Posted on 03/22/2006 4:04:11 PM PST by dukeman
See the McDowell book "More Than a Carpenter." The resurrection is every bit as provable an event as Alexander's defeat of Darius or Julius Caesar's assassination.
Ever seen MTV? Have you met any New Agers, as a for instance? Wiccans? Atheistic hedonists? Much of our population, particularly people living in urban areas, are practical atheists or materialists, leading amoral lives.
As for the Skeptical Inquirer crowd, they're the kind of people who, when told that Mother Theresa had a big heart, would answer, "we measured it in an MRI and it was of average size."
And let the debunkers debunk the following miracles:
Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano
Blood of St. Januarius
The Tilma of Guadalupe
Incorrupt bodies of the saints
Fatima
Shroud of Turin
Sudarium of Oviedo
"So what keeps you from carrying out the impulse of killing somebody when the urge is manifested?
"
Who says I have had the urge to kill someone? I haven't. You're talking about one of the basic tenets of all social systems of mores. The prohibition against murder is common to all systems. Self-defense and war are some of the exceptions to that rule.
I cannot ever remember having the urge to kill somebody. Can you?
I caN SURE SEE WHY. They try to take the words God out of everythng , the pledge, the patrotic songs we sing , Christmas, now Easter. Which oh yes, am I the only one who noticed that Easter is being ignored now also. They sure have a way of getting their own way through libs on the supreme court for a minority in this country. Sorry this is a republic not a democracy , democracy is gov by the mob , republic is gov by majority. I am the majority there fore get in the back of the bus.
"The resurrection is every bit as provable an event as Alexander's defeat of Darius or Julius Caesar's assassination."
So it's not a matter of faith but pure fact?
(for the record, I believe in the Resurrection...but as a matter of faith, not fact. Else, it's not religion)
Take a look at this article.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1601535/posts
Uri Kaufman does a better job of explaining anti-religious sentiments in our schools/courts and brings up points we have not touched on.
As a side note, look at this pages from the American Atheitst website concerning prayer. The original discussion was over "militant" atheists. Here is their position.
http://www.atheists.org/publicschools/faqs.prayer.html#voluntary
I wonder why you haven't cited WALLACE v. JAFFREE, 472 U.S. 38 (1985)in your "moment of silence" or "voluntary prayer" is constitutional. Our USSC says otherwise. They ruled when a school sets aside a moment of silence for prayer or meditation that is indeed unconstitutional. You can read the decision at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=472&invol=38
Your last batch of comments are even further off the point than the first one, which is saying something.
In contrast what we have about Jesus Christ's life is 3 Gospels from about 30 years later that appear to have been compiled from a single common source and which contain numerous anecdotes to which there can have been no witnesses, and another Gospel that wasn't finished for at least a further 30 years. We have no idea what Jesus looked like. We don't have a *single* direct eyewitness account of any part of his life. All the gospels were written by people who never met Jesus, apparently compiled from interviews of claimed witnesses decades later.
The resurrection is every bit as provable an event as Alexander's defeat of Darius or Julius Caesar's assassination.
Yeah right. Even if your false contention were true it is almost irrelevant. No-one is requiring me to worship Caesar or Alexander or face eternity in Hell. We ignore the more outrageous claims about those individuals, and take tales of their extraordinary military prowess with a pinch of salt where there is no corroboration. No-one is asserting that those individuals were the sons of the one true God. Large claims require large evidence, and our contemporaneous evidence of Christ is virtually non-existent.
Check out post 222 - you are describing all atheists as hard atheists, while the majority of us are soft atheists.
Oh dear.
Indeed, the irony that I found so delicious was the following unintentially hilarious sentence (emphasis mine):
"Because they lack any form of Spiritual Maturity, atheists have a distinct probability of resorting to petty name-calling whenever discussing politics with someone of a different opinion."
So it's not a matter of faith but pure fact?
(for the record, I believe in the Resurrection...but as a matter of faith, not fact. Else, it's not religion)
I've been doing some amateur study of Resurrection apologetics. You might be interested in a book titled The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona. It systematically goes through all the naturalistic explanations to date (it's a 2004 book) for the Resurrection and shows the problems with each. It is an exhaustive study which shows that the most plausible explanation for the widely accepted histocial facts, acecpted even by skeptical scholars, is that Jesus rose from the dead after crucifixion. Of course, a person with an emotional or volitional barrier to accepting the Resurrection probably wouldn't be convinced.
It's too long to lay out here, but you might be interested in checking out the book.
Thanks for the recommendation!
Which of the others actually pulled it off?
"Which of the others actually pulled it off?"
According to the myths, all of 'em.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.