Part 30 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity>>>MOD ALERT<<<

That is to assume that all fossils have been found and no new discoveries will ever happen because there is nothing else to discover.

 

I posted a link to a story that talks about unicorns and what they ate.
That proves they exist(ed).
You aren't giving me some double standard now?

What empirical facts show Jesus resurrected?

 

Because you're trying to change the subject and its not working. If you admit you're unable to refute evidence that Jesus has resurrected, then I'll continue on into the next topic.

 

1) You gave me a story, huh? Was it backed up by any empirical scientific evidence? What's that you say? No? Awww...

2) Sure thing. I guess I need to start handing out this source like its candy:
Source: http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/resurrection-evidence.htm

 

Yep. And considering that scientists realized a looong time ago that the horns they were seeing weren't from Mystical Unicorns, but rather, from Narwhals.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicorn#The_narwhal

Look at how easy it is for me to tear through your ridiculous claims like a hot knife through tissue paper (not even worthy enough for the consistency of butter). I've already proven that one can prove that something doesn't exist by providing evidence to the contrary. I've demonstrated this quite easily and effortlessly. Now, it's your turn to disprove the evidence of Jesus' resurrection. Make it happen. Stop making excuses.

Thank you. Case closed.

 

I argue that there is no proof of the existence for God or unicorns.

That is nonsensical as I never made any claim that the resurrection never happened. So what case is there to close?

 

Ok then. Lets move on to the next point to explore this notion.

Alrighty. Can you disprove the evidence I've provided for Jesus' resurrection? In case you've lost the source, here:
Source: http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/resurrection-evidence.htm

 

No, but a moot point as this still does not prove that the resurrection happened. The inability to prove the negative does not prove the positive.

 

You make the claim (resurrection), you provide the evidence.

If you think proving something via failure to find evidence it didn't happen is actually a thing (tip, it isn't), then you must accept as fact every supernatural event and being ever claimed for which no proof can be found they didn't exist. What's that? You DON'T accept all those other gods and monsters? I'll take a stab in the dark here and assume that's because there's no evidence they exist. So the method isn't good enough for you, but you insist it should be good enough for everyone else.

You're very far out of your depth, Wunderkind. And you're oustandingly vain and arrogant.

 

I'm bored, lets have some fun with this.

Speculation and opinion.

Opinion

Opinion and speculation.

Speculation and conjecture. (I am seeing a trend here)

Opinion and speculation.

Speculation

I could go on and on but from my perspective there is a lot of speculation, conjecture, and unqualified opinion here... none of which prove that the resurrection happened.

 

Umm... All you did was respond to what skeptics have been saying under the "Hallucination theory". In fact, you helped the evidence more than you've hurt it. Congratulations!

 

Thanks again. Case Closed. Not only can't you refute the resurrection of Jesus Christ (something you admitted yourself), but you also can't refute the evidence provided. There's nothing else to really say here.

 

go back and read my most recent post in this thread. addressed to you.

 

You've been asked by several to show your evidence. Still no shred of it.
Next topic.

 

Do you understand, he has no clue what it is you're stating?

- - - Updated - - -

Ignored. Because he can't address it.

 

Incorrect. The"Hallucination theory" is as follows:

http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/resurrection-evidence.htm

Speculation, conjecture, and unqualified opinion have nothing to do with hallucinations nor did I make any claim of anyone having a hallucination.

 

That isn't how empiricism or logic works, my friend. One, we aren't screaming and yelling, we're pointing out the simple fact that hearsay accounts aren't reliable.Two, there's this thing called the burden of proof, and unsubstantiated hearsay accounts that contradict one another don't sufficiently reach that burden.

 

Nor can you prove the resurrection happened or that God exists. Evidence is not synonymous with proof. Your evidence does not prove that God exists or that the resurrection happened. Case still open.

 

Actually, there was more to say there, and you cut out the remainder of it (how honest of you) because you either can't or don't want to address that there is a burden of proof when you present a claim. Especially when that claim is supernatural.

 

Not true. The Old Testament is rife with evidence of Jesus and nothing need be taken out
of context. But you know that.

 

Because I've already refuted that claim time and time again. The most important part was that you couldn't refute the evidence.

This is just a baseless assertion you're making based on the tantrum you're having. I presented evidence you couldn't refute and now you're just repeating what you said earlier.

This is your opinion. Majority of history is based on what witnesses have saw and attested to (for example: The American Civil War). You wouldn't possibly know the detail of the civil war if there weren't any witnesses to document what was going on. Didn't you learn this in High School Social Studies?

 

My apologies. You were simply responding to the refutation of the "Conspiracy theory" not the "Hallucination theory". This show that you haven't read the whole thing, nor have you checked the citation at the bottom of the page. If you were writing a research paper, you'd fail for laziness.

Perhaps you should check the prescription on your glasses...
Candy Source: http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/resurrection-evidence.htm

 

The civil war did not involve talking snakes, magic sky men, and people turning into pillars of salt. There is no comparison here.

The only comparisons you can make are to other supernatural heresay claims. Once again, my guess is you believe none but your own. Making you dishonest, and a practitioner of double standards.

 

Please continue your discussions here
http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...r-tough-questions-regarding-christianity.html
This thread has reached its post limits

Shangrila
Moderator

 

Speculation, conjecture, and unqualified opinion are not synonymous with conspiracy nor did I make any claim of a conspiracy.