BDS

At least I'm responding to people with whom I disagree, instead of arguing against Christians on an atheist message board. If Ty was responding to an OP that said, "There's plenty of evidence for the Resurrection" he'd have a better excuse.

TySixtus

Yes, but this evidence could be provided if asked for. This is my chief point of contention.

I have evidence of who I am. Scientifically verifiable evidence, to boot. No such thing exists for the Ressurection.

BDS

No such thing exists for most ancient historical events, many of which even you doubtless accept.

It's this infatuation with "scientifically verifiable evidence" that I object to. Eye witness accounts are not "scientifically verifiable evidence". However, that doesn't mean they aren't good evidence.

Much of history is based on eye witness accounts.

TySixtus

So then it would be the idea of the unreal event that has significance, and not the event it self- because it never happened.

And here we enter the murky depths of "Ressurection as mythology" argument. Okay. I'll bite. What is the the "idea" of the ressurection supposed to mean?

Once again, what is this "meaning"?

Once an idea has been proven to be untrue, and people still teach it to be true, they are lying.

Innocence I can forgive- but we live in a modern age. It's the year 2006. People who teach children that man-god rose from the dead are lying. What other word is there for us to use?

If a reporter reports a fact that isn't true, and later has mountains of evidence to disprove the fact, and still reports the fact as true, he is lying.

If Christianity were being taught to kids as mythology, I would agree with you. But we don't have Judges refusing to remove 10 commandment displays because of their stances on mythology. It's theology that we have a problem with. Specifically, people who literally believe that Jesus rose from the dead. Millions of people don't think this is myth- they believe it to be true.

In otherwords, they aren't treating it like mythology, so I'm not going to. They want their nonsense to be respected in the public sphere, and claim some validity? Fine. I'm going to hold them to it. They can't make bullshit claims, and, when presented with evidence that refutes those claims, cry "Mythology!"

If something is untrue, it's untrue for one of two reasons: Either on purpose (lie) or not on purpose (fiction). There is no third category.

If the Ressurection stories aren't lies, and they aren't fiction, they must be true.

So do you believe the Ressurection happened?

Careful, your bias is showing. Why is Christianity more respectable than Mormonism? They both have the exact same amount of evidence to attest to their truth- that is to say, absolutely none.

Ty

TySixtus

Yeah, how dare I start a discussion on a discussion board. What the hell is my problem...



Ty

TySixtus

And as I said, if the events are common place, I would accept such mediocre standards for evidence.

But we're talking about somone rising from the dead.

Call me crazy, but a little skepticism is in order.

Ty

Tigers!

Yes, you could provide 'evidence' of your existence. What if I refuse to accept it by claiming that it is so implausible that it could not be possibly true? What if I claim your evidence is flawed or manufactured? If you find this unacceptable remember them the next time you make an insurance claim. Who defines what is or is not scientifically verifiable? Is it the provider of evidence or the receiver of such?
Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proofs is often mentioned in these fora. What a pity nobody defines what extraordinary means or is.

In 100 years could that 'evidence' be provided to others who claimed that you never existed? The ravages of time mean that evidence disappears or changes, that does not mean it never existed.

I side with BDS on this.

Our bias, prejudices, preconceptions colour so much of what we think and believe and can interfere with what we accept.

BDS

For all your faith in "science" and "evidence", Ty, you lack basic knowledge of logic. You say:

This is obviously incorrect. As I said in my post, lies are "intended to deceive" and fiction is an intentional falsehood 'not intended to deceive".

We all say and believe things that are untrue every day. They are not lies (if we believe them), nor are they fictions. If Leonidas and his Spartans never defended the pass at Thermopolae it would nonetheless be neither a lie nor a fiction for me to say that he did. It would be a "mistake".

You whine about my "ad hominems" and then claim that all Christians are "lying". This is incorrect and insulting (and I'm not even a Christian). Many Christians doubtless believe that Jesus rose from the dead. They may be mistaken, but they are neither telling "lies" nor "fictions", as any careful speaker of English could inform you.

You can start any discussions you want, Ty. What you appear incapable of doing is arguing your position in a reasonable and persuasive manner.

BDS

Sure it is.

We can't alter our preconceptions, certainly. Here Ty shows his true colors -- it's not the evidence or lack of evidence that determines his objection to the Resurrection. It's his preconceived notions about the nature of the Universe, and its laws.

In this respect, Ty resembles the most Fundamentalist of Christians.

TySixtus

This flew right over your head, I guess. Do you know the similarities between a lie and a fiction?

You guessed it, both are untrue. That's all I'm interested in. If it's a lie, or if it's a fiction, I don't care. Either way, it isn't true.

And you blatantly ignored my argument from before. If you know something to be untrue and report it as true anyway, you are doing one of two things- lying, or telling a fiction.

We know the Ressurection to be untrue. People don't come back from the dead. Or are you claiming that Christians don't possess the intelligence to know the difference, and so thier belief in the Ressurection is "a mistake" if it turns out to untrue?

I call "bullshit". Everyone in the modern world knows that people don't come back from the dead. It's 2006. Ignorance is no excuse anymore.

Sure they are. Any who looks at the Ressurection with any shred of intellectual honesty will realize that what they believe is a steaming pile of garbage. There is no evidence. There is no science, there is no precedent, and this is no possibilty. Deal with that.

You want to call it a "mistake" and make yourself feel better, fine. Either way, they are spreading a falsehood, and a big one at that. And enough of the ringleaders are smart enough to know that they're peddlling bullshit. So that makes them liars.

Says you. Excuse me while I go and cry in the bathroom.

Ty