Richard Dawkins vs Conall and Donall

[dms1972]

.

 

[HammerOfThor]

you may consider it weak (your opinion)

It's objectively weak because it's unverifiable.

 

[dms1972]

It's objectively weak because it's unverifiable.

It is already verified and testified to by over five hundred witnesses who seen Jesus after his resurrection, and nothing has been found to falsify it. You are either unaware of that in which case you could read the appropriate part of the documents - Paul's letter to the Corinthians Chapter 15 . Or you just won't accept the strength of the evidence.

http://biblehub.com/niv/1_corinthians/15.htm

 

[HammerOfThor]

It is already verified and testified to by over five hundred witnesses,

What?

and nothing has been found to falsify it.

Is it even falsifiable?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Because dismissing evidence because it is "religious" is as absurd as dismissing it because it is "secular".

And it was a very amusing video clip, so it must be true

But they didn't present any evidence to be dismissed.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Churches do exist and the gospels also exist; these are evidences. Dismiss them and they will still be there.

So it turns out that every religion is well-evidenced then.

 

[HammerOfThor]

So it turns out that every religion is well-evidenced then.

Apparently so

 

[dms1972]

The list below are sometimes called proofs - I'd call some of them evidences, not proofs.



[FONT=arial,helvetica]The Resurrection, Proofs of the Resurrection[/FONT]


1. The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early. The Sabbath ended at sunset, so that Jesus had been dead and buried Friday night, Saturday, and Sunday morning, beginning at the previous sunset, three days according to Jewish reckoning. See 1 Sam. 30:12, 13; 2 Chron. 10:5, 12. This visit John says was "early, while it was yet dark;" Mark says "very early in the morning;" Matthew says "As it began to dawn." John names Mary Magdalene as the important one of these women who visited the tomb, but does not say she was alone. From the other evangelists we learn that Mary, the mother of James and Joses, and Salome were with her, and that they came with sweet spices to embalm the body of Jesus, expecting to secure aid to remove the stone. The fact that they came to embalm the body shows that they were not satisfied with the coarser, but loving treatment of Joseph and Nicodemus, and that they did not expect a resurrection. To their astonishment they found the stone rolled away.


2. Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, etc. The reason that John mentions Mary Magdalene alone is shown in this statement. She was the one who ran and met Peter and himself. Her sad cry, "They have taken the Lord away out of the sepulcher, and we know not where they have laid him," shows that others were with her at the sepulcher. Her only explanation was that the enemies had taken away the body. While Mary had gone to seek the disciples the other women entered the sepulcher and saw an angel there. See Matt. 28:6-7.

3, 4, Peter . . . came to the sepulcher. As soon as Peter and John heard the story of Mary Magdalene they at once hurried out of the city to the sepulcher. They were intensely excited by the startling story, and ran with their utmost speed to the sepulcher. John seems to have been the swifter of the two and reached it first. The circumstantial details he gives are those of an eye witness.

5, 6, 7. And he . . . saw the linen clothes lying. Though John reached the sepulcher first he was so awed that he did not enter in, but through the open [295] door he saw the tomb to be empty, but linen clothes that Joseph and Nicodemus had used for burial garments (see John 19:40) lying within. Peter, more impulsive and bolder, as soon as he reached the tomb, went within and also noted the linen wrappings, carefully folded, and even the napkin that was about his head, placed in such a way as to show that the tomb had not been rudely robbed.

8, 9. Then went in that other disciple . . . and he saw and believed. When John entered in, saw the careful attention paid to the grave clothes, and knew that rude robbers could not have taken the body, it flashed upon his mind, for the first time, that the Lord had risen. So dull had they all been, according to his confession, notwithstanding the clear, Scripture statements and the teachings of the Lord, that they had not before understood that he should rise from the dead. This is the first gleam of faith in the Lord's resurrection. John was the first believer.

10. The disciples went away again to their own home. Probably to the house of John, which there is reason to believe was in Jerusalem. The tomb was empty; there was nothing more they could do but simply to await the developments that might come.

11. Mary stood without at the sepulcher weeping. She had followed Peter and John more slowly, and when all the other disciples departed she remained to weep at the place where the Lord had lain. She also stooped and gazed through her tears into the sepulcher, but without hope, when suddenly she

12, 13. Seeth two angels, clothed in white. It is not certain that she at first knew them to be angels; she was stupefied almost with grief, and they had the appearance of men, as did the angel seen by the other women whom she had not met since she ran for Peter and John. They asked her, Why weepest thou? and her answer shows that the stone rolled away from the door of the sepulcher has not been lifted from her heart; "Because they have taken away my Lord and I know [296] not where they have laid him." To her, still, the broken tabernacle of clay laid in the tomb, is her Lord.

14. She turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing. As she spoke of her Lord her Lord was there, though she did not recognize him. Her failure to do so was due probably in part to her preoccupation and excitement of mind and to the dimness of the light. She saw a man, and paid little heed at first to his appearance, though it may be possible that her "eyes were holden," as in the case of the disciples on the way to Emmaus.

15. Woman, why weepest thou? The same question is asked, first, by the Lord that had been by his angels in the tomb. Mary, still heedless of all but her sorrow, without looking, takes it for granted that it is the gardener who has charge of the garden in which the sepulchre was placed, for who else would be likely to be there so early? She at once asks him about the body. As yet her hope is dead.

16. Jesus saith unto her, Mary. . . . Rabboni. Before she had been listless, but when she heard her name in the accents she remembered so well, she at once beheld her Lord, and crying out, Rabboni, Master, she attempted to throw herself at his feet.

17. Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father. She, in her gladness, sought to grasp her Lord about the feet. There has been much conjecture as to the reasons underlying the Savior's prohibition. It seems to me that the explanation is about as follows: She desired to fling herself upon the Lord and retain him, but it was needful that he come and go, during the time he showed himself to his disciples, until he "ascended to his Father." Then would he come again by the Spirit to be with his disciples forever. Had he permitted her embrace he would have been compelled, in a moment, to escape from her, but since he has ascended to his Father he abides with the saints forever! Though Mary is not allowed to embrace him, there is assigned to her a higher privilege. She is told to go and tell the glad story to my brethren. He is still our Brother. I ascend to my Father. The time of the ascension is viewed as present. He has risen; he ascends; another step in his exaltation. The Father to whom he [297] ascends is "your Father" also. The disciples are brethren of the Lord and children of his Father.

[FONT=arial,helvetica] 18. Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord. The women were last at the cross; they followed the body to the tomb; they were first to see the open tomb; first to hear the story of the resurrection from an angel, and Mary was the first to see the Lord. Great is the faith and devotion of the sex; great is the honor with which the Lord has crowned the faith and devotion of women.

[/FONT]

 

[HammerOfThor]

1. The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early. The Sabbath ended at sunset, so that Jesus had been dead and buried Friday night, Saturday, and Sunday morning, beginning at the previous sunset, three days according to Jewish reckoning. See 1 Sam. 30:12, 13; 2 Chron. 10:5, 12. This visit John says was "early, while it was yet dark;" Mark says "very early in the morning;" Matthew says "As it began to dawn." John names Mary Magdalene as the important one of these women who visited the tomb, but does not say she was alone. From the other evangelists we learn that Mary, the mother of James and Joses, and Salome were with her, and that they came with sweet spices to embalm the body of Jesus, expecting to secure aid to remove the stone. The fact that they came to embalm the body shows that they were not satisfied with the coarser, but loving treatment of Joseph and Nicodemus, and that they did not expect a resurrection. To their astonishment they found the stone rolled away.


2. Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, etc. The reason that John mentions Mary Magdalene alone is shown in this statement. She was the one who ran and met Peter and himself. Her sad cry, "They have taken the Lord away out of the sepulcher, and we know not where they have laid him," shows that others were with her at the sepulcher. Her only explanation was that the enemies had taken away the body. While Mary had gone to seek the disciples the other women entered the sepulcher and saw an angel there. See Matt. 28:6-7.


3, 4, Peter . . . came to the sepulcher. As soon as Peter and John heard the story of Mary Magdalene they at once hurried out of the city to the sepulcher. They were intensely excited by the startling story, and ran with their utmost speed to the sepulcher. John seems to have been the swifter of the two and reached it first. The circumstantial details he gives are those of an eye witness.

5, 6, 7. And he . . . saw the linen clothes lying. Though John reached the sepulcher first he was so awed that he did not enter in, but through the open [295] door he saw the tomb to be empty, but linen clothes that Joseph and Nicodemus had used for burial garments (see John 19:40) lying within. Peter, more impulsive and bolder, as soon as he reached the tomb, went within and also noted the linen wrappings, carefully folded, and even the napkin that was about his head, placed in such a way as to show that the tomb had not been rudely robbed.

8, 9. Then went in that other disciple . . . and he saw and believed. When John entered in, saw the careful attention paid to the grave clothes, and knew that rude robbers could not have taken the body, it flashed upon his mind, for the first time, that the Lord had risen. So dull had they all been, according to his confession, notwithstanding the clear, Scripture statements and the teachings of the Lord, that they had not before understood that he should rise from the dead. This is the first gleam of faith in the Lord's resurrection. John was the first believer.

10. The disciples went away again to their own home. Probably to the house of John, which there is reason to believe was in Jerusalem. The tomb was empty; there was nothing more they could do but simply to await the developments that might come.

11. Mary stood without at the sepulcher weeping. She had followed Peter and John more slowly, and when all the other disciples departed she remained to weep at the place where the Lord had lain. She also stooped and gazed through her tears into the sepulcher, but without hope, when suddenly she

12, 13. Seeth two angels, clothed in white. It is not certain that she at first knew them to be angels; she was stupefied almost with grief, and they had the appearance of men, as did the angel seen by the other women whom she had not met since she ran for Peter and John. They asked her, Why weepest thou? and her answer shows that the stone rolled away from the door of the sepulcher has not been lifted from her heart; "Because they have taken away my Lord and I know [296] not where they have laid him." To her, still, the broken tabernacle of clay laid in the tomb, is her Lord.

14. She turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing. As she spoke of her Lord her Lord was there, though she did not recognize him. Her failure to do so was due probably in part to her preoccupation and excitement of mind and to the dimness of the light. She saw a man, and paid little heed at first to his appearance, though it may be possible that her "eyes were holden," as in the case of the disciples on the way to Emmaus.

15. Woman, why weepest thou? The same question is asked, first, by the Lord that had been by his angels in the tomb. Mary, still heedless of all but her sorrow, without looking, takes it for granted that it is the gardener who has charge of the garden in which the sepulchre was placed, for who else would be likely to be there so early? She at once asks him about the body. As yet her hope is dead.

16. Jesus saith unto her, Mary. . . . Rabboni. Before she had been listless, but when she heard her name in the accents she remembered so well, she at once beheld her Lord, and crying out, Rabboni, Master, she attempted to throw herself at his feet.

17. Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father. She, in her gladness, sought to grasp her Lord about the feet. There has been much conjecture as to the reasons underlying the Savior's prohibition. It seems to me that the explanation is about as follows: She desired to fling herself upon the Lord and retain him, but it was needful that he come and go, during the time he showed himself to his disciples, until he "ascended to his Father." Then would he come again by the Spirit to be with his disciples forever. Had he permitted her embrace he would have been compelled, in a moment, to escape from her, but since he has ascended to his Father he abides with the saints forever! Though Mary is not allowed to embrace him, there is assigned to her a higher privilege. She is told to go and tell the glad story to my brethren. He is still our Brother. I ascend to my Father. The time of the ascension is viewed as present. He has risen; he ascends; another step in his exaltation. The Father to whom he [297] ascends is "your Father" also. The disciples are brethren of the Lord and children of his Father.

[FONT=arial,helvetica] 18. Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord. The women were last at the cross; they followed the body to the tomb; they were first to see the open tomb; first to hear the story of the resurrection from an angel, and Mary was the first to see the Lord. Great is the faith and devotion of the sex; great is the honor with which the Lord has crowned the faith and devotion of women.

The Resurrection, Proofs of the Resurrection
[/FONT]

You need to demonstrate that the christian scriptures are true before I consider any of this to be valid evidence.

 

[HitchSlap]

It is already verified and testified to by over five hundred witnesses who seen Jesus after his resurrection, and nothing has been found to falsify it. You are either unaware of that in which case you could read the appropriate part of the documents - Paul's letter to the Corinthians Chapter 15 . Or you just won't accept the strength of the evidence.

1 Corinthians 15 NIV

With over five hundred witnesses, you shouldn't have any trouble naming just one, then. BTW, Paul never met Jesus, and wasn't there for the alleged resurrection. And aside from the gospels, which were written decades after the supposed life of Jesus, there are zero written accounts of a resurrection. Jesus was "Euhemerised" a century after the time he supposedly lived.

As a Christian, I would have thought you had a better understanding of the evidence.

 

[HitchSlap]

Originally Posted by dms1972

sorry this is a ridiculous statement - it is evidence, if not then what?
​

Not at all, you may consider it weak (your opinion), but it is evidence. That's us back from subjective opinions to statements of fact.

If you consider anonymous, unsupportable claims as credible evidence, then by your standards, all religions would be true.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Conall and Donall are still the champions. Cartoon-richard-dawkins lost the debate. I reckon that a number of posts in this thread reflect the 'wisdom' of cartoon-richard-dawkins.

 

[HitchSlap]

I like this video of Dawkins much better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvAznKSN2x4

 

[GrimKingGrim]

It is already verified and testified to by over five hundred witnesses who seen Jesus after his resurrection

Then we would be able to have found some evidence to that. You'd think after witnessing the most important event in human history that people would be in a furious uproar. There would thousands of papers and reports on it. There would be diaries and journals and statues and celebrations.

None found.

and nothing has been found to falsify it.

It's not falsifiable. So it's no good to anyone.

You are either unaware of that in which case you could read the appropriate part of the documents - Paul's letter to the Corinthians Chapter 15 . Or you just won't accept the strength of the evidence.

Any story that cannot be verified with objective evidence has little to no strength

 

[Davian]

Ugh. This is satire. Liberals do this all the time and it's pretty funny when they do, most of the time. When it gets turned around though, they don't find it nearly as funny. They get all uptight and stuff. Or at least, so it seems.

I found this to be quite funny.

It's because Satire is usually accurate

This was attempted satire but because it was inaccurate I can't laugh and say "ha, yea that is true!" The point of satire is not to get it wrong.

Indeed. Jon Stewart and the Daily Show would not be nearly as funny if they were simply knocking down straw-men and caricatures.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Richard Dawkins mocking ignorant creationist ... Wendy Wright

I like this video of Dawkins much better.

Ah, the benefit of editing ... it can make anybody seem oh so reasonable and nice.

 

[MoreCoffee]

she says "show me the evidence" ... he responds "where did you study science"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XrOscFu1y8

Conall and Donall were spot on accurate

 

[MoreCoffee]

Argument from incredulity!

Who would have thought

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyB1wTV3Tj0

 

[HitchSlap]

Ah the Wendy Wright interview. Cringe worthy.

What would you call a person who blithely ignores the evidence?

 

[HitchSlap]

Ah, the benefit of editing ... it can make anybody seem oh so reasonable and nice.

Including Conall & Donall.