Forums

Reasons for Joy; In Gentleness, and Respect.

Profile of Maxximiliann

Show Posts

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Maxximiliann

1
Apologetics and Theology / Re: All just a conspiracy?
« on: May 04, 2020, 06:39:03 pm »
It doesn't explain why the accounts are so contradictory. How could eye witnesses not know whether they went straight away to Galilee to meet up with Jesus or stayed in Jerusalem and met up with him there? Obviously one of the accounts is false. This means it is not just likely but certain that false accounts could get recorded. If one could get recored then it's not at all unlikely that many different false accounts could have been recorded.


To what specific Gospel passages are you trying to allude to?

Matthew 28 and Luke 24.

Especially:

Matt 28: 5 The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 6 He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. 7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.’ Now I have told you.”

 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”


In Luke 24 however, Jesus never tells the women he is going ahead to Galilee, and instead it says two of them met Jesus on the road to Emaus. They then return to Jerusalem to tell the others when Jesus appears to them all and teaches them for a while. Afterwards he leads them to "the vicinity of Bethany"  from where he ascends to heaven and they return to Jerusalem where "they stayed continually at the temple, praising God."

It is no possible that both those stories could be right, and it's not possible that an eyewitness would not remember which one was right.

This "evidence" is completely consistent with them being two different versions of a legend  recorded decades after the supposed facts and completely incredible as being two eye witness accounts of the same event.

Ok, let's take it step by step. Early on that first calendar day, Mary Magdalene along with other women left for the tomb with spices to treat Jesus’ body. Upon discovering the tomb empty, Mary ran off to inform Peter and John but the other women stayed. Shortly thereafter, an angel appeared to these and explained to them that Jesus had been resurrected. “Go quickly and tell his disciples,” the angel directed.

As these women were rushing to give the news, Jesus himself appeared to them. “Go, report to my brothers,” he asked them. (Matthew 28:1-10; Mark 16:1, 2; John 20:1, 2) Oblivious of the angel’s visit and overwhelmed with sorrow, Mary Magdalene went back to the vacant tomb. Jesus appeared to her there, and after she at last identified him, he declared: “Be on your way to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.’”—John 20:11-18; compare Matthew 28:9, 10.
 
Seeing how these reports are not logically incongruous they cannot be contradictory. In basic terms, if all the narratives can be factual  then  you simply do not have any contradiction. When you can show logically that a particular statement being factual would mean a second assertion cannot as well be factual, then you have found a real contradiction. At this point, though, you have not identified any kind of contradiction. Rather, you have displayed a failure to take into account the unique perspective of various individuals who experienced distinct events at various occasions.

First of all John and Mark's accounts have nothing to do with this.

Argumentum assertio. Try again.

2
Apologetics and Theology / Re: All just a conspiracy?
« on: May 04, 2020, 06:38:12 pm »
Right. Even if atheism is false, the number of religious positions that must still be false and that people have still been willing to die for, is still high.  So somebody being willing to suffer and die for a belief cannot, in and of itself, be taken as evidence that the belief is true.

If this is a response to my recent reply to Tom then it's a Strawman argument. Care to clarify?

3
In 1999, I had a dream wherein I saw all the Superbowl winners between the years 2000 and 2020.  I wrote these down when I woke. Every one of them was correct!  I can prove I did this by sending you a copy of the list I made in 1999.

Did you predict the year of an event 150 years from now? Daniel did so in Dan 9:25-26 when from the time to restore Jerusalem under Ezra with the Artaxerxes decree in 457 BCE to the Messiah is 483 years [69 weeks * 7]:

Quote
Know thou therefore, and take notice: that from the going forth of the word, to build up Jerusalem again, unto Christ the prince, there shall be seven weeks, and sixty-two weeks: and the street shall be built again, and the walls in straitness of times.

So, the Christ comes in 27 CE (around the time when Jesus' ministry began). I know you consider that a coincidence but read the rest:

Quote
And after sixty-two weeks Christ shall be slain: and the people that shall deny him shall not be his. (Dan. 9:26)

How do you explain that even if Daniel was written in the second Century BCE?

Just a head's up, Fred here has absolutely zero interest in becoming a Christian proselyte and it would seem he's actually on here looking to convert forum participants to Atheism . . .

4
The problems w/dating Daniel definitively are difficult. There are arguments on both sides with some merit. I will say, though that ruling out prophesy,  by fiat, declaring it to be impossible doesn't work for me.

Not unless someone wants to assign it a date long after 70 C. E. when the last aspect of its Messianic prophecy was fulfilled. (See:
https://www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/index.php?topic=6056887.msg1275744995#msg1275744995
)

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/daniel-the-basic-issues/

These are my concerns. I'd love for them to be fully resolved.

Sure, thank you for sharing that. Where would you like to start? :)

5
Apologetics and Theology / Re: All just a conspiracy?
« on: May 04, 2020, 06:21:26 pm »
Of course, infrequency does not equal impossibility or even improbability, I never claimed they did. Infrequency can imply improbability though. All else being equal if X happens less frequently Y, then the most parsimonious explanation is that X is less probable than Y.  If we have event Z and we are looking for an explanation and the candidates are X and Y, then i reasonable to consider Y the more probable explanation.

Right? If you have children you should be able to appreciate this. You come into a room and your child is standing next to a broken lamp. You ask the child what happened and he says that a ghost knocked it over. Now, we cannot say that ghosts don't exist that would be to presuppose naturalism,,,LOL...so which should we consider more likely? that the child is lying? or that a ghost really nocked over the lamp? I'd go with the child lying?And even if I believed ghosts were possible, I'd still consider it more likely that he was lying? Why? Well, it would be because in my experience ghostly phenomenon are very infrequent if they happen at all, but children lying is a high frequency sort of occurrence.

I guess I'm just daft to think like that though.

Argumentum ad nauseum . . .

In this earlier rejoinder the historical evidence which debunks such analogies has already been spotlighted.

6
Apologetics and Theology / Re: All just a conspiracy?
« on: May 04, 2020, 06:12:51 pm »
"Socrates taught for 40 years, Plato for 50, Aristotle for 40, and Jesus for only 3. Yet the influence of Christ's 3―year ministry infinitely transcends the impact left by the combined 130 years of teaching from these men who were among the greatest philosophers of all antiquity."  – Unknown

Let's highlight, then, how there is more historical evidence for the life, death and resurrection of Christ than there is for Microbes-To-Man evolution.  So much so, in fact, any denial of the historicity of Christ’s life, death and resurrection is comparable to denying the moon landing of 1969 or that Columbus landed in America in 1492.

That's absurd, as a child I watched live coverage of the moon landing. Has anybody alive today watched live coverage of Jesus' resurrection? Of course not, there was no live coverage. All we have are contradictory nth hand accounts.As such the claim being made here is patently false, and when someone makes a patently false claim, that should lead one to suspect that they are spewing nonsense. Why would I even bother to check out someone's supposed evidence when they are telling me things that are obviously nonsense.  I'm not a chump.

Did you personally witness Columbus' 1492 visit to America as well? Or do you not accept that as historical fact either . . .

Huh? How does my pointing out that its bonkers to think there's even close to as much evidence for Jesus' resurrection as for the 1969 moon landing imply that one can only reasonably believe things that one has eye witnessed?

Because millions of us did not personally witness the moon landing but accept it as historical fact based on the preponderance of the historical evidence, just as with the life, death and resurrection of Christ Jesus.

You also persist in disregarding the historical evidence for the vicious and implacable persecution the first century Christians suffered at the hands of the religious/political leaders of their era. Had they been simply promoting a calculated scam they would have quickly caved and Christianity would have vanished from the annals of history.  After all, nobody is willing to sacrifice themselves for something they know is a lie.

Accordingly, the only tenable explanation for their unshakable faith is that their Christ was resurrected by Almighty Jehovah God.

7
Apologetics and Theology / Re: All just a conspiracy?
« on: May 04, 2020, 06:01:06 pm »
It doesn't explain why the accounts are so contradictory. How could eye witnesses not know whether they went straight away to Galilee to meet up with Jesus or stayed in Jerusalem and met up with him there? Obviously one of the accounts is false. This means it is not just likely but certain that false accounts could get recorded. If one could get recored then it's not at all unlikely that many different false accounts could have been recorded.


To what specific Gospel passages are you trying to allude to?

Matthew 28 and Luke 24.

Especially:

Matt 28: 5 The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 6 He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. 7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.’ Now I have told you.”

 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”


In Luke 24 however, Jesus never tells the women he is going ahead to Galilee, and instead it says two of them met Jesus on the road to Emaus. They then return to Jerusalem to tell the others when Jesus appears to them all and teaches them for a while. Afterwards he leads them to "the vicinity of Bethany"  from where he ascends to heaven and they return to Jerusalem where "they stayed continually at the temple, praising God."

It is no possible that both those stories could be right, and it's not possible that an eyewitness would not remember which one was right.

This "evidence" is completely consistent with them being two different versions of a legend  recorded decades after the supposed facts and completely incredible as being two eye witness accounts of the same event.

Ok, let's take it step by step. Early on that first calendar day, Mary Magdalene along with other women left for the tomb with spices to treat Jesus’ body. Upon discovering the tomb empty, Mary ran off to inform Peter and John but the other women stayed. Shortly thereafter, an angel appeared to these and explained to them that Jesus had been resurrected. “Go quickly and tell his disciples,” the angel directed.

As these women were rushing to give the news, Jesus himself appeared to them. “Go, report to my brothers,” he asked them. (Matthew 28:1-10; Mark 16:1, 2; John 20:1, 2) Oblivious of the angel’s visit and overwhelmed with sorrow, Mary Magdalene went back to the vacant tomb. Jesus appeared to her there, and after she at last identified him, he declared: “Be on your way to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.’”—John 20:11-18; compare Matthew 28:9, 10.
 
Seeing how these reports are not logically incongruous they cannot be contradictory. In basic terms, if all the narratives can be factual  then  you simply do not have any contradiction. When you can show logically that a particular statement being factual would mean a second assertion cannot as well be factual, then you have found a real contradiction. At this point, though, you have not identified any kind of contradiction. Rather, you have displayed a failure to take into account the unique perspective of multiple individuals who experienced distinct events on separate occasions.

8
Daniel 9 - A True Biblical Interpretation

"“The people of the prince will come and destroy the city and the Sanctuary” Daniel 9:26, refers to the Roman legions of Vespasian and Titus, who destroyed Jerusalem." -https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/daniel-9-a-true-biblical-interpretation

Since Daniel was recorded well before 70 C. E. -when the Roman Empire leveled Jerusalem and its temple to the ground- the veracity of Daniel's prophecy is indisputable . . . and Atheism falls, completely refuted . . .

Nicely done! :)

9
Apologetics and Theology / Re: All just a conspiracy?
« on: May 04, 2020, 05:44:50 pm »
In his book "The Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus", Michael Licona provides a list of scholars who attest to the historicity of Christ’s death and resurrection which includes Brodeur, Collins, Conzelman, Fee, Gundry, Harris, Hayes, Hèring, Hurtado, Johnson, Kistemaker, Lockwood, Martin, Segal, Snyder, Thiselton, Witherington, and Wright.

I suspect that none of those scholars are objective historians, but most likely true believers for whom the study of history is just an exercise in confirmation bias.

You don't actually expect any atheist persuaded by the preponderance of the evidence for Christ's extraordinary life, death and resurrection to remain Atheist, do you?

That can't be taken as proof they are impossible. But if they happen at all they must still be one of the rarest of events.

This was already refuted two days ago . . .

Why do you keep regurgitating this?

10
The disciples could have simply been sincerely mistaken.  They died for it, thinking it was true, when in fact it was not.

We've already gone over the historical evidence which lays bare how completely bankrupt of explanatory power this attempted rationalization is . . .


11
Apologetics and Theology / Re: The Best empirical evidence for God
« on: May 04, 2020, 05:26:57 pm »
What could possibly have led you to believe that I would lend any credence to the views of someone whose worldview rests on the absurd proposition that the universe originated from nothing, by nothing, for nothing?
I see, so you make stuff up about what I believe so that you employ a genetic fallacy to dismiss my logical analysis of your absurdity


Oh? Are you suddenly a proponent of the theistic explanation for the creation of our universe 13.70+/- billion years ago?

13
Better to fuggedaboudit and just be decent to each other.

Be "decent" to each other? Atheism is intrinsically amoral . . . what are you talking about?

14
We're not interested in your prepackaged version of the truth.

Apparently you're not interested in evidence either. Let's take your claim that Daniel was written around the time of the Maccabean revolt. For the sake of argument let's grant this dating. That would still place Daniel's recording of the prophecy concerning Jerusalem's destruction post-reconstruction and after the arrival of the Messiah -which occurred in 70 C. E. when the Romans razed Jerusalem and its temple to the ground under General Cestius Gallus- well over a century prior to the advent of that watershed moment in Jewish history.

Your only out at this point is to do an about-face and attempt to advocate for a date of Daniel's writing well after 70 C. E. which, naturally, would be patently absurd . . .

15
Max - Don't read this!  I'm providing the quote below for those who are interested in a historical approach to the Bible. It has no relevance to someone of faith.

Proselytizing for Atheist converts, eh? At least now we know why you dedicate so much time to this forum  . . .

Yes, good call! And after he converts us we  have to tithe 15% of our salaries to him.

Hey, it worked in China, Cuba, the Former Soviet Union, etc., etc.,  . . .

Pages : [1] 2 3 ... 104