Is there evidence of Jesus' ressurection?

[bel9]

Erm...you're a Christian.

I'm a Catholic. That means I believe bread and wine magically turn into Jesus's body and blood.

You should believe in Jesus Christ's ressurection. So... by default, you want it to be a credible event.

I would appreciate it if you didn't put words into my mouth.

Unless I've got the idea of faith all wrong.

Assuming makes and *** out of u and me. The cornerstone of Christianity is supposed to be based on the idea of Christ's teachings, not solely on his resurrection. As I've already stated I respect the story for the message it sends.

 

[meteor64]

I'm a Catholic. That means I believe bread and wine turn into Jesus's body and blood.

I appreciate Christian =/= Catholic, but Catholicism is a branch of Christianity.

I would appreciate it if you didn't put words into my mouth.

I apologise. Thats not what I intended.

Assuming makes and *** out of u and me. The cornerstone of Christianity is supposed to be based on the idea of Christ's teachings, not solely on his resurrection. As I've already stated I respect the story for the message it sends.

And Christ "teaches" forgiveness when he is ressurected, does he not? While it's certainy not the whole story, it's definately an important part.

 

[legendarypokemonmaster]

^Show some evidence for your claims that evolution has been disproven. But then again, I don't really want to derail the topic, especially since there is an evolution thread, so maybe this should be continued there.

 

[Charmander#4]

the earth is billoions of years old? disproven by carbon dating

This is one statement I don't understand. First of all, carbon dating can only be used for things that are no more than a few thousand years old and organic. Secondly, rocks have been found that were several billion years old. Where is your source? Here's one of mine: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/8...here-at-the-earths-beginning-researchers-say/

cromagnum man? fake

It's spelled Cro-Magnon. And no, no it has not. Searching around, I was unable to find any sources for this piece of information: Where did you hear this?

if you have your beleifs i have mine if you want to criticsize me for them,
FIRE AWAY but show me some solid evidence beofre you claim fact

I did. Now you do the same.

 

[cantab]

the earth is billoions of years old? disproven by carbon dating

Trying to date the earth by carbon dating is like trying to measure the speed of a fighter jet with a weather station anemometer. That you make the claim you do indicates you're woefully ignorant of how radiometric dating of rocks works.

 

[ChedWick]

LOL
all of the evolutioists theories have been disproven time and time again
the earth is billoions of years old? disproven by carbon dating
cromagnum man? fake
if you have your beleifs i have mine if you want to criticsize me for them,
FIRE AWAY but show me some solid evidence beofre you claim fact

"LOL" indeed. These kinds of topics always have a half dozen incredibly ironic posts. Yours being one of them. You make a lot of claims with out anything to back them up.

 

[7 tyranitars]

I can't believe I'm actualy saying this but the resurection of jezus can be taken 2 ways:
the literly way he really did came back to life etc etc..

or he came back a life through peoples minds like how death family/friends to you are still alive in your head because they didn't disapeared out of your mind

 

[meteor64]

LOL
all of the evolutioists theories have been disproven time and time again

I like this invisible evidence you're showing me.

the earth is billoions of years old? disproven by carbon dating

Indeed, using a method devised to measure the ages of things within the realms of human history is perfect proof of the earths age. There's absolutely no way the earth is "billoions" of years old.

cromagnum man? fake

Mmmmmmm...Magnum. Got a craving now.

if you have your beleifs i have mine if you want to criticsize me for them,
FIRE AWAY but show me some solid evidence beofre you claim fact

It's a shame people seem to be questioning your knowledge of the topic at hand instead.
And ironic argument is ironic.

 

[cantab]

bones rockes exc yeah
theres plenty of evidence to refute evolutoion look into it sometime

Well why don't you give us some pointers, some links to descriptions of this evidence?

 

[bel9]

theres plenty of evidence to refute evolutoion look into it sometimenum

Since you're such an expert why not enlighten us poor misguided souls.

yes CRO-magnum man was falsified, the skull they found wasnt that of a human it was a gibbon or something

link or it didn't happen.

also, if i remeber right the evolutionist theory that was the earth was billoions of year old was disproven by dating rocks

False.

the planet being less than to thousand years old,

I want you to know this would also mean that the entire first half of the Bible was false and time didn't start until Jesus was born.

Furthermore the fact that the Black hills have been dated back to at leastn 1.8 billion years ago means that you're pulling that fact straight out of your ass.

simple enough for you to understand?

No. Your grammar and punctuation is atrocious. Your message and over all central idea is unclear. Your organization could use tons of work too. Despite your overall condescending nature to the debaters here, you seem to fail to understand that you are the fool who makes absolutely no sense. You cite absolutely nothing when asked which makes you look like you're pulling stats right out your arse.

 

[legendarypokemonmaster]

^How do you know they are not both true? The little globe next to the color A is for posting links. We should probably continue this discussion on evolution to the "Let's debate evolution" thread, since this is about the resurrection of Christ.

 

[rykerr1]

last i checked this was a bebate forum, not a spellin be,
i conveyed my point clearly, but since you still dont seem to get it,
here goes for the third time: pro creation has more evidence that refutes evolution, mant of the evolutionist theories have been disproven. more than once in fact. dont sondescend to me about being condescending.
lol, im a fool because my thoughts oppose yours? or because you cant stand that a valid point was made that punchesa hole in you theory?
i dont know how to do links so you'l just have to manage on your own

OK first of all.... You keep saying that evolution has been disproven, yet give absolutely no evidence.

Secondly, the fact that we can use Uranium-238 to date rocks PROVES that the earth is billions of years old, because Uranium-238's half life is 4.5 billion years.

You say carbon dating disproves that earth is billions of years old, but it isn't even used to date rocks. It only dates organic material.

So I think your "theories" have more holes than anyone elses.

 

[AzukanAsimbu]

I find it hard to argue about this kind of thing. In any other debate, all I would have to say to dismiss this was "Is there precedence for such an event happening?", and the answer would be "No.", which would end the argument. Then someone might say "But one time has to be the first!". And that is true. So I would answer "Is there any hard evidence indicating that someone can, in fact, rise from the grave of their own accord, days after dying of crucifixion?" and the answer would, of course be "No."

In a scientific debate, this would lead us to the conclusion that a person cannot get up and walk away after dying from crucifixion. But then there is the factor called "God". Apparently, invoking his name gives you explanations for everything. It is the real-world equivalent of saying "A wizard did it". But is it acceptable as an argument? No, it is sadly not. Until the existence of a deity can be proven decisively, they will not be acceptable for use in an argument. It is a matter of faith. If you believe in God or whatever other deity you worship, that's cool. But do not bring them to a serious debate. You cannot use belief in the existence of dragons or Bigfoot as an argument either. And while you might think that you can, such is only the case in the presence of others who share your faith. If you are arguing with someone who is not as religious as yourself, try to present hard evidence instead. If you are unable to do so, stay out of the argument. You have lost before you even started.

But don't listen to me, I'm just the Antichrist:

"Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the Antichrist." (2 John 1:7)

i laughed. so that means im the Antichrist too. because i have such a desire to kill thousands of people and take their souls back to hell

and yes apparantly Catholics think Jesus is coming on May 21st? im not sure why

 

[legendarypokemonmaster]

^What? Who said that?

 

[foodmetaphors]

Imagine you're reading about somebody's life. The first account of them was written by someone who never claimed to have seen them in the flesh but rather as a ghost years after the timeline given for their life. Their biography is written several times over even later than the account of their appearance as a ghost was written. And the identities of the writers of these biographies are still unknown. Going further, this person was extremely famous as is shown in many parts of their biography. And yet no contemporary record of their account can be found.

Some of the information on this person doesn't even match up.. including a nine year difference between when it was claimed they were born. There's no first-hand evidence for anything that occurred during his life. He didn't resurrect because he didn't exist in the first place. And there are so many issues of using the Bible as a source considering that the events described in Exodus, for example, never happened.

 

[legendarypokemonmaster]

^I don't see it...anywhere.

 

[ChedWick]

from all my previous posts, you should be able to peice it together -_-

About as accurately as the bible I would say.

 

[legendarypokemonmaster]

How dare you insult the bible like that!

 

[rykerr1]

yeah, i did -_- read it again

rocks, minerals, fossils, and bones.
you get the idea, and and no, i said it idsproves it

I don't understand. What are you implying about rocks, minerals, fossils, and bones? They exist, we have dating that proves some are billions of years old. Are you trying to tell me that fossils disprove evolution?

Besides, rocks, fossils, etc are not the only things we have as evidence of evolution...

 

[ChedWick]

How dare you insult the bible like that!

/sarcasm? Honestly can't tell. I'd like to think so though.