Freethought & Rationalism Archive

dr lazer blast · 06-07-2008, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atheos

dr lazer blast,

Is there something vague about the statement "'you can't skip a single detail"? :huh: You said you needed clarification a 'couple' of things. That's only one and it's pretty damn clear.

Yes there is something vague. Obviously the bible doesn't account for how many steps mary took, or how many inches the boulder was moved. I just asked you to clarify detail.

Quote:

From Dan Barker's book, "Losing Faith In Faith: From Preacher To Atheist":

Quote:

I HAVE AN EASTER challenge for Christians. My challenge is simply this: tell me what happened on Easter. I am not asking for proof. My straightforward request is merely that Christians tell me exactly what happened on the day that their most important doctrine was born.

Believers should eagerly take up this challenge, since without the resurrection, there is no Christianity. Paul wrote, "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not." (I Corinthians 15:14-15)

The conditions of the challenge are simple and reasonable. In each of the four Gospels, begin at Easter morning and read to the end of the book: Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, and John 20-21. Also read Acts 1:3-12 and Paul's tiny version of the story in I Corinthians 15:3-8. These 165 verses can be read in a few moments. Then, without omitting a single detail from these separate accounts, write a simple, chronological narrative of the events between the resurrection and the ascension: what happened first, second, and so on; who said what, when; and where these things happened.

Since the gospels do not always give precise times of day, it is permissible to make educated guesses. The narrative does not have to pretend to present a perfect picture--it only needs to give at least one plausible account of all of the facts. Additional explanation of the narrative may be set apart in parentheses. The important condition to the challenge, however, is that not one single biblical detail be omitted. Fair enough?

Fair enough, I'll bring you an account that makes sense soon enough.

Quote:

1 - Why should you have to resolve anything? Why can't the bible just speak for itself? When I read the bible I see lots of obvious problems with internal consistency, compliance with modern knowledge of how the universe operates and downright absurd statements. Is there some "good stuff" there? Sure there is, but there's "good stuff" in the Quran, the Vedas, the book of Mormon, the Taoist traditions, the Shintu traditions, etc.

Asking why we should have to resolve anything is like asking why our legal system needs to resolve anything, if they're innocent or guilty it should just speak for itself! why do we need a jury or a lawyer and prosecutor? im sorry but that doesn't make any sense. Even science gets things wrong (look at all the medicine that is taken off the market) and they have to go back and re do their theories. The bible is not written like a dr suess book
Sure there is 'good stuff' in the other books, the only thing that comes close to matching the bible is the Koran

Quote:

2 - What makes the bible different from the Quran, the Vedas, the book of Mormon or any other religious book? So far you've got a major "O-fer" going. You've tried "Substance", "Predictive Prophecy", "Interal consistency" and in each case it has been demonstrated that they are simple matters of taste, question begging and dilligent apologetic effort. So what if you have explanations for the obvious issues one can see with a cursory look at your favorite religious book? Can a devout Moslem not offer explanations of the issues you find with the Quran? Can a devout Hindu not offer explanations of the issues you find with the Vedas? Can a devout Mormon not offer explanations for any problems you have with "The Prophet Joseph Smith" or any of his publications?

Lets see, you've shown me an argument from silence, (massacure of the innocents) you've given me an incorrect assertion that the gospel of mark was written after the temple was destroyed (scholars date mark anywhere from 60 AD to 75 AD) so until definite evidence is revealed it is inconclusive , you've given me scripture taken out of context (Moses murdering after he came to know God), you made an incorrect assertion that Genisis 16 was not talking about the original muslim, and you've given me something to think about regarding Egypt. So far you've you haven't given me any type of reasonable doubt that makes me think I made a hasty decision in my choosing of Christianity.

For the 15th time, the muslims and the christians might be worshiping the same God, so I find it very hard to take that example seriously. The vedas? lets see what interpretation of the vedas would that be? the atheist one? the monotheist one? the polytheist one? or the panatheistic one? Hinduism is so difficult to narrow down, even scholars have trouble doing it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism

Quote:

Hinduism is an extremely diverse religion. Although some tenets of the faith are accepted by most Hindus, scholars have found it difficult to identify any doctrines with universal acceptance among all denominations.

Mormons took a good majority of their religion from Christianity anyway, so I really don't see your point there

Quote:

When you understand why you dismiss all the other holy books, you'll understand why I dismiss yours.

Didn't we go through this? I dismiss all other holy books (still working on the quoran) as half truths from satan

temporalillusion · 06-08-2008, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr lazer blast

you've given me an incorrect assertion that the gospel of mark was written after the temple was destroyed (scholars date mark anywhere from 60 AD to 75 AD)

Up to as late as 80, and even given your range it's possible it was written after the temple was destroyed.

Looking forward to your Easter narrative!

dr lazer blast · 06-08-2008, 02:45 PM

Easter challenge: Please read the whole post before commenting, thanks.

1. Who was there?

Mary Magdalene, Mary mother of James, and Salome.

Mat 28:1, Mar 16:1, Luk 24:1, John 20:1

2. Why were they there?

To anoint the body of Jesus with spices.

Mar 16:1, Luk 24:1

3. What happened next? they encountered a problem with the guards and the stone blocking the tomb

They saw the guards standing by the tome, and the stone blocking the way, and they asked amongst themselves who's going to roll the stone away?

Mar 16:3

4. How did the stone get moved?
An angel caused an earthquake, moving the stone and killing the guards, after the earthquake they saw the stone had been moved.

Mat 28:2, mar 16:4, Luk 24:2, John 20:1

5. What happened next? they walked into the tomb
They all entered the tomb.

Mar 16:4, Luk 24:3,

6. What happened next? inside the tomb they found 2 angels and no remains of Jesus
After entering the tomb they saw 2 angels, and no remains of Jesus.

Mar 16:5, luk 24:3-4,

7. What happened next? One of the angels spoke to them
An angel speaks to them and tells them that Jesus has risen, and to go tell the disciples about it

Mat 28:6-7, Mar 16:6-7, Luk 24:6-7

8. What happened next? Mary Magdalene went to go tell Peter and the other disciple
Mary magdalene went to tell Peter and the other disciple(she went by herself, mary mother of James did not accompany her), Peter and the other disciple ran to the tomb, saw there was no remains of Christ, and went back home, while mary stayed at the tomb, she saw the 2 angels, then she saw Jesus, then she ran to where the other disciples were.

John 20:2-17

9. The events in #9 (this one) are happening during the events of #8
Mary mother of James, and Salome went to go tell the other disciples (mary magdalene didn't go with them, she went separately to get peter and the other disciple) and on the way Jesus appeared to them (after He appeared to Mary magdalena) and they ran to the house where the disciples were.

10. What happens next? Mary magdelena, Mary mother of James and Salmoe all arrive at the house of the disciples

All the women arrive at the house of the disciples at around the same time and tell the stories of what happened.

Mar 16:13, Luk 24:10, John 20:18

Sightings are all separate events

Jesus showed Himself to Mary Magdelena first (jhon 20:14)
Jesus showed Himself to Mary Mother of James and Salome (mat 28:9)
Jesus showed Himself to the 2 people in the country ( Mar 16:12) the story of the 2 people in the country is detailed in luke 24:13-33
Jesus showed Himself to the 11 (Jhon 20:9, Mar 16:14)
Jesus showed Himself to Thomas (Jhon 20:26)
Jesus showed Himself to to the 12 and apostles (Acts 1:3-12)
Jesus showed Himself to Cephas (1 Corinthians 15:5)
Jesus showed Himself to the 12 (1 Corinthians 15:5)
Jesus showed Himself to the head of 500 (1 Corinthians 15:6)
Jesus showed Himself to James separately from the 12 (1 Corinthians 15:6)
Jesus showed Himself to the apostles (1 Corinthians 15:6)
Jesus showed Himself to Paul (1 Corinthians 15:8)

Resurrection in a nutshell.

Mary magdelana Mary mother of James, and Salome went to the tomb to anoint Christ with spices. Saw the guards and the rock, asked who is going to move the tomb. Angel comes down starts the earthquake, after the earthquake they look and see the guards were dead and the rock is moved. They go in the tomb, 2 angels and no remains of Jesus. One of the 2 angels talked telling them that Jesus had risen from the dead and they should go and tell the disciples. The 3 women separate mary magdelna going to find Peter and the other disciple, and the other 2 women going to get the rest. Mary finds Peter, peter and the other disciple run to the tomb, see it empty, go back home. Mary stays at the tomb and cries, sees 2 angels, sees Jesus first, then runs to the disciples house. The other 2 women go to tell the other disciples, Jesus appears to them. All the women arrive at the house at about roughly the same time, and tell their stories.

Clarifications.
Luke 24:12 is speaking in past tense.

Quote:

12Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.

Beheld is past tense for behold. If you look at the verse right after it (luke 24:13), you will see behold, which is being used in present tense, letting the reader know that the author has made one verse in present tense and one verse in past tense.

Quote:

And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.

So that verse is most likely Mary magdelena telling what happened with Peter.

Why does Jhon only talk about Mary Magdelena? I think this further proves the point that Mary Magdelena went off on her own, because it is basically telling about her events during the resurrection.

Conclusion
If I've missed anything let me know, I am not writing this to prove anything, I am writing this in response to Atheos's challenge.

dr lazer blast · 06-08-2008, 05:00 PM

for some reason I am not able to edit my post,

Quote:

The 3 women separate *with* mary magdelna going to find Peter and the other disciple

there is supposed to be a 'with' in that sentence.

Kharakov · 06-08-2008, 08:16 PM

Atheos, what does the difference between the tomb accounts mean (Matthew 28 and John 20)?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew 28

After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.
2There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. 4The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.
5The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 6He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. 7Then 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."

Quote:

Originally Posted by John 20

Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. 2So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don't know where they have put him!"

Why is it at dawn in the one account, and an angel removed the stone for the girls, and in the other Mary arrived while it was still dark, and the stone was already moved? I don't understand, did Satan change our bible?

dr lazer blast · 06-08-2008, 08:55 PM

did you not read what I posted? I asked that people read the whole post before commenting.

dawn.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawn

Quote:

Astronomical dawn
the moment after which the sky is no longer completely dark, formally defined as the time at which the sun is 18 degrees below the horizon in the morning

still dark, just not completely dark.

dr lazer blast · 06-08-2008, 09:19 PM

Also I'd like to point out the the gospels are 4 different accounts of the same event.

Quote:

Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. 2So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don't know where they have put him

It would be a contradiction if anything in that verse couldn't not in anyway match up with the other verses.

Did it say mary magdelene went to the tomb alone? no it didn't, it just said Mary Magdelene went to the tomb. Mary magdelene can be going to the tomb with the other women as well, there is nothing in that verse that says otherwise, just because they weren't listed in Jhons Gospel doesn't mean they weren't there. The author could be assuming that the reader has read the previous gospels and listing them wouldn't be necessary.
Mary saw the stone had been removed from the entrance. Does it say how the stone was removed? no, it only says "Mary saw the stone had been removed" does that mean that it is impossible for the stone to be moved by the angel? no. It could very well be possible that mary saw the angel remove the stone. Do those things contradict each other? is it not possible according to scripture for Mary to see the angel remove the stone? and not contradict Jhons verse? yes.

Kharakov · 06-08-2008, 09:55 PM

Ok, I suppose that dawn is technically twilight, so it could still be said to not be fully light.

So what of these 2 verses:

Quote:

Originally Posted by John

And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.
15Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.
16Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.
17Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Quote:

Originally Posted by matthew

8And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.
9And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.
10Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.

They certainly appear to be different accounts to me. Can you explain these? The reason I ask is you seem to have a better understanding of the intricacies of this story than me. I don't really follow your post above, so if I can ask you question by question, I would appreciate it.

Biff the unclean · 06-08-2008, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr lazer blast

Easter challenge: Please read the whole post before commenting, thanks

Well that’s the most astonishing reply to Barker’s Easter challenge I’ve ever seen. It ignores everything Barker says and apparently assumes that none of us have ever read the bible.

It makes me wonder if apologists are aware of what they are doing and how they justify it to themselves.

angelo · 06-09-2008, 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr lazer blast

Also I'd like to point out the the gospels are 4 different accounts of the same event.

Quote:

Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. 2So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don't know where they have put him

It would be a contradiction if anything in that verse couldn't not in anyway match up with the other verses.

Did it say mary magdelene went to the tomb alone? no it didn't, it just said Mary Magdelene went to the tomb. Mary magdelene can be going to the tomb with the other women as well, there is nothing in that verse that says otherwise, just because they weren't listed in Jhons Gospel doesn't mean they weren't there. The author could be assuming that the reader has read the previous gospels and listing them wouldn't be necessary.
Mary saw the stone had been removed from the entrance. Does it say how the stone was removed? no, it only says "Mary saw the stone had been removed" does that mean that it is impossible for the stone to be moved by the angel? no. It could very well be possible that mary saw the angel remove the stone. Do those things contradict each other? is it not possible according to scripture for Mary to see the angel remove the stone? and not contradict Jhons verse? yes.

I can just imagine what a good judge in a court of law would do with so many contradictions and downright bad witnesses. If I was the judge I would throw the case out of my court. Also, there are no records of that time that report any earthquake anywhere in the Roman Empire. Not to mention some corpse coming back to life after a couple of days been dead. Surely some source outside of the gospels would report such a stupendous event. :huh:

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.