Who is right? I give up

[Subduction Zone]

And yet it was promulgated throughout the world of that time in just three years. And starting in the very place where he was crucified... there would be no better evidence than the fact that the very place where he died is where they also said he was raised from the dead. If anyone could have evidence contrary to that fact, they would be the first to be able to prove it.

Maybe there is more to it that what you believe?

I don't think that you understand what evidence is. In a myth where someone is raised from the dead it usually is where they died. After all that is where there body is. That was not a new belief. And you still have not dealt with the problem of Roman crucifixion and what happened with the bodies.

 

[Kenny]

None of that is evidence.

I think it is the same evidence but just coming to different conclusions by the reader.

"Evidence that demands a Verdict" was a cold case detective out to prove it a myth and ended up believing the history behind it.

 

[Kenny]

I don't think that you understand what evidence is. In a myth where someone is raised from the dead it usually is where they died. After all that is where there body is. That was not a new belief. And you still have not dealt with the problem of Roman crucifixion and what happened with the bodies.

Usually when the red corpuscles separate from the body's serum... it is a great evidence of death. Plus, a rich and influential man got the body down (not to mention the Jews had a custom that the romans permitted)

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think it is the same evidence but just coming to different conclusions by the reader.

"Evidence that demands a Verdict" was a cold case detective out to prove it a myth and ended up believing the history behind it.

You need something better than old refuted nonsense.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Usually when the red corpuscles separate from the body's serum... it is a great evidence of death. Plus, a rich and influential man got the body down (not to mention the Jews had a custom that the romans permitted)

That is the claim. It is not backed up with any reliable evidence at all. It sounds like something that was made up after the fact to try to explain how Jesus's body was taken down.

 

[Kenny]

You need something better than old refuted nonsense.

A simple statement by you isn't sufficient evidence.

 

[Kenny]

That is the claim. It is not backed up with any reliable evidence at all. It sounds like something that was made up after the fact to try to explain how Jesus's body was taken down.

It is your right to believe or not believe. For me, there is enough evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

A simple statement by you isn't sufficient evidence.

Are you honestly trying to claim that you do not know that is a load of tosh?

If so you should be face palming yourself. Sadly his arguments are not those of a good police investigator.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is your right to believe or not believe. For me, there is enough evidence.

The problem is that you do not have reliable evidence. And you are not consistent in how you accept evidence.

 

[Kenny]

The problem is that you do not have reliable evidence. And you are not consistent in how you accept evidence.

What you say is unreliable... so many others say it is.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What you say is unreliable... so many others say it is.

It does not matter what others say. What matters is if one can support one's claims. You obviously knew how weak the arguments of the ex-cop are. You did not even quote one of them.

It is unwise to base your arguments on the weakest aspects of Christianity. You should try to argue based upon its strengths. You set yourself up for failure with your strategy.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I haven't read this thread since I posted. Have you guys come to a consensus yet that I'm right?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I haven't read this thread since I posted. Have you guys come to a consensus yet that I'm right?

Sure. Why not. But tomorrow is my turn.

 

[Kenny]

It does not matter what others say. What matters is if one can support one's claims. You obviously knew how weak the arguments of the ex-cop are. You did not even quote one of them.

It is unwise to base your arguments on the weakest aspects of Christianity. You should try to argue based upon its strengths. You set yourself up for failure with your strategy.

Your opinions isn't "'Support of one's claim". If that is your best argument... it is no wonder you position holds no import.

 

[Alex22]

I think it is the same evidence but just coming to different conclusions by the reader.

"Evidence that demands a Verdict" was a cold case detective out to prove it a myth and ended up believing the history behind it.

Why should I believe he's a magic man rose who from the dead or that he's a god, your only reason is because the Bible says so which isn't good enough.

 

[Kenny]

Why should I believe he's a magic man rose who from the dead or that he's a god, your only reason is because the Bible says so which isn't good enough.

I don't think I have asked you to believe anything. It was notorious in his day and it started in the very city where he died and resurrected.

You can believe you are gd if you so choose.

 

[Alex22]

I don't think I have asked you to believe anything. It was notorious in his day and it started in the very city where he died and resurrected.

You can believe you are gd if you so choose.

As I thought, no evidence in the slightest.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Eh...

 

[Kenny]

As I thought, no evidence in the slightest.

Evidence of what? Can you be more specific? I'm not quite understanding just what you are asking.

Let me put it in a different way. You seem to be edging in a different subject matter, which is ok. But so that I am non the same page, can you rephrase your question?

 

[Dropship]

Can someone tell me plainly if their religion is the actual correct one..

Well the founders of all other religions are dead and buried, but Jesus is not, so I'd think that makes him a good bet..