How interestingly fortuitous that I have just finished posting the below in another thread and it happens to be exactly relevant to this thread too.
Can one disprove Jesus' resurrection?
- Thread starter rakovsky
- Start date
How interestingly fortuitous that I have just finished posting the below in another thread and it happens to be exactly relevant to this thread too.
Yes.
If someone tries to prove that the resurrection did or didn't occur, the person making either claim has the burden of proof.
The fact that a proponent of a claim (eg. that the weather will be nice tomorrow or that there are mice in his field) has not proved his case doesn't mean that the inverse is true (eg. that the weather will not be nice tomorrow or that there are no mice in the field).
Yes, I understand, Tommy.
It is helpful for simplicity though that in this thread I am only asking whether one can disprove the Resurrection, not other conclusions or implications drawn from it like God being behind it.
However, Jesus' resurrection was depicted as him having a miraculous new body that could show up places before his bodily ascension. That is, this wasn't depicted as a run of the mill resuscitation.
No, you have not provided "more proofs that the Resurrection didn't occur". That is because the burden is on someone claiming something to prove it. In your case, you have made a claim that you haven't yet proved, ie that you were there.
You have not even presented any evidence that Jesus existed let alone said whatever gobbledygook you are now trying to explain with some more nonsense.
What you do not even realize is that the hucksters who wrote down what an imaginary son of god said never intended for you to actually understand what was being said... it was a mystery cult with no intentions for anything other than the bamboozlement of the uninitiated.
John 10:6
- This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.
Luke 9:44-45
- 9:44 Let these sayings sink down into your ears: for the Son of man shall be delivered into the hands of men.
- 9:45 But they understood not this saying, and it was hid from them, that they perceived it not: and they feared to ask him of that saying.
Luke 8:9-10
- 8:9 And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be?
- 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
Matthew 13:10-17
- 13:10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
- 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
- 13:12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
- 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
- 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
- 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
- 13:16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.
- 13:17 For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.
Last edited:
Smart cooky,
Yes, I understand. One could reasonably propose that Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers who had some sympathy toward him and thus didn't put in the full effort to kill him. The early Christian community was one of the more peaceful to the Romans and supposedly healed centurions' families. Some soldiers at the crucifixion supposedly said that he was divine. These could be made up details that reflect a reality that they were sympathetic. Then Pilate, being a little bit sympathetic too, agreed to let Joseph of Arimathea take down the body early even though people often take much longer to die from crucifixion. In fact, maybe one of the somewhat sympathetic Roman soldiers didn't stick his spear all the way in. Then a day or so later Jesus happened to revive in the tomb and impressed Mary Magdalene when she came to the tomb. Then at night he stumbled over to the apostles' hideout. Some time later he died and spiritually ascended to heaven. Then after about a century of retelling the story and intentionally making it sound as impressive as possible it got put down in the current form in which we have it (eg. an angel paralyzing the guards, etc.).
Personally, I don't think that this is the best explanation, but it's rational and not so unreasonable.
You could be right in your overall thesis in this quote, I guess. But as far as those verses are concerned and what the early Christian writers were claiming, Jesus put things in parables but the faithful followers did understand it when the Holy Spirit or Jesus revealed the meanings to them. It was the uninitiated and unenlightened who didn't understand the parables, but Jesus did and explained them.
It's like saying that anti-Christians don't really "get" Jesus' parables and good message, they just distort and twist what Jesus said in order to make it sound bad. Meanwhile, other people who might be OK but still not united with Jesus don't necessarily get the message either. For some of the tougher parables/prophecies/riddles it was just when Jesus or the Spirit revealed it that people understood.
Faith is very powerful. I think that maybe if you are totally faithful and feel totally connected to God/Christianity then you might be able to emotionally withstand intense negative events and deprivation in your life.
I am not sure that this actually proves Christianity though.
The charlatans and mountebanks who artfully fabricated your religion never intended for anyone to actually understand anything, proof or otherwise... only to have faith and PAY OUT and follow blindly.
2 Corinthians 4:3-4
1Corinthians 2:7,14
1Corinthians 4:1,14-16
- 4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
- 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
1Corinthians 2:7,14
- 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
- 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1Corinthians 4:1,14-16
- 4:1 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.
- 4:14 I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
- 4:15 For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
- 4:16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.
- 2 Corinthians 5:7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight)
- Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
- 1 Corinthians 1:19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
- 1 Corinthians 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
- 1 Corinthians 1:27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise;
Last edited:
Substance abuse will achieve the same effects... and the substances being abused are real things for sure unlike Jesus.
Unfortunately though neither Jesus nor morphine in fact solve the problem that necessitated their use in the first place... so despite their mind numbing effects something else is still needed to actually resolve the cause of the problem.
Last edited:
So now Jesus' resurrection is something as mundane and ordinary as the weather and mice?
Are you contradicting yourself a bit?
The Big Dog
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Messages
- 29,742
Ahh, the rule of so, which states that when an argument starts with the word so, the likelihood that what follows is a strawman fallacy approaches 100%.
But I interupted your prostelizing, do continue.
Yes... Christianity was devised right from the start as a Pyramid Scheme or a Multi Level Marketing Scam.
Yes a very convenient dodge... you are not
But even the Buybull admits that it is God who is actually delibrately blinding people.
- Matthew 11:25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
_
- 2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
_
- 1 Corinthians 1:19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent._
- 1 Corinthians 1:27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise;
Romans 9:8-23
- 9:8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
- ...
- 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )
- ...
- 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
- 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
- 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
- ...
- 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
- 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
- 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
Last edited:
But then it would not be a resurrection would it?
If one is not dead and then wakes up and recuperates from his wounds it is called a RECOVERY not a resurrection.
Last edited:
Ah the chicanery of language legerdemain and pretense of making up nonsensical rules indicating not a likelihood but an assured certainty that the casuistic codswallop has been exposed for the onanism it is and that apologetics have failed to substantiate any claimed claptrap, for which reason the next step is now on the way deploying sophistic hoodwinking stratagems to obfuscate the issue by degenerating the argument into nothing but tomfoolery and flinging ad hominems and red herrings and piles of illogical fallacies.
Ah, but I interrupted your sophistic shenanigans... do carry on!
Last edited:
Elind
Philosopher
This is silly, only the person making the original claim has the burden of proof.
[QUOTE
But the main miracles go beyond just resuscitation after clinical death to include virgin birth and Ascension. As for those cases, it's outside of our knowledge of science and our experience in the world that people are born of virgins and visibly ascend after death. I suppose that theoretically a virgin could conceive but it's next to impossible. And I suppose that ghosts exist and can be seen by people, but it would be even more unlikely for multiple people to watch them at length ascend to the sky.
Thus, from a purely scientific standpoint, these events are next to impossible. Yet for believers, the justification is made that God can do anything, and so they look to signs like ancient prophecies (Psalm 22) that God would perform resurrection. Still, scientific unlikelihood is a major objection.
With that in mind, are there still more proofs that the Resurrection didn't occur?[/QUOTE]
Mary wasn't a virgin. In ancient Hebrew scriptures she's referred to as a young woman. The Greeks mistranslated that as virgin. In that time she would have been stoned to death for being unmarried. I watched a prog last night on biblical conspiricies and it now points to a Roman soldier called Ponteras that got Mary pregnant
But the main miracles go beyond just resuscitation after clinical death to include virgin birth and Ascension. As for those cases, it's outside of our knowledge of science and our experience in the world that people are born of virgins and visibly ascend after death. I suppose that theoretically a virgin could conceive but it's next to impossible. And I suppose that ghosts exist and can be seen by people, but it would be even more unlikely for multiple people to watch them at length ascend to the sky.
Thus, from a purely scientific standpoint, these events are next to impossible. Yet for believers, the justification is made that God can do anything, and so they look to signs like ancient prophecies (Psalm 22) that God would perform resurrection. Still, scientific unlikelihood is a major objection.
With that in mind, are there still more proofs that the Resurrection didn't occur?[/QUOTE]
Mary wasn't a virgin. In ancient Hebrew scriptures she's referred to as a young woman. The Greeks mistranslated that as virgin. In that time she would have been stoned to death for being unmarried. I watched a prog last night on biblical conspiricies and it now points to a Roman soldier called Ponteras that got Mary pregnant
The Big Dog
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Messages
- 29,742
Cripes, it is like a thesaurus had an accident in here! LOLZ!
But seriously, on this site for skepticism the "rule" or "doctrine" of "So" is very well known to critical thinkers, so perhaps I have should have understood that you were unfamiliar with it, so for that reason I do apologize.
H'ethetheth
fishy rocket scientist
...for that claim, yes.
If someone else claims the opposite of the original claim, they have the burden of proof of the opposite claim.