- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28795
05 Jul 19
@sonship saidSo when you asked, which is more of an extraordinary claim; everything came into existence by nothing and for nothing or everything came into existence by something for something, you weren't actually referring to any claim made by anybody in this forum?!
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
Again, name one person on this site who has claimed everything came from nothing. If caissadr4 has, quote her.
Perhaps no one "here" on this thread or forum.
But prominent voices that influence people here HAVE said it. And you have the names.
You were just referring to a claim made by nobody here and using it as a strawman to contrast with your own position?
05 Jul 19
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI think Man evolved to have fingers is, fingers are highly complex piece of the whole of man. Nothing directing this process and fingers appear. That is quite the extraordinary claim.
@sonship
Which is more of an extraordinary claim?
1.) Man evolved to have fingers.
2.) God fashioned fingers out of sausages.
(You see what I did there? )
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jul 19
1 edit
Historical nature, That is a laugh.
If there is a joke here it is on you.
A expert on ancient literature of all types (C.S. Lewis) wrote this
"I have been reading poems, romances, vision literature, legends, and myths all my life. I know what they are like. I know none of them are like this. Of this [gospel] text there are only two possible views: Either this is reportage ... or else, some unknown [ancient] writer ... without known predecessors or successors, suddenly anticipated the whole technique of modern novelistic, realistic narrative ..."
Ancient fiction was nothing like modern fiction. Modern fiction is realistic The genre of detail and dialogue laden imaginative story has only developed in the last three hundred years.
According to your book of fable the dead rose from their graves and were walking about at the time of the crucifixion [edited] .
Your assignment of "fable" is what you are trying to prove.
According to the gospel this is not a TYPICAL event but one stupendously notable occurrence associated with a stupendous personality.
"No man ever spoke like this man." was the reason for not arresting Jesus by the guards sent to seize Him. That something astounding accompanied His (one in all history) powerful words, is understandable.
You still have not given me a good reason for the inclusion of severely embarrassing details of the women taking the lead to witness Christ's resurrection rather then the twelve apostles He appointed.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jul 19
1 edit
That is an extraordinary claim and there is zero, zip and nada historical evidence.
That is an extraordinary claim.
But you have not explained why "God is" is an extraordinary claim.
As for no evidence leading these scientists suggests the finely tuned anthropic principle is evidence pointing to a supreme mind if not proof of God.
"A universe aiming at the production of man implies a mind directing it." ... " Though man is not at the physical center of the universe, he appears to be at the center of its purpose." - The New Story of Science, by Robert Augros and George Stanciu
Fred Hoyle was not a theist as also Owen Gingrich a Harvard astronomy professor at the Smithsonian astraphysical Observatory.
Gingrich remarked about Hoyle -
[my bolding]
"Fred Hoyle and I differ on lots of questions, but on this we agree: a common sense and satisfying interpretation of our world suggests the designing hand of a superintelligence."
So if the existence of a super-intelligence ( God the Creator ) is an extraordinary claim why do you think this astronomer says it is a common sense and satisfying interpretation of our world ?
Wouldn't NO super-intelligence behind creation be the MORE extraordinary claim ?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jul 19
1 edit
Were the walking dead so normal that no one mentioned it in any historical documents ?
When reading the Bible you first have to get the facts stated correctly. They were not walking dead. They WERE asleep (had died ) and were miraculously (with Christ's resurrection) raised to life.
You're reading into the text your Hollywood zombie movie memories perhaps.
The smell alone should have made some writers put pen to papyrus.
You should not wear your ignorance as a badge of honor. An educated person may not believe something written. But they would be honest to get the stated facts correctly.
And behold, ... and the earth was split shaken and the rocks were split.
And the tombs were opened, and many bodies of saints who had fallen asleep were raised. And they came out of the tombs after His resurrection and entered into the holy city and appeared to many." (Matt. 27:51b-53)
The New Testament spends no other time discussing this detail.
It is not a major tenet on which the whole Gospel depends.
You've reached for ( upon copying something you read probably ) this relatively minuscule report to cast doubt on much more significant things.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jul 19
Thousands of Jerusalem Jews SUDDENLY altered their most sacred day, the Saturday Sabbath to celebrate instead the first day of the new week - "the Lord's day" commemorating the rising from the tomb alive of Jesus of Nazareth.
What else do you propose caused in so short a time of weeks this great shift from a centuries old Jewish custom ? They believed that Jesus had been miraculously raised by God and in so, vindicated.
That is not proof that He rose. It is evidence that the Gospels are historical writing and not fiction like a first century Harry Potter novel for entertainment.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jul 19
1 edit
Folks you will see a number of skeptics try to put the Gospels in the same category as a Harry Potter novel or a Lord of the Rings novel.
Don't fall for it. This style of fiction is only about three hundred years old.
Instead in the first century we have such things mentioned which are indicative of being the memorized detail of eyewitnesses.
Mark 4 says that during a storm with boat at sea, Jesus slept on a cushion. Why would it specifically mention that it was on a cushion that Jesus was sleeping?
It sounds like someone remembered this detail.
We are told that Jesus directed the disciples, after His resurrection, to cast the fishing net into the sea. The COUNT of fish caught is recorded - 153 fish.
That they caught precisely 153 fish (See John 21:11 ) is more indicative of a detail that some eyewitness RECALLS.
In John 8, it recounts that at an attempted stoning of a woman caught in adultery, Jesus stooped down and wrote in the sand. It is not said WHAT He wrote. We can only imagine the unprovided detail.
This is indicative of some eyewitness recalling this unusual detail. In such a tense moment, Jesus calmly was stooping down and scribbling SOMETHING in the dirt of the ground.
The Gospels have many details like this revealing that in the impactful events of the life of this powerful personality, associated details were recalled by those who were eyewitnesses.
This is like you remembering some detail of where you were or what you were doing at 9/11 in the US. The major event you remember. And some insignificant associated detail you recall, peripheral in meaning perhaps, but clear in memory.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jul 19
Thousands of Jerusalem Jews SUDDENLY altered their most sacred day, the Saturday Sabbath to celebrate instead the first day of the new week - "the Lord's day" commemorating the rising from the tomb alive of Jesus of Nazareth.
What else do you propose caused in so short a time of weeks this great shift from a centuries old Jewish custom ? They believed that Jesus had been miraculously raised by God and in so, vindicated.
That is not proof that He rose. It is evidence that the Gospels are historical writing and not fiction like a first century Harry Potter novel for entertainment.
Whoever put a thumbs down on this post can now do the harder part.
What is your alternative explanation to the belief that Jesus had been raised, TO the phenomenon of thousands of Jerusalem Jews making the day of His supposed rising more important then the centuries old tradition of the Seventh Day Sabbath ?
You did the easy part of thumbing down. Now tell us your reason for the historical shift of thousands of Jerusalem Jews.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Jul 19
1 edit
So when you asked, which is more of an extraordinary claim; everything came into existence by nothing and for nothing or everything came into existence by something for something, you weren't actually referring to any claim made by anybody in this forum?!
You were just referring to a claim made by nobody here and using it as a strawman to contrast with your own position?
Okay, let's give you that no one here may have written that per se.
Now if an astronomer believes as he does that the evidence points to a super intelligence and that this is a " COMMON SENSE AND SATISFYING INTEPRETATION OF OUR WORLD " why would the interpretation be more extraordinary then its denial ?
Are you saying that no super intelligence is more satisfying and more a common sense interpretation of the anthropic principle?
Oxford educated John Leslie has taken it up to catalog many anthorpic examples which he enumerated in a book Universes (1989)
He reasoned that if our universe is the only one that exists then its fine tuning for life and human beings is " genuine evidence ... that God is real."
Explain why it would be less extraordinary to claim that in such a finely tuned universe no God involved in its design should be more persuasive.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28795
05 Jul 19
@sonship saidSo why write it?!
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
So when you asked, which is more of an extraordinary claim; everything came into existence by nothing and for nothing or everything came into existence by something for something, you weren't actually referring to any claim made by anybody in this forum?!
You were just referring to a claim made by nobody here and using it as a strawman to contr ...[text shortened]... position?
Okay, let's give you that no one here may have written that per se.
What if I put forward a Christian argument that no Christian on this site had ever asserted and then used it to make my own position look more reasonable?
Very sloppy sir.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28795
05 Jul 19
@sonship saidHow is the universe finely tuned?
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
[quote] So when you asked, which is more of an extraordinary claim; everything came into existence by nothing and for nothing or everything came into existence by something for something, you weren't actually referring to any claim made by anybody in this forum?!
You were just referring to a claim made by nobody here and using it as a strawman to contr ...[text shortened]... claim that in such a finely tuned universe no God involved in its design should be more persuasive.
05 Jul 19
@ghost-of-a-duke saidHow is it possible to give a wrong answer to a what do you think question?
Sir, you are responding to a parody. (And still managed to give the wrong answer).
Your blinders towards the creation vs nothing (or something to be named later) debate must be blinding you completely.