Page 3 of 3 [ 35 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Thom_Fuleri
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2010
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 849
Location: Leicestershire, UK

13 Feb 2012, 7:08 pm

Declension wrote:
Oh, come on! Everyone wants to skirt around the obvious issue. He supposedly rose from the dead after three days, after probably most of the blood had been drained from his body. Accompanied by an earthquake and the appearance of an angel. We are not talking about an unlikely medical miracle, here.


Depends which of the gospels you're reading. They can't even agree on whether it was three days or two, who was at the tomb, whether the tomb was open when the witnesses arrived or what happened to Judas.

Quote:
This is the central belief of Christianity. It proves that Jesus was the son of God. Why is nobody prepared to defend it?


Because it is indefensible. There's no evidence to confirm or deny it - just a bunch of written accounts, which weren't even written at the time and have been copied and recopied and translated once or twice, not to mention edited to fit the needs of the church (such as at the Council of Nicea). It wouldn't be acceptable evidence in a court of law ("this man was the murderer, as my great aunt knew a guy whose brother wrote about the murder in his journal twenty years after it happened; of course, that was in Swahili, so we've had a translation produced...")



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

14 Feb 2012, 12:56 pm

Declension wrote:
However, I think that it is sophistry to talk about that in this context. Everyone knows the sort of thing that counts as a proper miracle. Physics behaving like we didn't expect doesn't count, as long as the new physics is still systematic in some sense.

The key point for a miracle is that it is local, both in space and time. It is non-repeatable and unexpected. Jesus rising from the dead is not the sort of thing that can be used as the basis of a new theory of physics.


Well, given that the largest organization on the planet that still deals actively in miracles talks in these terms I think you are the one engaging in sophistry by insisting upon a notion of, "what counts as a proper miracle."

Look at the miracles attributed to just about any saint canonized by the Roman Catholic church in the last century, and you will probably find that they are, by and large, cures and recoveries that physicians were at a loss to explain. Did they occur? Yes. Are they unexplained? Probably most of them are. Are they miracles? Well the Roman Catholics believe that they are.

In a world where the term is as watered down as that, why are we diving into the fantasies of the sun stopping in the sky, the walls falling down or men rising from the dead (there was more than one, remember)?


_________________
--James


Thom_Fuleri
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2010
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 849
Location: Leicestershire, UK

14 Feb 2012, 1:07 pm

visagrunt wrote:
...or men rising from the dead (there was more than one, remember)?


They predate Jesus too. Ezekiel was trying to build an army of skeletons way back in the OT days, and that would be a much better trick than the recent dead.

Everybody sing along now... The knee bone's connected to the thigh bone...