Steven Carr

Another debate can be found at http://resurrectiondebate.blogspot.com/

Comments always welcome.

My opponent is somebody who claims to be engaged in mission. You would think he would have better arguments for the resurrection than that some Gentile Christians gave some money to charity on the first day of the week.

Decypher

Christians want to make a big deal out of the supposed resurrection. What I say to them, is who cares if it really happened?

The Bible doesn't say that if someone gives a sign then they are a genuine prophet. The Bible actually makes it clear that false prophets can give signs.

When you judge Jesus/Christianity on the criteria of the Hebrew Bible, they don't come out of it well. They look very suspect. So if Jesus was resurrected, so what? The guy is still a false prophet according to the Bible.

Headache

And an empty tomb may simply indicate that someone removed the body, not necessarily that it was resurrected.

I can dig up a grave and remove the body from it and claim the body has been resurrected. How can anyone argue against such a claim?

gdeering

Good luck getting through the clouds of obfuscation.

Gregg

Steven Carr

I think I'm doing OK.

I quite like my last post.

I was asked what would be proof for me. I feel like a poker player when an opponent turns over a pair of twos, and then asks him what would constitute proof that he has 4 aces.

Not having a hand with only a pair of twos would be a good start on providing proof that he had 4 aces....

Decypher

You said in the debate:

What would be proof? I think a nice start would be gospels without these problems. Why on earth should we accept gospels that don't even bother to explain their sources etc.?

Steven Carr

There was an extraordinary response by Mr. Twisleton at

http://resurrectiondebate.blogspot.c...-01032008.html

Steven Carr

The debate continues at http://resurrectiondebate.blogspot.c...&max-results=7

My opponents are getting pretty stuffed.

gdeering

Yes it's not really fair, they are not used to independent thinking and too used to preaching to the converted. Still you are doing a good job, better than I would. But, we are wrong because "billions see otherwise!"

The bad side of me wants to comment on the site, but I won't. His one through ten are just fantastic howlers, really the lamest list possible.


8 What usually happens doesn’t always happen. (???)

Still, I think you are very clear, still it might be good to try to nail them on something specific to answer; otherwise they will just continue to attack you for not having happy thoughts, or failing to see God's will for us little people.

You have to get them on all the generalities, ad hominem and particularly the obfuscating jargon ("....with a dynamic inexplicable without it"). Like you did with Paul and the empty tomb.

My prediction for the future is - the debate will fizzle out because of their frustration that you just don't "get it." Again, because they are used to the nodding heads of the converted.


Gregg

Steven Carr

I did wonder what that meant.

I thought it meant that if Jesus was still alive, and people could see what he was really like, the Christian churches would never have grown anything like as fast.