Wrong. That’s “not” my claim, nor has it ever been.
You:
You both totally IGNORED the most important point that made:NONE of the NUMEROUS people that I listed (i.e. Budda, Muhammad, Confucius, etc.) EVER ROSE FROM THE DEAD, and/or REMAINED ALIVE--like the Lord Jesus.
Your assertion is that Jesus was resurrected. Your proof thus far is the Bible. You cannot show me more direct proof for Jesus being resurrected because no such proof exists. But you're welcome to try.
You see, I’ve given you “extra-biblical” evidence, and “scientific” revelations in the Bible that were revealed “thousands” and “hundreds” of years before modern scientists discovered them (101 to be exact)—but you “run” in the other direction so to speak, every time I bring these “irrefutable”, “claim-proving facts” up.
1. The Bible cannot provide irrefutable scientific evidence, because it does not use scientific method to provide actual theories, and its claims cannot be independently replicated or verified. It is, by definition, a tool of mythos and therefore any 'predictions' it makes about scientific knowledge are luck.
Being right about a conclusion despite a lack of evidence or faulty premises does not make for an irrefutable argument.
2. Youtube links to people claiming things aren't convincing. I will not entertain a multitude of external videos taking up my valuable time simply because you cannot concisely and easily convey your point. Videos themselves do not provide evidence, but present it. Find readable sources. If they exist.
You see, your source for Thor’s goats does not have the “track record” that the Bible has. The Bible has “archaeological” weight, “extra-biblical” credence, scientific “foreknowledge”, and predictive (i.e. prophetic) power.
1. Archaeological weight is a misleading term. The walls of Troy were uncovered; this does not mean the Iliad is entirely fact or even mostly fact.
2. I don't think you know what scientific really means. In order for a claim to be scientific, it must withstand the scientific method. Anything else is an untested claim, which may ring true or false, and may be either for entirely different reasons.
If I say that the earth is round because people have round eyes, I am right for the wrong reasons.
3. Thor's goats are mythos; by attacking their credibility you miss the obvious point - that Jesus cannot be substantiated without claims that beg for real evidence. "The Bible says so" is not evidence. "Youtube supports Bible's such and such" is not evidence. Evidence is something tangible that substantiates he even existed, much less that he is of divine parentage.
1. My last post to Adam_PoE was not a wall of text. Go back and look for yourself.
I ignore your walls of text largely because I don't always want to sift through your verbal diarrhea just to find something to respond to every single time we debate. I can present my arguments simply; why can't you?
2. YouTube links aren’t proof? Then someone should break the news to Patience_Leech.
Unless the Youtube video shows Jesus facetiming in 33 AD, I don't thing you have reason to claim it's proof of anything but that a video exists which claims such and such. I'm sure if I spent valuable time I could find Youtube videos which support hidden Illuminati lizard people in the Denver International Airport if I wanted. But I don't.
3. I “keep” giving you “proof” but you won’t examine it (i.e. links to “scientific” facts revealed in the Bible thousands and hundreds of years before modern scientists discovered them, and prophecies which predict historical events with “better-than-laser-precision”, and “accuracy”).It’s not my fault that you appear to be “afraid” of finding out the truth.
You barf Youtube videos on me I won't watch. An idiot can youtube anti-vaxxer 'proof' or 'proof' that Tupac is alive. The internet is filled with disinformation. Provide me something concrete. Remember the burden of proof is on you for making the large claims.
Also, I didn’t know that “eyewitness” testimony was not acceptable.
Eyewitness testimony, depending on the circumstance, can be very unreliable. Human memory is susceptible to stress, bias, fatigue, external influences, and even heat. 12 Angry Men does a better job of showcasing how unreliable it is than anything I could say further.
1. Wrong. The Bible is “not” a human construct.If you examined the information in my links you would “know” this by now—but it appears that you are “afraid” to do this.
1. The Bible is printed/written by individuals. It did not come into being through supernatural means. If you believe this, you must provide proof for this exceptional claim, as no other books in our world come from anything other than living beings.
If you intend to argue that the Bible is divinely inspired, you could elaborate on why God seems to be suffering a personality change between OT and NT, or why it's okay to have bears eat children, treat women as objects, sell slaves, or why parts of Matthew, Mark and Luke are basically retellings of the same stories with variation.
2. Again, your saturation of biased videos does not sway me. I've done plenty of my own sifting through the garbage over the years. Unless you have Jesus's social security number on photocopy, I'm not interested in apologist shit.
3.
2. Wrong. “God” divinely, and providentially compiled “His” Word into what we call the Bible.The link below provides insight into His process.
Click and scroll down https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/canon.cfm
What specifically am I looking for? Excerpts from religious individuals who conclude the books are divinely inspired do not an argument make. I could start pulling out scholarly articles which refute their divine nature. Would the existence of block quotes invalidate your claim?
Also, here’s the approximate “dates” that the various Books of the Bible were written.“Not” one gospel was, as you erroneously claim, was written,
“…over a hundred years after Christ apparently lived….”
Click and scroll down to New Testament since you mentioned “gospels”, or scroll down to Old Testament (depending on which Books you want the approximate date for) https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2...-bible-written/
Well, this source notes that the book of Matthew was likely not written by him at all and dates near the end of the first century. Comparatively, this would be like an adult today writing about Winston Churchill with only collected oral and written stories from a small group of people which have endured the telephone game for a few generations.
Damning proof indeed.
3. Wrong. Peter, James, John, Matthew, and possibly Jude were five of the original twelve apostles of the Lamb (i.e. Jesus Christ), “and” His disciples.All “five” were given divine inspiration to pen Scripture—and “personally” knew Jesus in life.
See above. The gospels are named for apostles, but cannot be accurately traced to them. It's particularly concerning that nothing exists even in Jesus' own hand. Can you explain that?
4. Wrong. Whether I bold, highlight, italicize, or underlined—what you fail to admit is that I have “not” altered, nor changed the “meaning” of any translated word in the Bible in any way.I know it’s difficult for you to come to terms with the Words of the Lord Jesus regarding a “majority” of people going to Hell, but it’s the “truth”.
"Truth" is either subjective or objective. In order for it to be "objective", the proof must be universal. "Gospels" "say" "so" is not objective. Try again.
Also, ancient tongues in which the Bible was originally composed do not translate perfectly into English. Greek, for example, has multiple meanings and cultural differences in word usage. When you "literally" ascribe meaning to Bible passages which are several times translated, you risk being off because of liberties or errors on behalf of human translators.
It's so simple it's axiomatic.
5. I don’t “think” that the Bible is the end-all.I “know” that the Bible is the Word of the living God.
You're confusing knowledge with blind faith and belief. They are not the same. If I have blind faith and belief that I will win the lottery and tomorrow be a rich man, this is not knowledge. If a book my parents pushed on me which told me I should bet on certain numbers because they would win influenced my belief, I couldn't rightly say I knew anything.
And hell, more Youtube videos of preacher types pushing their idiocy. I'll pass, thanks.