get something like the value of pi correct?

I really don't see how the actual religion of Christianity, has anything to do with wars. It is not the religion itself that promotes them, it's the people. One of the Ten Commandments actually says; "Thou shalt not kill" yet people do. God's fault? Nope, ours for disobeying Him. I'll ask again; why would the apostles lie, only to get terribly persecuted and killed? It makes no sense. And the Church wouldn't even have existed in the first place, if it weren't for the apostles and Christ's Resurrection. The people caused terrible things, but these actions were NOT spurred on by Christianity itself. If you wager God DOES exist, and Christianity IS true, in the end, even if it's all false (hypothetically speaking) then you lose nothing if you decide to follow Jesus, you only get eternal non-existence. But if you DENY He exists, and Christianity WAS true the whole time, then you lose everything. What do you think?

 

[Timothy Bryce]

Sounds like phyco babble

Sounds like illiteracy.

 

[Timothy Bryce]

What is laughable is someone saying something is not true but can't prove it, or saying something is true and can't prove it.

No it isn't.

Example of something worthy of laughable ridicule: someone making a completely unverified, unsubstantiated claim and then claiming that anyone who challenges it with a request for empirical evidence is laughable.

Guess what? I am Jesus - I've come back! Prove it that I'm not Jesus; I look forward to it!

 

[SoldierofChrist]

No it isn't.

Example of something worthy of laughable ridicule: someone making a completely unverified, unsubstantiated claim and then claiming that anyone who challenges it with a request for empirical evidence is laughable.

Guess what? I am Jesus - I've come back! Prove it that I'm not Jesus; I look forward to it!

All of these 'Arguments' that you made are "Laughable" honestly... Empirical evidence is not the only method we can use to find truth. Can you empirically prove to me, that the use of solely empirical evidence is rational? Science cannot prove itself, empiricism cannot prove itself, and you cannot prove your own position to be rational or reliable, with any kind if evidence, in the form of data, facts or arguments.

 

[Timothy Bryce]

All of these 'Arguments' that you made are "Laughable" honestly... Empirical evidence is not the only method we can use to find truth. Can you empirically prove to me, that the use of solely empirical evidence is rational? Science cannot prove itself, empiricism cannot prove itself, and you cannot prove your own position to be rational or reliable, with any kind if evidence, in the form of data, facts or arguments.

Explain to me how any argument I made is laughable. I look forward to it.

You seem to have a serious lack of an understanding of the scientific method.

Help yourself to a textbook. Like, immediately. Your obviously impeded mind poses a danger to the community.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

Explain to me how any argument I made is laughable. I look forward to it.

You seem to have a serious lack of an understanding of the scientific method.

Help yourself to a textbook. Like, immediately. Your obviously impeded mind poses a danger to the community.

How is it laughable? You claim to be Jesus lol. Your not necessarily helping the community either, by making such a claim. Here's some homework for you:

Evidence for the Resurrection of Christ by Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli

Argument from Pascal's Wager by Peter Kreeft

The Divinity of Christ by Peter Kreeft

 

[SoldierofChrist]

We can rationalise the Resurrection. If it DID happen, then there would be a continual following, as well as a Church (which there is). If it did NOT happen, then there would NOT be a Church, and the following Jesus had, would have died out, like all the other people who claimed to be the Messiah and failed to prove it. That, is the rational explanation.

 

[Timothy Bryce]

How is it laughable? You claim to be Jesus lol. Your not necessarily helping the community either, by making such a claim. Here's some homework for you:

Evidence for the Resurrection of Christ by Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli

Argument from Pascal's Wager by Peter Kreeft

The Divinity of Christ by Peter Kreeft

I am Jesus. And anyone with a fully functional brain will see that I'm taking the **** out of you.

I'm not going to read any of that garbage you took the time to post; it's a waste of time.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

And this is an interesting debate about the historicity of Jesus:

 

[Timothy Bryce]

And this is an interesting debate about the historicity of Jesus:

No it isn't.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

You don't have to read it, it's there just in case you do. I'm merely presenting arguments for my position, wether or not they come from me specifically, is unimportant. As long as they defend my faith, that's all that matters. No?

 

[SoldierofChrist]

No it isn't.

Well, maybe it isn't interesting, but it's there nonetheless. Feel free to watch. I am right now.

 

[Timothy Bryce]

You don't have to read it, it's there just in case you do. I'm merely presenting arguments for my position, wether or not they come from me specifically, is unimportant. As long as they defend my faith, that's all that matters. No?

No.

With any luck, you'll be improved over the course of your life as a direct result of your realization of the futility of the garbage you apparently believe.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

No.

With any luck, you'll be improved over the course of your life as a direct result of your realization of the futility of the garbage you apparently believe.

It's hard to realize something is apparent "Garbage" to YOU, when there are not only historical facts to support it, but a method of simple rationalisation and deductive process, that I have described. As I will again;

First:


The apostles would not create a lie, and go out to die for it.


Second:


If Jesus did NOT rise from the dead, then His following would have died, and He would have been forgotten, as were all the others were who claimed to be the Messiah. With no Church or disciples to preach about Him.



Third: Therefore, Jesus indeed rose from the dead, as I believe He did.

 

[Timothy Bryce]

It's hard to realize something is apparent "Garbage" to YOU, when there are not only historical facts to support it, but a method of simple rationalisation and deductive process, that I have described. As I will again;

First:


The apostles would not create a lie, and go out to die for it.


Second:


If Jesus did NOT rise from the dead, then His following would have died, and He would have been forgotten, as were all the others were who claimed to be the Messiah. With no Church or disciples to preach about Him.



Third: Therefore, Jesus indeed rose from the dead, as I believe He did.

I work in criminal law. I know garbage when I see it.

Your "First," "Second" & "Third" literally made me laugh out loud; what you've posted is that intellectually retarded.

And I just dealt with a man who caused his girlfriend to hang herself due to alleged domestic abuse - we're running a case that there is a police conspiracy against him - IMO, you look like more of an intellectual retard than my client.

 

[SoldierofChrist]

I work in criminal law. I know garbage when I see it.

Your "First," "Second" & "Third" literally made me laugh out loud; what you've posted is that intellectually retarded.

And I just dealt with a man who caused his girlfriend to hang herself due to alleged domestic abuse - we're running a case that there is a police conspiracy against him - IMO, you look like more of an intellectual retard than my client.

Ouch. Glad I could make you laugh at least. Maybe I'm not the most intellectually stimulating guy you've ever met, but my case remains nonetheless. At least I don't claim to be Jesus. That's not very intellectually sound IMO.

 

[columbus]

First:


The apostles would not create a lie, and go out to die for it.


Second:


If Jesus did NOT rise from the dead, then His following would have died, and He would have been forgotten, as were all the others were who claimed to be the Messiah. With no Church or disciples to preach about Him.



Third: Therefore, Jesus indeed rose from the dead, as I believe He did.

Not really. This is textbook "circular reasoning". You believe the stories because the Church teaches them. You believe the Church because of the stories. See what I mean?

Think about this. According to the legend, Jesus became fairly well known around Jerusalem. Then, on the busiest day of the year, publically executed amid great portents. Solar eclipse, earthquake damages the Temple, it's huge. Then the next week He reappears, fresh as a daisy. He continues to teach and preach for over a month.

What one would reasonably expect from that is an explosion of Christian fervor. People in masses, taking to the streets, pushing out the Romans, all kinds of excitement. But none of that happened, nothing that anybody else noticed happened at all. Nobody even noticed the eclipse and earthquake.
But then Paul came along, learned enough to create a new religion that was more attractive to gentiles and began to spread around his version of the heretical, apocalyptic, Jewish cult of the Christ and so that survived. It became a pagan/Jewish hybrid religion. Eventually Jesus got deified and Trinitarianism invented, although I expect Jesus would have been horrified by that. He was a devout Jew. He just hated what Jewish culture had become under the pagan influence of Rome and Greece.
Tom