Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All your "evidence" is not evidence at all. It ALL--I mean All as in EVERYTHING comes straight from the gospels. You haven't got a nickel's worth of evidence from any source outside the gospels for this alleged resurrection. Modern secular historians don't recognize the resurrection as a historical fact. And there is still this:
The gospels were NOT written by any eyewitnesses to the events. They were written by Greek scholars living in Greece who weren't familiar with Israel and they were writing these accounts 50-100 years after the facts. They were getting their information from myths and legends and stories floating around the Mediterranean for a half century.
This is not evidence, Derek. And you still haven't given me one eyewitness outside the gospels who can testify to the resurrection. Truth is you can NEVER give us one because there isn't any.
Truth also is, if God and Jesus wanted us to believe in the resurrection they would have left us evidence of it so irrefutable that no skeptic in their right mind could deny the resurrection happened.
Last edited by thrillobyte; 11-24-2021 at 09:53 AM..
All your "evidence" is not evidence at all. It ALL--I mean All as in EVERYTHING comes straight from the gospels. You haven't got a nickel's worth of evidence from any source outside the gospels for this alleged resurrection. Modern secular historians don't recognize the resurrection as a historical fact. And there is still this:
The gospels were NOT written by any eyewitnesses to the events. They were written by Greek scholars living in Greece who weren't familiar with Israel and they were writing these accounts 50-100 years after the facts. They were getting their information from myths and legends and stories floating around the Mediterranean for a half century.
This is not evidence, Derek. And you still haven't given me one eyewitness outside the gospels who can testify to the resurrection. Truth is you can NEVER give us one because there isn't any.
Truth also is, if God and Jesus wanted us to believe in the resurrection they would have given us evidence of it so irrefutable that no skeptic in their right mind could deny the resurrection happened.
The "natural man" (aka carnal) cannot understand the spiritual and there cannot be any evidence of it because it is not physical or material in the sense that we can measure, Thrill. That should not be too surprising since less than 5% of our entire Reality is measurable and observable.
Don't you feel the least bit concerned that you are making such absolute conclusions about what exists on information about a mere 5% or less of what is out there?
The "natural man" (aka carnal) cannot understand the spiritual and there cannot be any evidence of it because it is not physical or material in the sense that we can measure, Thrill. That should not be too surprising since less than 5% of our entire Reality is measurable and observable.
Don't you feel the least bit concerned that you are making such absolute conclusions about what exists on information about a mere 5% or less of what is out there?
That's ironic coming from a poster like you who constantly makes absolute conclusions based on a single episode in your life, which probably constitutes a mere .000000001% of knowledge of what is out there?
The rules of Judaism aren't meant to be "inviting". Jews do stay in their in their respective lanes, since they don't proselytize. However, Judaism has always been tolerant of others precisely because of the notion of chosenness. The Jews have been chosen for a particular mission; however, others do not have to accept their religion. Judaism does not seek converts and considers any society or belief system which recognizes one G-d and conducts itself in accordance with the basic principles of civilization as acceptable. Our beliefs don't "pit us" against anyone; in fact, we have usually been the ones who have been the victims of others' incorrect beliefs and prejudices. History illustrates this fact abundantly.
I've read much of this history, including the history of the middle east, and although I can agree to some extent with what you explain here, there is much I don't see the same way you do. Our different perspectives is largely a result of the obvious bias that belonging to any religion creates. A bias that is very difficult if not impossible to overcome so as to view these histories and/or facts in a more objective fashion. Obvious to me is the "good, bad and ugly" when it comes to these histories and religions. Plenty enough "good, bad and ugly" to go around all considered, and I know better than to point out the bad and ugly with someone who only sees the good about their religion and/or their history. We should all know and respect how this works in any case. Again, confirmation bias tends to overwhelm all facts, reason and logic when it comes to reconciling these sorts of differences.
The "natural man" (aka carnal) cannot understand the spiritual and there cannot be any evidence of it because it is not physical or material in the sense that we can measure, Thrill. That should not be too surprising since less than 5% of our entire Reality is measurable and observable.
Don't you feel the least bit concerned that you are making such absolute conclusions about what exists on information about a mere 5% or less of what is out there?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bungalove
That's ironic coming from a poster like you who constantly makes absolute conclusions based on a single episode in your life, which probably constitutes a mere .000000001% of knowledge of what is out there?
That is where we differ, Bungalove. The experiences were so life-changing precisely because I experienced connection with 100% of Reality. There was nothing separate.
Here again a perfect example of how confirmation bias works it's magic...
You simply can't consider the likes of this "strong case" from a source/site titled "desiringGod."
To truly arrive at the truth of these matters, what I call "triangulating for the truth," you have got to consider sources free of such bias. At a minimum consider multiple opinions, data and research that are from more objective sources. I've read a great deal about this sort of evidence, and at the very best, the "jury is still out" when it comes to any strong case the resurrection actually happened. Objectively speaking that is...
The "natural man" (aka carnal) cannot understand the spiritual and there cannot be any evidence of it because it is not physical or material in the sense that we can measure, Thrill. That should not be too surprising since less than 5% of our entire Reality is measurable and observable.
Don't you feel the least bit concerned that you are making such absolute conclusions about what exists on information about a mere 5% or less of what is out there?
Indeed. How can we really know we're really here?
Now back to our regular programming...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
