If the resurrection was false, the Jews and the Romans would have proved it 1970 years ago (and there would be records to that affect). No records exist, because the resurrection happened.
45 comments
OK lets take a deep breath and go with the facts...
" Day 45: Dear diary, we killed a guy today, he didn't rise from death. Day 46: Dear diary, we killed three guys today, neither of them rose from death. Day 47: Killed one guy and a dog today. The guy appeared to rise from death, but turns out he wasn't quite gone in the first place. Day 48: We fixed the embarrasing mistake from yesterday. Day 49: Day off, killed some time, it did not rise from death."
Yeah... 'cause that totally happened. At any rate... we all know that the bible is perfect proof... yeah.
My high school teachers drum a lesson into our heads all fundies must make note of.
ALL INFORMATION MUST BE BACKED UP BY MULTIPLE CREDIBLE ACADEMIC SOURCES AND CITATIONS MUST BE PROVIDED FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED!!!!!
No, I get it. I really do. In their world, lack-of-evidence IS proof. That's the proof they have for their god, and now it seems that's the proof for the resurrection as well.
They aren't taught to believe in something in SPITE of lack of evidence, but BECAUSE of lack of evidence.
Think of the scams we could run on them! If only I had their lack of morals, I could be rich! rich I tells ya....
Can't we say the same for Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, Champ, etc.? I think I'll invent my own. There is a ghost ship in Boston Harbor, to rival the Flying Dutchman . If it doesn't exist, someone would have proved it and documented it. Since nobody has proved Boston Harbor isn't haunted by Nix's Mate, et al., Boston Harbor is haunted.
I understand what Joelch is saying. All the Romans and Jews needed to do to discredit Christianity was to produce the body of Christ.
Two questions....
1) Assuming Jesus really died, where did his body go?
2) If Jesus didn't really die, why didn't Pontius Pilate or the other high-ranking figures named in the gospel accounts not defend themselves from the charges of having executed the man?
No news at all is very good news, eh?
When did they start reporting non-resurrections in official records? Something like a dead man coming to life, that would seem noteworthy all around. Nothing there either.
> If the resurrection was false, the Jews and the Romans would have proved it <
It's proven false as soon as you claim it, since it's impossible.
Yeah, Again: Prove something didn't happen.
Here's how the goalpost thing works, you have to get it through them, not move them. In every game the goalposts stay in place.
All we ask is you score once under the rules and we'll take the arrogance as earned (once)
They....didn't record that a corpse stayed dead....because they had no reason to think that a corpse wouldn't stay dead....so the corpse must not have stayed dead...?
The Romans had to face the real world. And in the real world, people do not rise from the grave, except in your deistic fantasies and Altered Beast. If Jesus had risen from the dead, the Romans would have made a record of that, probably using the phrase "Holy Shiticus" to describe it. If there is no record that Jesus did not rise, it isn't because he did, but because nobody had any expectation that he would. If no record that he did rise exists, that's because HE DIDN'T!!!
A man was killed, his followers went to look for the corpse, his followers say there was no corpse. Non-followers accuse them of having stolen the corpse (Matthew)
possible explanations:
a) unlike every other man who ever died, this one rose back to life, ascended to heaven and was in fact the son of God
b)his followers stole the corpse and are shameless liars
Which is more likely?
YES ! the jews and Romans kept records of everything..
oh wait ..
everything that really happened, so no records might mean it never happened. No Jesus of Nazaretyh born in Bethlehem, no trial, no execution and no newsflash on the empty grave.
oh well..
There are no records that the big New York earthquake in 1947 didn't happen and didn't destroy Manhattan. Therefore, Manhattan was destroyed in 1947.
Why or how the flying fuck would there be records of something that DIDN'T happen?? Even by fundie standards this is moronic in the extreme.
Unless it's a troll having a bit of fun at Crapture Ready's expense. I must confess, I sometimes am a tiny little bit tempted to do it myself...
In the early days of Christianity, there was no need to try and prove it to be false. Christianity was just one of many god-man cults that thrived in the Roman Empire. The only thing remarkable about it was its lack of originality.
As Christianity spread, it became a scape-goat for the faltering Roman Empire. Rather than address the real world causes of their economic, social and administrative problem, the leaders of the empire attributed them to the upstart Christians who were tricking people into neglecting the pagan gods of the state. There was no need to try and disprove Christianity. The proof, they claimed, was the correlation between the neglect of the gods of the state and the problems that were tearing the empire apart. Its the same trick used by Christian fanatics in the US today, i.e. insisting that our problems are because too may people are turning away form their god while distracting people from the over-growing coffers of their patrons.
When Constantine threw his support behind Christianity, the Christian leaders finally had the clout to force their agenda on people. Abandoning the actual teachings of their savior, they embarked on a campaign to promote their own narrow dogma, restrict or eliminate competing ideas, and re-write history to validate their position. This campaign is still going on.
Hope that makes it clear jolech2
"No records exist, because the resurrection happened."
You aren't real bright, are you?
Dr. Shrinker said: 'When Constantine (Or Constipated as he should be called) threw his support behind Christianity, the Christian leaders finally had the clout to force their agenda on people. Abandoning the actual teachings of their savior, they embarked on a campaign to promote their own narrow dogma, restrict or eliminate competing ideas'
@ nyctornado
I am quite pleased to burst your bubble when I tell you that, yes, I have heard of the groups you mentioned, as well as many others. And you know what, ALL of them claimed to be practitioners of "the true teachings of Christ." Granted many of those sects held to the teachings regarding passivism. However, history makes it clear that those inconvenient teachings can be ignored when the sect that used to promote them becomes powerful.
The fact is that the gospels are a very poor source for the teachings of Christ. They simply conflict too much. And, when you try to figure in the teachings of Paul you get, well, history speaks volumes on the mess that makes.
Now, if you want to pretend that you have an insight in "the true teachings of Jesus," don't let me stop you. However, do try and realize that when you do you are putting yourself at odds with millions of Christians, Catholic and otherwise, who are equally convinced that you are wrong. Also know that if this belief of yours stem from the gospels, I really have to question whether you have bothered to read them or not.
"You can’t prove it’s not true.” is a ridiculous statement. It’s not up to others to show that an extraordinary claim isn’t true. It’s up to those making the claim to provide evidence and reasons why it IS true. We must have evidence that a person DID commit a crime, for example, not prove that everyone else in the world did not. It's called the burden of proof.
"No records exist"
How very conveeeeeeenient for you. [/hyper-sarcasm]
Sumeria. Babylon. Egypt. Rome. China. These ancient civilisations are known about because of the records found; clay tablets, papyrii, wax tablets, carvings on walls, columns & stelae, temples etc. Especially in the case of ancient Rome, China & Egypt.
Ramses II. Acknowledged as the greatest pharaoh by historians & Egyptologists, precisely because we know so much about him via datable records. Oh and having an actual DNA-analysable body does him no harm whatsoever as to his existence , neither. Can the same be said about your 'Jesus'...? Because if you fundies can't present evidence to our satisfaction (in b4 the 'Turin Shroud': proven to be a medieval fake , via carbon dating & other tests), then you yourselves will have admitted - and therefore proved - that Jesus doesn't exist; never had, and never will .
Facts fuck 'Faith'. Every time.
"because the resurrection happened"
Therefore making the whole 'Sacrifice' aspect of the process completely pointless.
...oh, and 'If. ' [/Spartan Laconic Wit]
So...the fact that they didn't document someone staying in their grave nice and cozy is proof that the person resurrected now?
Good lord, it's a wonder they find any bones there at all.
If the resurrection was false, the Jews and the Romans would have proved it 1970 years ago (and there would be records to that affect). No records exist, because christians and fire happened.
Fixed for you.
Or put another way, even if they did have records, (which as others have said is insanely unlikely) Christians have had a long time to destroy them.
Whoever is in charge of keeping records of things that don't happen is doing a real, really crappy job.
I went to look yesterday for a record of my not retiring a billionaire in Hawaii and couldn't find anything anywhere. Does that mean I actually am a billionaire retired in Hawaii? I want you to convince my bank of that.
“If the resurrection was false,”
“the Jews and the Romans would have proved it 1970 years ago”
"(and there would be records to that affect).”
"No records exist, because the resurrection happened.”
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
