leroy
Well-Known Member
ok then you are wrongNo.
s.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
ok then you are wrongNo.
s.
You keep forgetting that in this discussion you are the "YEC". Your one attempt to provide evidence failed. You did not vet your source. You did not even appear to realize how poor your source was.
Liberty "University" is not a scholarly source.ok justify your claim (in red) why my attempt to provide evidence fails?
sure I can support my claim.
most scolars acccept that the disciples had experiences that they interpreted as having seen the risen jesus
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAAegQIBBAC&usg=AOvVaw1ZEc_TqBcvPHDU5Hd51Afv
2 most scholars belive in the empty tomb
most scholars accept thst jesus died on the cross
as for the burial of jesus i cant find the exact number, but if 75% of scholars accept the empty tomb this means that tacitly they also accept the burial of jesus, so atleast 75% of scolars accept the burial of jesus.
....
First claim for you to support.The evidence for the resurrection is grounded on 5 claims that are widely accepted by scholars
why not?Liberty "University" is not a scholarly source.
in the source,sure I can support my claim.
most scolars acccept that the disciples had experiences that they interpreted as having seen the risen jesus
You haven't supported your claim by simply making ANOTHER unsubstantiated claim. You need to support your claim with some actual VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE. Where is your EVIDENCE that MOST scholars accept this unsubstantiated claim?
sure fist claim is that the existance of God is possible. (with this I mean that there is no conclusive evidence against the existance of God)First claim for you to support.]
]And by support, I mean actually present a list of the scholars that actually support it,
in the source,
the author of the source made a survey on NT scholars and concluded that most accept the claim.
the claim is verifiable, anyone can repeat the survey, anyone can see the original sources.
Your really need to work on your reading comprehension skills.sure fist claim is that the existance of God is possible. (with this I mean that there is no conclusive evidence against the existance of God)
most scholars agree with this claim.....
37% of scientists from natural sciences dont believe in God and 31% in the sociall sciences
(source http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~ehe/doc/Ecklund_SocialProblems_54_2.pdf)
go to table 3 in that paper..... i cant copy the table in the post because of the format
as a bonus i would add that "not believing in God does not imply that they claim that the existance of God is impossible...... so the number of academics that would deny point 1 is probably much much much lower than 30%
that is a stupid and unrealistic request......... can you show that most scholars accept the theory of evolution (common ancestry) using you stupid and unrealistic standards?
if a research paper that made a survey is not enough for you then sorry I cant meat your standards of evidence
...
besides if I where to bet, Ill bet that you dont reject point 1...... am i wrong?...... you are just "playing skeptic" why?
can you quote anywhere in the article that you quoted, where it says that the majority of scholars reject any of the 5 claims?And the author of the article that I cited stated that according to his investigations the majority of NT scholars do NOT accept the claim. Thus your original contention is clearly in dispute.
ok justify your claim (in red) why my attempt to provide evidence fails?
can you quote anywhere in the article that you quoted, where it says that the majority of scholars reject any of the 5 claims?
Your really need to work on your reading comprehension skills.
The first claim you need to support is:
"The evidence for the resurrection is grounded on 5 claims that are widely accepted by scholars"
claims 2 - 5 supported in this post
s
....
irrelevant. . . because beyond the historical events known of the life of Jesus there is no evidence for the supernatural events. h
yes it is, Accepting or rejecting these 5 claims is relevant for this threadIt is not a matter of rejecting the 5 claims,
irrelevant
none of the 5 claims in the OP are supernatural events.
you can ether accept . or reject these claims (claims 2-5) based on the historical evidence
and the very first time I did exactly that, you did not even address the claim I quoted...see that why I am constantly requesting you and other users to quote the specific claim that I am supposed to support.
that way I can know exactly what are you taking about.
The letter 's' in a quote bubble does not support anything, let alone your specific claims.of the 5 claims that I mentioned and that I claim are supported by the majority of academics
claim 1 is supported in this post
claims 2 - 5 supported in this post
show the opposite of what is true?can you show that the opposite is true? care to provide your sources?
yes it is, Accepting or rejecting these 5 claims is relevant for this thread
do you accept these claims? would you reject any if these claims?
can you quote anywhere in the article that you quoted, where it says that the majority of scholars reject any of the 5 claims?