1. 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured The evidence for the resurection of Jesus

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by leroy, Apr 7, 2021.

  1. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,797
    Ratings:
    +315
    Religion:
    christian
    BUT YOU are unable to quote a single cliam
     
  2. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,797
    Ratings:
    +315
    Religion:
    christian
    But in this case the paper that I quoted is from a NT scholar. The best possible authority with regards to stuff related to the NEW TESTAMENT.
     
  3. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,797
    Ratings:
    +315
    Religion:
    christian
    But I didn’t quote “a blog post written by a car mechanic”……I quoted a peer reviewd article written by a historian and a new testament scholar.
     
  4. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,797
    Ratings:
    +315
    Religion:
    christian
    If I ask you “can you please show to me that most scholars accept evolution (common ancestry) and you provide a poll with thousands of scholars where most of them agree with evolution…what kind of reaction would expect from an honest person?

    1 ok thanks you successfully proved your claim

    2 ohhhh your source is just a joke (without an explanation on where are the mistakes)

    3 ohhhh but the poll includes scholars that don’t share my own personal world view, therefore it is not a proper source.
     
  5. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,797
    Ratings:
    +315
    Religion:
    christian
    why not?......
    Why can’t a man be both a theologian and a NT scholar?

    agree

    So show that there is a bias. (we are the definition of bias that you shared before.)
     
  6. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    41,113
    Ratings:
    +24,311
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Sorry, but since you used a corrupted source you placed the burden of proof back upon yourself. A theologian may be a scholar, but it is not that likely. And your list also included apologists and I have never seen apologists that are scholars. A corrupted list is of no value.
     
  7. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    41,113
    Ratings:
    +24,311
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I have put effort into refuting @leroy in the past, but he only tends to ignore refutations or just deny them. I laughed when I saw that his source was Liberty University. No need to go further, though others did and even then @leroy could only deny the refutations. That is why I rarely bother with him in that regard. Mere correction is enough.
     
  8. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    41,113
    Ratings:
    +24,311
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Oh my! Abject failure. Try not to quote out of context if you want a discussion. There is no debate since you lost that a long time ago.
     
  9. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,797
    Ratings:
    +315
    Religion:
    christian
    The “list” is made out of scholars that have published on the topic in peer reviewed journals. This by definition implies that they have the proper credentials.

    Whether if they are also theologians or apologists seems irrelevant to me.
     
  10. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,797
    Ratings:
    +315
    Religion:
    christian
    Can you quote a single refutation that I have ignored?
     
  11. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,797
    Ratings:
    +315
    Religion:
    christian
    Aja you won

    congratulations
     
  12. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    41,113
    Ratings:
    +24,311
    Religion:
    Atheist
    I have yet to see that claim made. Here is what was said about the soruces:

    "Most of the critical scholars are theologians or New Testament scholars, while a number of philosophers and historians, among other fields, are also included."

    Others found clear apologists of all things in his list. This is not even a peer reviewed meta-study. It is merely a paper by a person that goes to a fundamentalist university. It is a biased source. Biased sources produce biased results. Just look at how he defines "moderate conservative":

    "For the purposes of this essay, I will define moderate conservative approaches to the resurrection as those holding that Jesus was actually raised from the dead in some manner, either bodily (and thus extended in space and time), or as some sort of spiritual body (though often undefined). In other words, if what occurred can be described as having happened to Jesus rather than only to his followers, this range of views will be juxtaposed with those more skeptical positions that nothing actually happened to Jesus and can only be described as a personal experience of the disciples. Of course, major differences can be noted within and between these views"

    That is definitely not moderate. It is only conservative.

    "
     
  13. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    41,113
    Ratings:
    +24,311
    Religion:
    Atheist
    No, you just lost.
     
  14. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    41,113
    Ratings:
    +24,311
    Religion:
    Atheist
    A specific one no. It was pointed out at that time. This is another game of yours. I can give you the gist of it. Specific examples of non-scholars were given and those you ignored.
    You keep demanding that others do your homework for you even when it has been done several times already.
     
  15. sayak83

    sayak83 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    9,097
    Ratings:
    +8,689
    Religion:
    Pluralist Hindu
    [/QUOTE]
    What do you mean by definition?
    You can easily find their educational backgrounds in wiki and see for yourself that they did not do a PhD in history or any historical discipline. Of course I can back up my claim. That's the whole reason I am linking the wiki article so that everyone can see these scholars backgrounds in education does not include any doctoral studies in history.

    You do understand that to be a historian, you need a PhD in history. A degree like one below.
    Graduate Degree Programs | Department of History
    These scholars do not have it. As seen from their cvs or in the wiki page about them. They are not historians. Their studies on historicity of Jesus therefore have no relevance.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    4,719
    Ratings:
    +199
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    Jesus is not god the teaching.

    Immaculate spirit gas born in space womb is the sun sacrificed body. Owned by God O planet one.

    The human advised science teaching thinking using words in explanations.

    Not God.
    Not man's
    Owned by mother womb.

    A man's psyche advice the holy mother womb keeps life safe.

    The teaching. Lots of verbal data status argued against science for human life continuance said no man is God. Human reasoning against human reasonings.

    No man is Jesus either another teaching as his life was a special one of human teaching. Man life sacrificed aware teaching.

    Exactly what was said. How it was taught since by human book readers. Who said no argument allowed about misappropriating defined word statements.

    As a human reasoning. Was an unholy life attack.

    Science used Phi to allow for science. The light constant was in a vacuum was not squaring itself.

    Is just gases cold burning in space owning no relativity.

    Science relative to science only as human man chosen earth manipulation.

    Even Einstein's deceased last voice recorded comments which once I heard with his seen life image apologised and said he was wrong.

    I was not researching him.
    Was not trying to make conscious contact. It suddenly occurred one day in a spiritual discussion.

    Conditions you realise.

    Life lived in water oxygenated heavens and life dies in exactly the same conditions.

    Human life before living as a human had died. Their images already owner of a deceased life are recorded in the heavens. Why you see them at a NDE condition.

    Proving Jesus died as a man life as he is seen in the NDE experience.
     
  17. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    41,113
    Ratings:
    +24,311
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Okay, Leroy probably knows by now how he failed in some of his later claims. Let's work on the first one:

    The wording of this is very poor. One can not say that the existence of a god is "at least possible". This is incorrect. It puts a huge burden of proof upon Leroy. The existence of a God may be possible. The only way to know if something is "at least possible" is if it occurs occasionally or if there is some evidence for it. No one can seem to find any reliable evidence for a God.
     
  18. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    4,719
    Ratings:
    +199
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    Simple human basic science observations.

    Seen.

    You are watching seeing as advised.

    Then quote what I see is holy. Holy changing sacrificed the see.

    I can see through clear night time gases into dark space. far away I see gases burning as lights.

    Thinking theism.

    Via a clear sky looking afar into reactive space as gases burning.

    O earth mass not converting.
    Science didn't exist.

    Theme I want to invent science the statement.

    No converting existed. A space in mass itself caused to then react from position a space in mass. Mass was given that space in science.

    Evidence God earth formed new sink holes. Science caused theist for a space.

    Thinker inside clear gases saying burning inside the space body is reactive.

    The first place of human aware space was space.

    Theme taught by thinking.

    Day light existed by heavens in vacuum owned daylight.

    No science constant.

    Thesis by heavens first not by God mass. The conscious human thinker.

    Ask man book writer hearer of voice why did you say your brother a human was Satan by science thinking conditions?

    Heard it he said after ice age when science man looked and returned pondering sciences.

    Quotes brother just a human burnt all life to death. Satan. As a satanist theme. Life totally gone.

    Ask science just human studied using science consciously why science can determine science in earth body when God was sealed before human reactive sciences existed?

    Due to human man brother scientist satanist advice. The reason.

    Common sense.

    The day has to exist for you to count it.

    Using human science copying thesis why light existed in natural day you said man set night time even sky on fire yourselves. As the man god thesis.

    Burnt sky even changed into eve space body heavens changed. A man science confession stating it hurt my life. Blaming space that it coerced him into false beliefs. As female maths sophism.

    Is typically human expressed egotism.
    Watched by a man human present to count the days. Stopped burning on seventh day. UFO effect gases left burning seen at night as UFO effect placed. By scientists.

    By science terms I achieved copying natural history in space about heavens why today you believed you personally by science invented the constant of light.

    Instead you invented observed seen Phi UFO fallout ground attack. Which you ignited caused by science conversion. To give earth space.

    Reason crops are pressed down on ground. Life exists living before fall out evidence. Phi crop circle effects.

    Stone radiation patterns proved all ground life was destroyed.

    Natural life. When water boils it disappears and produces vapours. Vapour not the same as water mass lost.

    What was never known how much water an atmosphere mass held or how much mass of gas sits around earth.

    Status to live safely is inside clear gas.
    Status science want of coldest converting form gases.

    Heavens says not a never ending supply.
    Earth mass says not a never ending supply.

    Where is a thesis owner of an eternal supply of never ending power as a cold gas?

    As first is highest form.

    To react highest form is not first.

    Thesis human science to own says react.

    Human thinking origin before science thesis says my life lives owning presence clear heaven gas. I am not a gas as a human.

    If you first preach I own life living standing on God earth in a God created heavens God owns it first.

    The thinker however makes claim secondary ownership. As a human.

    Why they had to categorically constantly preach for brain entrainment no man is God.
     
  19. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,797
    Ratings:
    +315
    Religion:
    christian
    @Subduction Zone
    Maybe, but that is why I explained elsewhere what I mean by “at least possible”

    With “at least possible” I mean there is no conclusive evidence against the existence of God

    With this clarification, please let me know if you disagree with this point
     
  20. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,797
    Ratings:
    +315
    Religion:
    christian
    What do you mean by definition?
    You can easily find their educational backgrounds in wiki and see for yourself that they did not do a PhD in history or any historical discipline. Of course I can back up my claim. That's the whole reason I am linking the wiki article so that everyone can see these scholars backgrounds in education does not include any doctoral studies in history.

    You do understand that to be a historian, you need a PhD in history. A degree like one below.
    Graduate Degree Programs | Department of History
    These scholars do not have it. As seen from their cvs or in the wiki page about them. They are not historians. Their studies on historicity of Jesus therefore have no relevance.[/QUOTE]

    If someone publish a research article on a specific topic then by definition this man has the proper credentials to do so.

    For example a theologian that makes his doctorate thesis on the Pauline epistols , is qualified to publish stuff about say “Corinthians” even if he doesn’t have a PHD in history.
     
Loading...