Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
What evidence were you looking at, other than the one I mentioned?How I get "it is true that Jesus rose from the dead" is simple. After honestly looking at the evidence, the evidence pointed me to that conclusion. I accepted it and then once I did this, God confirmed to me that it indeed was true.
Ask seek and knock.
I made an entire thread based on how we shouldn't assume things first but rather observe and ask honest questions, did you see that thread? C'mon give me a break here, you're falsely representing my beliefs in order to make your case, which is dishonest.
It is interesting that the only thing atheist worry about not believing in is God.
All I'm saying is the evidence of God hasn't been presented to atheists yet, but in time it will be.
Except if evidence that proves God does not exist was found then me being a liar wouldn't really matter because after I die I wouldn't be punished for such a grievous lie, instead I'd get off scotch free into nothingness.
How I get "it is true that Jesus rose from the dead" is simple. After honestly looking at the evidence, the evidence pointed me to that conclusion. I accepted it and then once I did this, God confirmed to me that it indeed was true.
Ask seek and knock.
I do. Especially when these people have good reasons for believing what they do and have evidence and changed lives to boot.
If they do affirm this then surely you can supply references that will bear this out.
google "evidence for the empty tomb".
Right, but if I am lying and it turns out to be true that there is no God to determine truth from lies, then doesn't that mean in the end truth has no meaning and lies have no meaning?
Excellent.
Internal evidence supports pre A.D. 70 dates for the synoptic gospels. Paul's letters are dated even earlier and the sources for Paul's works would be dated even earlier for they were in circulation already at this time, likely within the same decade that Jesus' crucifixion took place. Many of the eyewitnesses to the events recorded by these men would still be alive and would have been able to expose as liars, these men had they written anything contrary to what was actually witnessed to have happened. Hostile testimony from the Pharisees is the most telling, for they themselves give testimony that the tomb was empty on the Sunday following the crucifixion.
The fact that the original autographs are not at our disposal is simply immaterial. Had the copies of the originals shown any evidence of deviation from the autographs, those who had written them and those who had read the originals would have been all too willing and able to reveal them as having been amended.
Very little if any original ancient historical texts contemporaneous with the NT texts have survived over the centuries. Historians are not unduly worried by this.
I agree. The NT as a whole is more a work of theology than history, but where the NT acts as a conduit for historical knowledge, it has never been proven to be inaccurate.
Google evidence for the resurrection.What evidence were you looking at, other than the one I mentioned?
Google evidence for the resurrection.I too would like to know "what evidence"?
Google evidence for the resurrection.
Seems like you'd have to follow a lot of mutually contradictory religions then, since all of the big ones have this in their favor.
I never forbid the person from telling me to use google.Anyone else sense a double standard here?
"Historians are not unduly worried by this" - then those aren't very good historians. My understanding is that the original versions of Mark (the earliest gospel by decades) ended with Mary and co finding an empty tomb, with the post tomb scenes added much later? Considering this seems to be an important thing for Christians don't you find it somewhat disturbing that it's been messed around with so much.
A cumulative case for the resurrection.What evidence convinced you?
Nevertheless the tomb was empty, which is my point.
A c
A cumulative case for the resurrection.
That answers the second question mostly, but what about the first?Personally I think people should change their beliefs when they realize that holding them would make them irrational, i.e. change on pain of irrationality.
How do you leap from an empty tomb to a bodily resurrection and subsequent heavenly ascension? And please don't bother telling me to "google it."Nevertheless the tomb was empty, which is my point.
How do you leap from an empty tomb to a bodily resurrection and subsequent heavenly ascension? And please don't bother telling me to "google it."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_consequences
"Appeal to consequences, also known as argumentum ad consequentiam (Latin for "argument to the consequences"), is an argument that concludes a hypothesis (typically a belief) to be either true or false based on whether the premise leads to desirable or undesirable consequences."
The fact that you don't like the consequences of your assumption being wrong doesn't make it correct. That's a logical fallacy.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?