The Resurrection

[civilwarbuff]

I'm not so sure we have free will.

Then what do we have?

 

[civilwarbuff]

Freewill (assuming such a thing exists), would be used by me to stop someone from molesting my ten year old. Why doesn't your god operate under the same moral?

Because of freewill. He lets us do as we chose.

 

[HitchSlap]

Because of freewill. He lets us do as we chose.

That's nice.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

again the question...you're OK without freewill?

I don't have the free will to fly like Super Man. A football player doesn't have the free will to run over everyone for a touchdown no matter what they do.

The rapist is free to do as he chooses unless physical limitations constrain him. God would be violating his free will if he made it so that the rapist does not want to rape. Physically intervening is not a violation of free will. Why are you not getting this?

 

[civilwarbuff]

I don't have the free will to fly like Super Man. A football player doesn't have the free will to run over everyone for a touchdown no matter what they do.

The rapist is free to do as he chooses unless physical limitations constrain him. God would be violating his free will if he made it so that the rapist does not want to rape. Physically intervening is not a violation of free will. Why are you not getting this?

Man chose freewill over God...now you don't like the rules of the game and you want Him go intervene? Man has made his own bed and he will lie in it until until The Day of The Lord comes and only then will people turn their hearts to Him.

 

[HitchSlap]

Man chose freewill over God...now you don't like the rules of the game and you want Him go intervene? Man has made his own bed and he will lie in it until until The Day of The Lord comes and only then will people turn their hearts to Him.

Then your god is a malevolent one, at best.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Then your god is a malevolent one, at best.

The only ones who need fear Him are those who hate Him.

 

[HitchSlap]

The only ones who need fear Him are those who hate Him.

Ok.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Man chose freewill over God...now you don't like the rules of the game and you want Him go intervene? Man has made his own bed and he will lie in it until until The Day of The Lord comes and only then will people turn their hearts to Him.

So God is saying that he won't intervene for a rape victim because Adam ate forbidden fruit a few thousand years before the woman was born?

 

[Tawhano]

Yes, it doesn't matter if the investigation occurs after Easter Sunday or on it. You are correct there. But why was there no investigation at all?

I already covered this in multiple posts. There was an investigation and it was recorded in Matthew. You even quoted the very verse that showed there was an investigation in post#273.

you've gone on record saying that an investigation of the tomb would be moronic.

I explained all this in the post you are quoting. Didn’t you read it? I explained that yes there was an investigation and it would be moronic to perform a second investigation. Read the post again and stop playing games.

Now you come at me with a new angle.

Now I am seeing a pattern as to why everything is going over your head; you do not actually read my post but apparently skim over them to pick out something to reply to. You apparently read the first line where I say yes and ignored my explanation as to why I said it. This is not a new angle it is the crux of my argument to show that your position was built on a fallacy argument.

And yes, it cuts against the narrative to omit the investigation if it did indeed occur. But before I bother explaining that …Then we'll talk.

Yea right. So far you haven’t answered one question I put to you. All you have done is repeat your fallacious argument and have not provided one sliver of evidence to back it up. You keep saying there was no investigation and even quoted the verses that said there was. Forgive me if I do not believe you will ever explain, or for that matter able to explain, but your track record indicates you will not.

 

[Tawhano]

It wasn't just the way you worded it.

This thread is about the resurrection miracle. I took your remark “Even more bizarre is the thought that the pharisees actually did believe the guards, that they did believe a miracle occurred” to mean the miracle of the resurrection. I should have worded it to pinpoint that miracle instead I simply said miracles and you responded with the verses that recorded the event where the guards saw the angel. That passage in Matthew does not say that the guards or the chief priest believed that Jesus rose from the dead. So yes it was because I worded it wrong and yes I did, and have read many times, all four gospel accounts of the resurrection story.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Yes, it doesn't matter if the investigation occurs after Easter Sunday or on it. You are correct there. But why was there no investigation at all?

Now you come at me with a new angle. True, I cannot prove that there wasn't an investigation. I can, however, prove it was not recorded. And yes, it cuts against the narrative to omit the investigation if it did indeed occur. But before I bother explaining that, I need to make sure, as you've so often said, that this doesn't go over your head because you've gone on record saying that an investigation of the tomb would be moronic. Let's see if your angle on that has changed. Let's see if you've bothered to read the portion of Matthew that you chastised me for not reading. Then we'll talk.

What are you expecting, full CSI? They looked, he was gone.

 

[Tawhano]

What are you expecting, full CSI? They looked, he was gone.

He has never been able to answer this question but instead makes contradicting excuses such as when I supplied evidence from the scriptures that an investigation took place he answers with:

I asked why no one cared to pay a visit after Easter Sunday. It's clearly laid out in the OP. You are reading some kind of slant into it.

So even though he states in post#302 that “it doesn't matter if the investigation occurs after Easter Sunday or on it.” he has made it quite clear in multiple posts that it does matter when the investigation was performed. He makes it quite clear that the investigation on Easter Sunday does not answer his question posted on the OP. This is the circle that jason_delisle mentions in post#304. On the one hand he continues to chant that “no investigation” took place and then when presented with evidence that shows an investigation did take place he rejects that because it didn’t take place after Easter Sunday; which he says doesn’t really matter anyway. He then jumps back at the start of the circular reasoning and states that no investigation took place.

It is no wonder he chose his handle which means he rejects all religious and moral principles because he believes that life is meaningless. It is meaningless to him because he is unable to perform basic rational and logical evaluations of the data around him. If it doesn’t matter when the investigation took place as he states in post#302 then his question has been answered. There was an investigation. But, as you suggest, because the chief priest didn’t call in the forensic scientists then his argument must be the investigation performed by the guards posted at the sepulcher is null and void.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Paul stated that scripture to the natural man is foolishness because scripture is spiritually discerned.

 

[HitchSlap]

Paul stated that scripture to the natural man is foolishness because scripture is spiritually discerned.

Is this your "get out of jail free," card?

 

[HitchSlap]

This thread is about the resurrection miracle. I took your remark “Even more bizarre is the thought that the pharisees actually did believe the guards, that they did believe a miracle occurred” to mean the miracle of the resurrection. I should have worded it to pinpoint that miracle instead I simply said miracles and you responded with the verses that recorded the event where the guards saw the angel. That passage in Matthew does not say that the guards or the chief priest believed that Jesus rose from the dead. So yes it was because I worded it wrong and yes I did, and have read many times, all four gospel accounts of the resurrection story.

Do you agree that the resurrection story aptly fits the definition of miracle?

Miracle: Unsupportable, unverifiable claims, to promote religious dogma?

 

[civilwarbuff]

Is this your "get out of jail free," card?

Nope, just truth....

 

[HitchSlap]

Nope, just truth....

I thought it was your opinion, as "truths" can be demonstrated.

 

[civilwarbuff]

I thought it was your opinion, as "truths" can be demonstrated.

Demonstrated here on a regular basis....

 

[Tawhano]

Do you agree that the resurrection story aptly fits the definition of miracle?

Miracle: Unsupportable, unverifiable claims, to promote religious dogma?

We have different views for the definition of miracle. So what's the point you are trying to make? I fail to see that this has anything to do with my post other than to attempt to derail, yet again, the thread because the OP is based on unsupportable, unverifiable claims, to promote anti-religious dogma.