Is this potential evidence for the resurrection of Christ?

[3rdAngel]

Yes, I disagree. Someone not believing in God is a non-belief in God.

Ok well so much for logic

 

[sojourner]

I really do not think she understands. Some people just do not understand how logic works so there is no point trying to reason with them. They will just keep saying the same things over and over again.

Well, that’s certainly being demonstrated by the poster in several threads.

 

[3rdAngel]

It doesn’t matter what you feel. If you make a claim, the burden is upon you to provide evidence for that claim. That’s how rules of evidence work. You have no evidence here, because all you have is 1) belief (which is not evidence), and 2) the Bible (which is also not evidence.). You may believe in the Resurrection, but there is no evidence for it. And that’s the point of the thread: no biblical evidence.

OTOH, yes, I do believe the Apostles’ teaching, I don’t care whether the Resurrection is an actual event in history, and I freely admit that there’s no evidence for it as an historical event. I believe the Resurrection is a theological construct that demonstrates several spiritual truths.

Rubbish! Your simply repeating yourself. There is no burden of proof on me to prove anything. I freely admit that my belief in the resurrection which is based on the eyewitness accounts of Apostolic teachings (the scriptures) is true by faith. I feel no burden to prove anything here and freely admit that my belief is based on faith. You on the other hand do not believe the Apostolic teachings and have no evidence that the resurrection did not happen so your belief is also based on faith because you have no evidence for your belief which you cannot prove.

 

[3rdAngel]

Well, that’s certainly being demonstrated by the poster in several threads.

Says the one who says he believes in the Apostolic teachings but when provided with them does not beleive them

 

[sojourner]

Where is your evidence then that the resurrection did not happen? If you have no evidence your argument is simply one of silence that cannot be proven one way or another. Your belief therefore is also one of faith in not believing in the resurrection which you cannot prove did not happen. At least my faith is based on those who saw it. Yours is based on nothing because you do not believe the Apostolic teachings.

No. My evidence is the lack of evidence to support its existence.

 

[sojourner]

Says the one who says he believes in the Apostolic teachings but does not

You don’t know what I believe.

 

[3rdAngel]

You don’t know what I believe.

Your the one who said you believe in the Apostolic teachings not me.

 

[3rdAngel]

No. My evidence is the lack of evidence to support its existence.

As I posted earlier an argument in silence does not prove what is true or what is not true. It is simply an arguement in silence.

 

[sojourner]

Rubbish! Your simply repeating yourself. There is no burden of proof on me to prove anything. I freely admit that my belief in the resurrection which is based on the eyewitness accounts of Apostolic teachings (the scriptures) is true by faith. I feel no burden to prove anything here and freely admit that my belief is based on faith. You on the other hand do not believe the Apostolic teachings and have no evidence that the resurrection did not happen so your belief is also based on faith because you have no evidence for your belief which you cannot prove.

You’re repeating yourself nearly verbatim. It’s a bad habit. See my post to your first response of this nature. If you make a claim, you have a burden of proof. You have none. Therefore, your claim is invalid. You may believe that the Resurrection happened, but that does not mean that it really happened. You can’t make a reasonable claim that it was an actual event in history just because you believe it was.

 

[Trailblazer]

Nonsense you ignoring my questions to you. Do you agree that someone not believing that there is a God is a belief?

No, I do not agree, because if they do not believe in God there is nothing to believe in, unless they say they know that there is no God. In that case it is an assertion that God does not exist.

If someone does not believe in a God or for example a resurrection it is a belief that someone does not believe in God or the resurrection. Sound logical to you?

No, it does not sound logical. if someone does not believe in a God or for example a resurrection they lack a belief in God or the resurrection.

 

[sojourner]

Your the one who said you believe in the Apostolic teachings not me.

Yeah, but you’re trying to claim that I don’t. And you don’t have any evidence that I don’t.

 

[3rdAngel]

You’re repeating yourself nearly verbatim. It’s a bad habit. See my post to your first response of this nature. If you make a claim, you have a burden of proof. You have none. Therefore, your claim is invalid. You may believe that the Resurrection happened, but that does not mean that it really happened. You can’t make a reasonable claim that it was an actual event in history just because you believe it was.

Why your simply doing the same thing while not addressing the posts sent to you.

 

[sojourner]

As I posted earlier an argument in silence does not prove what is true or what is not true. It is simply an arguement in silence.

That’s not what an “argument from silence” is. Now you’re just making stuff up to gaslight everyone.

 

[3rdAngel]

No, I do not agree, because if they do not believe in God there is nothing to believe in, unless they say they know that there is no God. In that case it is an assertion that God does not exist.
No, it does not sound logical. if someone does not believe in a God or for example a resurrection they lack a belief in God or the resurrection.

You are free to believe as you wish. You not believing in God is a belief that there is no God IMO. Simple as that.

 

[sojourner]

Why your simply doing the same thing while not addressing the posts sent to you.

No, my response was different this time. However, let me make this very simple for you:

you have no valid argument; everyone here knows you’re wrong. Come back with something other than the verbatim horse crap you keep posting time after time and I may respond.

 

[3rdAngel]

That’s not what an “argument from silence” is. Now you’re just making stuff up to gaslight everyone.

You are indeed making an argument in silence. Your trying to argue that there is no evidence to prove that there was a resurrection which I agree therefore to believe in a resurrection you have to live by faith. There is also no evidence to suggest that the resurrection did not happen so this is an arguement in silence. You therefore may not believe in the Apostolic teachings that there was a resurrection but because you also do not have any evidence that there was no reusrrection you also believe this by faith.

 

[3rdAngel]

No, my response was different this time. However, let me make this very simple for you: you have no valid argument; everyone here knows you’re wrong. Come back with something other than the verbatim horse crap you keep posting time after time and I may respond.

Let me make this clear to you. Your argument in silence does not prove or disprove that there was no resurrection. It is simply an argument in silence that does not prove the resurrection did not happen. IMO eyewitness accounts for my faith in the resurrection supersedes your faith that there was no resurrection as you do not have any evidence .

 

[Trailblazer]

You are free to believe as you wish. You not believing in God is a belief that there is no God IMO. Simple as that.

I do believe in God.

It is not a belief that there is no God unless someone says "I believe there is no God."
The reason that is a belief is because they cannot prove there is no God.

 

[3rdAngel]

I do believe in God.
It is not a belief that there is no God unless someone says they know there is no God.
The reason that is a belief is because they cannot prove there is no God.

Indeed, I have already directly asked many here if they believe there is a God or if they believe in the existence of God or if they believe in God, for which many have replied no they do not believe there is a God before I started posting about faith vs evidence.

 

[sojourner]

So, to answer the OP, the Bible does not provide any real evidence for the Resurrection as an actual, historic event. It provides anecdotes that are mythic in nature, intended to promote a number of theological positions. The doubting Thomas story only appears in one gospel account. The story does what it was designed to do, which is to help seal the Resurrection as a solid theological argument, but it does not constitute physical evidence.