1 Corinthians 15:6 and the Definition of 'Eyewitness'

[Chinchilla]

demonstrates you are not willing to address the observation,

I'm not going to address bias based on your presuppositios , I'm willing to challenge your world view tho .
I'm not gonna watch you poking my caste with a stick my job is to tell you that you can't conquer that castle with stick and disarm you .

Your job is to tell me my castle is imaginary and i'm in delusion .

I'm not gonna answer further unless you tell me your world view . Are you materialist , dualist or have religious world view .

If you don't then I just simply take your arguments as arbitrary and can make exactly the same argument as you but it will be pointless in the long run .

I was raises Christian for decades. I believed blindly, because I believed people like you, whom assert with no actual evidence to back their claims (just assertions). As soon as I researched such claims, without a presuppositional bias, I am now widely skeptical to such claimed veracity.

What evidence would you accept as enought to prove existence of God ? Would you for example accept divine revelation using the atribute of God that he is outside of time and tells you events which will happen in future ?

 

[Chinchilla]

I do not classify myself as anything really, other than a skeptic to Christianity. Just like you are a severe skeptic to any opposing religion.

But you could say the same about Islam and Judaism because they have the same roots as Christianity .

Answer simple questions and we can continue .

Is matter all that there is ?

Is the world matter but also spiritual like it have objective moral values and truths in some spiritual realm like realm of ideas , or spirits , or souls , or Gods ?

Which one of these sounds more reasonable for you .

The third cathegory is religious belief like Islam , Christianity , Judaism , Mormonism ect which you deny so which one of these two is more applying to you then ?

 

[cvanwey]

I'm willing to challenge your world view tho .

I was extremely honest and clear. You are presenting a severe red herring here.

I'm not gonna watch you poking my caste with a stick my job is to tell you that you can't conquer that castle with stick and disarm you .

If you do not want to address the many observations made, that's on you.

Your job is to tell me my castle is imaginary and i'm in delusion .

Demonstrate evidentiary veracity of claims for eyewitnesses to a resurrection. I've looked, they do not appear to be anywhere? If you care to address, you can just look at my many prior posts in this thread, as I do not care to keep re-typing them over and over.

I'm not gonna answer further unless you tell me your world view . Are you materialist , dualist or have religious world view .

As I already stated, I don't 'label' myself. I'm a skeptic to all religion. I used to be a skeptic to all religions, accept Christianity. As I stated prior, I was in the camp of, 'there exists too many eyewitnesses to deny a resurrection.' Do you actually have any examples which hold water?

If you don't then I just simply take your arguments as arbitrary and can make exactly the same argument as you but it will be pointless in the long run .

If your best arguments have already been brought forth, then yes, this is an exercise in futility.

What evidence would you accept as enought to prove existence of God ?

For starters, demonstrate veracity in a resurrection claim. Start by actually addressing my many prior observations.

 

[cvanwey]

Is matter all that there is ?

I don't know. Do aliens exist? Do ghosts exist? Do spirits exist? Is any magic ever done really? Do witches exist? Are psychics real?

This is why I'm asking for ample demonstration for 'eyewitness attestation' for a resurrection. Can you provide any? Are have you already put forth your best effort, and the rest is just faith from there?

The third cathegory is religious belief like Islam , Christianity , Judaism , Mormonism ect which you deny so which one of these two is more applying to you then ?

None of them meet their burden of proof, as investigation does not correlate with discovery.

 

[Chinchilla]

I don't know. Do aliens exist? Do ghosts exist? Do spirits exist? Is any magic ever done really? Do witches exist? Are psychics real?

You assume that untill such things are not proven then they are not existing so you assume only matter exists correct ?

This is why I'm asking for ample demonstration for 'eyewitness attestation' for a resurrection. Can you provide any? Are have you already put forth your best effort, and the rest is just faith from there?

These eyewitness probably couldn't even write thier name on piece of paper but would sign with big X so what you are looking for is not existing . There is no such list of names like a petition nowdays .

 

[Chinchilla]

As I already stated, I don't 'label' myself. I'm a skeptic to all religion. I used to be a skeptic to all religions, accept Christianity. As I stated prior, I was in the camp of, 'there exists too many eyewitnesses to deny a resurrection.' Do you actually have any examples which hold water?

How many witnesses would you consider enought ? Two witnesses would be enought in court . You have Mark , Matthew and Luke that's 3 , then you have women at grave , then appearing of Christ to 500 .

If you validate that gospel was inspired you validate the 500 aswell .

 

[cvanwey]

You assume that untill such things are not proven then they are not existing so you assume only matter exists correct ?

Since you are so insistent on off topic questions, let me ask you some important ones?

In your 'view', does any evidence exist for anything spiritual, supernatural, or other, outside Christianity specifically? Or does non-material claims only hold true in Christianity; and all other claims of the supernatural are false?

I mean, if you were to visit a Hindu temple, and saw many praying and claiming a response from their gods, would you believe any of them in any capacity?

Now, when you attend a Christian church, and see many praying and speaking to Jesus/Yahweh, are they actually receiving answers?

These eyewitness probably couldn't even write thier name on piece of paper but would sign with big X so what you are looking for is not existing . There is no such list of names like a petition nowdays .

I would assume that one of the primary reasons for a resurrection, (aside from the claims of defeating death), was to also provide 'eyewitness' accounts, and to demonstrate the veracity of His claims. I would also assume that to accomplish such a task, as written from the Bible, one might think He would present himself to individuals whom could write such claims to paper (to represent the Bible sufficiently evidentually). One would also think that names, testimonials, and corroboration/deposition would become paramount to the claimed veracity to such a large claim. Meaning, to also provide eyewitness authorship to some literate people, whom would also authenticate the claims. Otherwise, it's kind of like a tree falling in the forest with no one there to hear it. You can claim it, but no one is there to report it. This holds true with 1 Corinthians 15:6.

The method instead chosen to use requires faith, all faith, and nothing but faith; just like every other religious claim of it's time. Eyewitness attestation would have been the only means of proof in it's time.

So if all that is written, is second hand accounts, not verified in any such matter......then? And there also exists nothing outside the Bible to corroborate such claims any further. The entire basis to antiquity exists within the Bible, and the Bible alone.

 

[cvanwey]

How many witnesses would you consider enought ? Two witnesses would be enought in court . You have Mark , Matthew and Luke that's 3 , then you have women at grave , then appearing of Christ to 500 .

If you validate that gospel was inspired you validate the 500 aswell .

Mark, Matthew, and Luke were not written by Mark, Matthew, and Luke. So the definition of 'eyewitness' has been violated.

In regards to the 'women at the grave', which gospel account are you referencing specifically? Because the stories differ from one to the next.

You have not validated '500' in any way, shape, or form.

 

[Chinchilla]

Mark, Matthew, and Luke were not written by Mark, Matthew, and Luke. So the definition of 'eyewitness' has been violated.

But you can't confirm or deny that so you being arbitrary .

Let's assume you are right and you want to fake being Luke for example . Where do you get genealogy of Jesus from ? Temple and it's documents burnd 70 A.D. you have no internet , no library .

Let's say that you want to write around 200 A.D.
How do you remember such details like who was in charge ? To this day people dubt that pilate was ruling at that time but they finally found evidence finding a chair dedicated to him because his evidence was erased due to pilate's mistakes in his political carieer .

 

[Chinchilla]

Mark, Matthew, and Luke were not written by Mark, Matthew, and Luke. So the definition of 'eyewitness' has been violated.

In regards to the 'women at the grave', which gospel account are you referencing specifically? Because the stories differ from one to the next.

You have not validated '500' in any way, shape, or form.

You might want to check this video or articles of this man . He was in similar situation like you .

 

[cvanwey]

But you can't confirm or deny that so you being arbitrary .

By default (meaning, without sufficient investigation and inquiry), no claim or assertion is true. Therefore, the burden of proof lies upon you, not me. What is your investigation into the claim?

Let's assume you are right and you want to fake being Luke for example . Where do you get genealogy of Jesus from ? Temple and it's documents burnd 70 A.D. you have no internet , no library .

It depends.... Which one?

The one from Matthew or Luke? The geneologies differ widely.

To this day people dubt that pilate was ruling at that time but they finally found evidence finding a chair dedicated to him because his evidence was erased due to pilate's mistakes in his political carieer .

No, Pilate existed. And I even claim Jesus existed. And?

 

[cvanwey]

You might want to check this video or articles of this man . He was in similar situation like you .

Then you might want to check out Dr. Robert Price's book 'The case Against the Case for Christ."

What's your point?

Did you happen to let my prior observation marinate yet? Give it some more time maybe...

 

[Chinchilla]

Did you happen to let my prior observation marinate yet? Give it some more time maybe...

No everything you claimed so far was arbitrary and you aswell refused to talk about your world view so we are left with talking opinion vs opinion which leads to nothing .

I'll watch the against case of Christ haven't seen it yet .

While I do would you asnwer if you ever considered yourself being "born again person " prior to leaving Christianity ?

 

[cvanwey]

No everything you claimed so far was arbitrary and you aswell refused to talk about your world view so we are left with talking opinion vs opinion which leads to nothing .

While I do would you asnwer if you ever considered yourself being "born again person " prior to leaving Christianity ?

It seems very 'convenient' to now state all such observations are 'arbitrary.' If you had further 'evidence', you would have provided as such. I've spoke to many now whom instead choose to 'stream roll" their own assertions (without proper cause). And when probed, questioned, or counter points are then addressed, which demonstrate opposing viewpoints in which the asserted party cannot refute, the asserter then instead makes statements such as yours, or ignores the observations, or changes the subject.

This is a debate forum. If you do not want to support or defend your position, which is also in line with 1 Peter 3:15, then just say so.

I say the 'evidence' for any claimed resurrection is lacking. Do you have any?

And I have already answered your question... Please re-read my prior responses accordingly.

 

[Chinchilla]

It seems very 'convenient' to now state all such observations are 'arbitrary.' If you had further 'evidence', you would have provided as such. I've spoke to many now whom instead choose to 'stream roll" their own assertions (without proper cause). And when probed, questioned, or counter points are then addressed, which demonstrate opposing viewpoints in which the asserted party cannot refute, the asserter then instead makes statements such as yours, or ignores the observations, or changes the subject.

This is a debate forum. If you do not want to support or defend your position, which is also in line with 1 Peter 3:15, then just say so.

I say the 'evidence' for any claimed resurrection is lacking. Do you have any?

And I have already answered your question... Please re-read my prior responses accordingly.

I asked what evidence would you consider enought for the claim of resurrection ?

 

[cvanwey]

I asked what evidence would you consider enought for the claim of resurrection ?

Okay, now we are getting somewhere, hopefully.

Is 1 Corinthians 15:6 'evidence' to support a claim of '500' witnesses? yes or no? If yes, please explain, which also refutes my direct observations provided thus far, (sense I do not want to re-type the same responses over and over).

 

[Chinchilla]

This is a debate forum. If you do not want to support or defend your position, which is also in line with 1 Peter 3:15, then just say so.

Fine let's have debate .

I Say that Christ resurrected because KJV 1611 Bible says so .

 

[Chinchilla]

Okay, now we are getting somewhere, hopefully.

Is 1 Corinthians 15:6 'evidence' to support a claim of '500' witnesses? yes or no? If yes, please explain, which also refutes my direct observations provided thus far, (sense I do not want to re-type the same responses over and over).

This vers on it's own no why would it be .

 

[cvanwey]

This vers on it's own no why would it be .

Okay, good so far... So what one may conclude, is that this specific verse is an asserted claim. So now, what actual evidence substantiates a claim to '500' eyewitnesses? Does any exist?

 

[Chinchilla]

Okay, good so far... So what one may conclude, is that this specific verse is an asserted claim. So now, what actual evidence substantiates a claim to '500' eyewitnesses? Does any exist?

You did not respond to my argument yet .