1. We have moved to a new forum system. All your posts and data should have transferred over. Welcome, to the new Serebii Forums. Details here
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
    Dismiss Notice
  3. If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders
    Dismiss Notice

Is there evidence of Jesus' ressurection?

Discussion in 'Debate Forum' started by GhostAnime, Apr 11, 2011.

  1. Remorph

    Remorph Alone With Everybody

    Mutations can add or subtract information, as permitted by DNA. That is, we can't possibly grow a dog's ear, because our DNA would never allow it, even with mutation. It wouldn't be possible for horses to have eagles wings. I'm sorry for not being clear, but THIS is what I meant when I said mutations do not add information.
     
  2. Sadib

    Sadib Time Lord Victorious

    Big steps in evolution take multiple generations to occur.
     
  3. Remorph

    Remorph Alone With Everybody

    Did we really get here by evolution? If evolution existed, then what started the earth? The big bang? That's spontaneous generation.
     
  4. Generic Pokemon Trainer

    Generic Pokemon Trainer Bible Thumper

    The Romans weren't the major players in the plan to kill Jesus. But yes, Jesus came to die. The Romans where kind of in between with Jews and Christians, they knew they couldn't move to silence them or else they would have a major rebellion on their hands eg. The Jewish Rebellion in AD 70
     
  5. TheFightingPikachu

    TheFightingPikachu Smashing!

    To start with, that's one more misrepresentation of my argument. I am not claiming that the Jews who wrote the Talmud were in favor of Jesus. That would be silly. The relevant fact about their charge that He "practised sorcery" is that they are here admitting that He did supernatural things.

    And, no, fourth century documents are not null and void. Ask a historian about sources used for other things in history, and you'll find out that many trustworthy sources were made centuries after the things they report (i.e., the biographies of Alexander the Great).

    Finally, the passage I quoted is from the Mishnah. Here's what Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia says about the Mishnah:
    So this source is actually quite early, especially given the fact that it was based on earlier material still.


    Do you even read the biblical sources you are criticizing? Only one woman failed to recognize Jesus when He appeared. In John 20:11-17, Mary Magdalene was weeping when Jesus appeared to her, which could easily account for her temporary failure to recognize Him. The only other people who didn't immediately recognize Him were the two on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-31). If these were the only eyewitnesses, the idea of someone pretending to be a resurrected Jesus might be sensible. However, not only is there good reason why Mary Magdalene might not immediately recognize Him, you also failed to account for "the other Mary" who saw Him (Matthew 28:9-10). And that does nothing to dismiss other eyewitnesses like James and Thomas.

    This is called special pleading. You have no evidence that Paul had any such deep desire. As a matter of fact, the fact that he put Christians in jail (etc.), likely indicates that quite the opposite is the case. I also want to see a source for whether such psychosomatic blindness is even possible.

    The Bible is the primary source for studying the historical Jesus, so you can't just exclude it because you don't like it. As I've shown, there's plenty in it to indicate historical authenticity.
     
  6. Remorph

    Remorph Alone With Everybody

    The Bible is the primary source for studying the historical Jesus, so you can't just exclude it because you don't like it. As I've shown, there's plenty in it to indicate historical authenticity.[/QUOTE]

    Gosh, you made me NOT feel alone, with all the evolutionists.
     
  7. Sadib

    Sadib Time Lord Victorious

    Let's close this topic now. It's clear now that the Bible is the only evidence.
     
  8. Remorph

    Remorph Alone With Everybody

    We're not saying the Bible is the only evidence ever, we are saying that the Bible is a valid source of evidence, at the very least, historically.
     
  9. Megaton666

    Megaton666 Swampert Trainer

    No it's not.
     
  10. Remorph

    Remorph Alone With Everybody

    And how is it not? Give me as many examples as you can of how it's not historically not correct.
     
  11. Megaton666

    Megaton666 Swampert Trainer

    Whoopie! I'm going to enjoy the hell out of this.

    1. It claims the Earth is 6000 years old, while in actuallity it's 4,545,000,000 years old.
    2. It claims the universe was created in 6 days.
    3. It claims there is a "firmament" which seperates the Earth for the "Water above it".
    4. It claims that rabbits chew cud.
    5. It claims the Earth was flooded, even though there's no geological evidence of said flood.
    6. It claims man is made of clay and woman is made out of a mutilated rib.
    7. It claims man is made in God's image while at the same time not allowing man to know what God looks like.
    8. It claims the Earth has 4 corners, implying it's flat.
    9. It claims that an all knowing god DIDN'T know his creations would eat the fruit he told them not to eat.
    10. It has a talking snake.

    And those are just some things off the top of my head. :D
     
  12. Remorph

    Remorph Alone With Everybody

    1. You can't prove it. The crap we use to date the earth doesn't work that far back.
    2. Of course, neither of us can prove that, it's a matter of faith.
    3. You can interpret this as heaven.
    4. Rabbits eat, partially digest their food, then they go #2. Then they eat that, and finish digestion. That's chewing the cud.
    5. Almost every culture has a story of a worldwide flood, and that's too coincidental. Also, there is multiple evidences of a huge catastrophe, which could be the flood.
    6. God created the world, he can sure as heck do this.
    7. We were created resembling God, not looking exactly like God. That;s not even possible, since God is spirit. We can't literally look like god.
    8. The Bible uses a lot of figurative language. This phrase basically means the whole earth. Come on, quite a few people use this phrase. Anyone could tell you that.
    9. God did know, because he is omnipotent. apparently, you read the passage wrong. You will have to read that passage to me, dude. This one's on hold.
    10. If you are even familiar with the story, then you should remember the snake was satan in disguise.

    With the exception of 9, which YOU have to prove, I have refuted every claim.
     
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2011
  13. Megaton666

    Megaton666 Swampert Trainer

    1. Study science. Seriously.
    2. Again, study the damn science.
    3. So would you say God and the angels are fish?
    4. Rabbits, like most species, eat their feces at times of famine. And regardless, coprophagia doesn't count as chewing cud. Chewing cud is when an animal has several stomaches and needs to regurgitate in order to pass the food through all of them. Not to mention, the bible says rabbits chew cud because that's one of the criteria for an animal to be kosher. And the kosher system was designed so that humans don't eat coprophagian animals.
    5. All cultures have stories of a flood because the planet's surface is mostly aquatic, and they needed to explain it.
    6. But evidently, I'm not made of clay.
    7. God didn't want humans to know what he looked like, which is ridiculous considering we supposidly look just like him.
    8. It's not figuritive. The reason it's a figure of speech today is because it's in the bible.
    9. the word you're looking for is "omniscient". and why did God need to look for Adam? And why was he surprised when he found out they ate the fruit?
    10. I am familiar with the story, but apearantly you're not. There's no mention of Satan, probably because the concept of Satan was thought of centuries after genesis was written.
     
  14. Remorph

    Remorph Alone With Everybody

    1,2: I do study science. And you can't prove it. Show me the proof.
    3: No. I wouldn't.
    4.Actually, many of the ancients put the rabbit in the same category as the coprophagians.
    5. Or maybe the earth is mostly aquatic because of the flood.
    6. Duh. The clay turned into human flesh. God can do that. And since you cannot possibly prove god doesn't exist, there is nothing you can do.
    7.Again with the literalism. I said we were made to RESEMBLE god, not literally look like god. And God is a spirit. Looking just like god is impossible.
    8. You don't seem to understand that lots of the bible had symbolism.
    9. Yes. Thank you for the correction. God wanst looking for adam. God was walking in the garden. Adam hid. God knew what adam did the whole time. God wasn't suprised. It never said god was surprised.
    10. Actually, the snake WAS satan. If the world was perfect, and Saran rebelled against God, it had to be him. That, and everyone universally agress that satan was the tempter.
     
  15. GaZsTiC

    GaZsTiC Alternating

  16. Megaton666

    Megaton666 Swampert Trainer

    1,2. Various methods of radiometric dating.
    3. Then the firmament isn't a metaophore for heaven.
    4. Rabbits still don't chew cud.
    5. Actually, the flood is, and was, impossible. Where did all the water come from? Where did it go? How could a tiny ark contain every species on the planet. Where did Noah store food? How did he keep it fresh? Where did he store the fish? How could every species repopulate when it was clearly incest? Why flood the earth at all, and why Make an ark? If god is omnipotent, he could just give all the evil people magic heart attacks, or just re-create every species after the flood.
    6. Well, I believe it was turned to flesh via magic pixies. You have your unsubstanciated hypothesis and I have mine. Not to mention, we already know how humans came to be. It's called evolution.
    7. The bible says "In his image".
    8. No, it didn't have symbolism, nor should it. When writing a document that's meant to be understood by all, using complex metaphores negates your purpose.
    9. Read the bible. He was looking for him. He asked him where he is. And he asked Adam why he was hiding his genitals.
    10. NO! The snake was NOT Satan! The idea that the snake was Satan is a purely christian one, and doesn't exist in Judaism (You know, that religion that actually studied the bible). The reason it's a snake is because, In Judaism, snakes are viewed as deceitful and sneaky.
     
  17. Psykicko

    Psykicko Active Member

    Well granted I only read the first page of this thread, noticed there were 58 pages and consequently skipped to the last page, but I was rather pleased that this thread didn't seem to be near approaching a flame war, but I think Megaton666 and Remorph are dangerously close to it.

    Anyways, here are my two cents:
    You two aren't making any progress by simply flinging these 10 points back and forth at each other. To be honest, by the look of things, the best solution for you two would be to agree to disagree, because you're both just being stubborn. Everyone is entitled to believe what they want to believe, and no matter how much another person's beliefs may infuriate you because you KNOW that deep down inside you are speaking the truth and the other person's beliefs are WRONG, all you will end up expressing when you try to refute them is tactless psychological brutality.

    Hey, take a look at my sig. I'm a spritualist/pagan, and I'm also a scientist by nature. I'm looking at the stuff that both of you are writing and thinking 'yep, they're both right there, Megaton is wrong there, Remorph is wrong there, but he's right here and he's right there...' etc, but I'm not about to waste my time trying to explain why because I'm comfortable with my beliefs, and you should be comfortable with your own.
     
  18. darkcharizard58

    darkcharizard58 Well-Known Member

    They didnt. Joseph of Arimethea donatd his own tomb for him. He was rich and believed in Jesus the Phariseesn had nothing to do with Jesus's burial
     
  19. Sadib

    Sadib Time Lord Victorious

    God of course.
    I don't think anyone showed any other evidence.
     
  20. ebilly99

    ebilly99 Americanreigon champ

    Joseph the Pharisie did? May I ask why he would do this? Seems strange to me that the same guy who voted to kill jesus would then give up his tomb
     

Share This Page