Go Back   Sports Central Message Boards > Community Discussion > The Lounge > Politics & Religion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-23-2008, 01:56 PM   #76
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by catman View Post
The resurrection is as well documented as any event in history.
We've officially hit rock bottom in here.

buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2008, 03:32 PM   #77
The Irish
Mr. Cellophane
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 95
The Irish is on a distinguished road
Default

This is in part what is wrong with hardcore Christians. Once hardcore Christians get an idea they are unwilling to see anyone else's view point as even remotely possible, and unwilling to belief that maybe their view is wrong. I'm not saying he is wrong. I am saying the bible is not a reliable source. I am saying that one can not come to the conclusion that the resurrection happened based solely on the word of the bible. It is not a history book. It was written to teach lessons, and to show that God cares for his people. So much so that he would give up his only son.
__________________
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam

They say the best weapon is one you never have to fire. I, respectfully, disagree. I say the best weapon is one you only have to fire once! That's how dad did it, that's how America does it, and it's worked out pretty well so far. - Tony Stark
The Irish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 12:33 AM   #78
catman
Humble MLB Moderator
 
catman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 9,325
catman will become famous soon enough
Default

Irish, if one of the ranking experts on admissability of evidence says something is admissable, I would suggest that it likely is.
If the source is the only problem, just look at the opinion of the expert -- the testimonies are admissable.
Again, are you saying that you know more than Mr. Greenleaf does? If so, I would like to see your credentials. If not, stop complaining about the source of the testimonies. They are considered to be factual enough to be considered as evidence in a courtroom by one who is the ranking expert in that field. That should be good enough for even you to accept.
__________________
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans...." John Lennon

Catman
Rest in Peace, Buck. You were truly a giant among men.
catman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 12:35 AM   #79
catman
Humble MLB Moderator
 
catman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 9,325
catman will become famous soon enough
Default

And Buck, why does the fact that the resurrection is as well documented, according to an expert in the field of admissability of evidence, bother you? Either you believe in it or you don't. No one forces you do change yourself for them, or at least they shouldn't.
__________________
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans...." John Lennon

Catman
Rest in Peace, Buck. You were truly a giant among men.
catman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 12:38 AM   #80
catman
Humble MLB Moderator
 
catman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 9,325
catman will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CKFresh View Post
Admissable in court is not the same thing as "100% true."

Would you agree with that?
I would agree with this statement. It just means that it can be brought in for a jury to decide on for itself.
This said, your statement that there is no proof of divinity is not a correct one.
__________________
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans...." John Lennon

Catman
Rest in Peace, Buck. You were truly a giant among men.
catman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 01:04 AM   #81
The Irish
Mr. Cellophane
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 95
The Irish is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by catman View Post
Irish, if one of the ranking experts on admissability of evidence says something is admissable, I would suggest that it likely is.
If the source is the only problem, just look at the opinion of the expert -- the testimonies are admissable.
Again, are you saying that you know more than Mr. Greenleaf does? If so, I would like to see your credentials. If not, stop complaining about the source of the testimonies. They are considered to be factual enough to be considered as evidence in a courtroom by one who is the ranking expert in that field. That should be good enough for even you to accept.
He never says it is admissable in a courtroom. He never even uses the phrase "admissable in court." He says: "Greenleaf concluded that according to the jurisdiction of legal evidence the resurrection of Jesus Christ was the best supported event in all of history!" That sounds to me like he is not even letting the evidence go into a courtroom. Sounds to me like he is just proclaiming the resurrection true based on the evidence.

Passages from a collection of short stories is not enough to prove the resurrection. You could not take passages from the bible into a courtroom and prove the resurrection. If you tried the other lawyer would slaughter you.

Personally I think that whole passage screams stunt to bring in new members.
__________________
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam

They say the best weapon is one you never have to fire. I, respectfully, disagree. I say the best weapon is one you only have to fire once! That's how dad did it, that's how America does it, and it's worked out pretty well so far. - Tony Stark
The Irish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 11:32 AM   #82
catman
Humble MLB Moderator
 
catman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 9,325
catman will become famous soon enough
Default

Irish, Simon Greenleaf was the ranking expert on admissability of evidence and he said that the testimonies would have been admissable. That should be good enough for even one like you who know more about admissability than he did.
Perhaps you have not read enough of the 64 pages of stories about his life and his studies to find the pearls of wisdom that you need to understand.
I am not asking anyone to change the way they believe. I am simply saying the evidence is there supporting the claim of Christ's divinity. The individual must decide whether to believe it or not.
__________________
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans...." John Lennon

Catman
Rest in Peace, Buck. You were truly a giant among men.
catman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2008, 03:05 PM   #83
Montrovant
Hatecarver
 
Montrovant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tampa
Posts: 685
Montrovant is on a distinguished road
Default

catman, I think the problem is you aren't offering new evidence. It's the same old evidence (the bible), with one man saying the witnesses to the resurrection would be admissible in court. That doesn't even say it's true, simply that their testimony would be allowed. But you are taking what this one man has said and somehow making it out as proof the event took place, which it clearly is not. At best, it's an emphasis of pre-existing evidence.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by CKFresh View Post
I find it strange that people sit at home, around the dinner table and think, "Damnit! People are gay!"
Montrovant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 01:13 AM   #84
catman
Humble MLB Moderator
 
catman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 9,325
catman will become famous soon enough
Default

I am saying that the evidence contained in the Bible would be allowed to be entered into a court. The jury would be able to decide for themselves if the event happened or not.
__________________
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans...." John Lennon

Catman
Rest in Peace, Buck. You were truly a giant among men.
catman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 02:45 PM   #85
The Irish
Mr. Cellophane
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 95
The Irish is on a distinguished road
Default

Convincing 12 people the resurrection happened based on evidence from the bible would be very, very difficult, provided the opposing lawyer was competent.
__________________
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam

They say the best weapon is one you never have to fire. I, respectfully, disagree. I say the best weapon is one you only have to fire once! That's how dad did it, that's how America does it, and it's worked out pretty well so far. - Tony Stark
The Irish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 02:53 PM   #86
CKFresh
Most Hated Member
 
CKFresh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 7,377
CKFresh will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Irish View Post
Convincing 12 people the resurrection happened based on evidence from the bible would be very, very difficult, provided the opposing lawyer was competent.
Not very difficult, but impossible, assuming that the jury followed the rules of "beyond a reasonable doubt."
__________________
Do yourself a favor, become your own savior.

Think Fresh.
CKFresh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 04:34 PM   #87
catman
Humble MLB Moderator
 
catman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 9,325
catman will become famous soon enough
Default

At least the testimonies would be allowed to be submitted as evidence. It would be difficult to refute them, using comparable evidence. Where does the disproving testimony come from?
__________________
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans...." John Lennon

Catman
Rest in Peace, Buck. You were truly a giant among men.
catman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 06:11 PM   #88
CKFresh
Most Hated Member
 
CKFresh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 7,377
CKFresh will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by catman View Post
At least the testimonies would be allowed to be submitted as evidence. It would be difficult to refute them, using comparable evidence. Where does the disproving testimony come from?
Don't need it.

"Reasonable doubt." That is the standard. Information that is 2000 years old, and contained in a book that also talks about a talking snake, is information that doesn't pass the threshold of "beyond a reasonable doubt."

It would be like testimony from an individual. If the oppisition can prove that the person is unreliable, they do not need disproving testimony.

The Bible is unreliable, therefore that "testimony" wouldn't do much to make the case for the resurrection.
__________________
Do yourself a favor, become your own savior.

Think Fresh.
CKFresh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 07:24 PM   #89
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by catman View Post
And Buck, why does the fact that the resurrection is as well documented, according to an expert in the field of admissability of evidence, bother you? Either you believe in it or you don't. No one forces you do change yourself for them, or at least they shouldn't.
Why are we taking a POV of the American Justice System to determine the existence of something (cuz that's what we are doing)?

I mean...is it because of the American Justice System's terrific record of being fair, honest and reputable (tries not to laugh during typing)?

In any event, you said...

The resurrection is as well documented as any event in history.

Which is just plain outrageous. Nearly every "event" that has occured within the lifetime of a large percentage of the people currently living is better documented than something that allegedly went down 2,000 years ago because we have LIVING EYE WITNESSES. I understand it is academia but have you ever heard of primary and secondary sources in anthropology/history/the other social sciences?

Again, this turns into a debate of believing or not believing in The Bible. I don't care what people believe or not including the whole intelligent design crowd either. All I'm saying is simply believe it on your own terms in private and not try to twist/bend/prove faith within the confines of science/government. That has been the history of organized religion since the alleged resurrection and all it does is a disservice to THE FAITH of those who believe it as well as make the faith look absolutely bogus. Plus it does a disservice to those who only put stock in science/the government as the governing bodies of day to day living because they must account for the unsubstantiated views of religion (in the eyes of science and government) in policies.

If you wanna believe it...do so. This whole take that you're going to modernize the debate for every generation's advances outside the religious realm is tacky and bogus. I mean...look at how foolish official religious doctrines from the 1700s look today. You'd say they don't look any more foolish than some scientific records but at the very least that discipline wasn't set in stone and people moved forward.

It's like the global warming debate we have in here. No person in here has the intelligence of all the scientists who study it yet everyone throws out facts and figures all the time. But we know one thing: provided there is no hidden motive/$ agenda behind their opinions the overwhelming number of scientists believe global warming is real and man contributes to it.

Now, take me. I am of the opinion that something isn't right. That they're wrong. This is a personality quirk or choice of faith...much like religion is to many folks and may be to you (and I believe it is).

HOWEVER, I would never argue against global warming on a serious level when it came to advancing science and protecting the environment even if I have some kind of "hunch" it isn't real.

This is where you have to seperate your faith/quirk with the overwhelming burden that science...unfettered from corruption...will produce the best results much more often than not.

I would never try to argue against global warming based on anything LOGICAL because there isn't enough evidence to go on. I understand it is my faith and I'm not going to let it dictate or introduce it in any other discipline (as you have with this justice system interlude) and try and prove it.

It's faith. Believe it or not and leave the other stuff be. Everytime you frame a debate of your God vs. the prevailing science/institution of the time it looks foolish.

God vs. the American Justice System?

We have enough problems with the secular stuff at any given time (science and government improve/change based on new info) but we try. I mean...if you're God is Jesus (as a Catholic) and Jesus is black/poor ...I sure as hell would take the American Justice System's prosecution of him if he ALLEGEDLY stole a bottle of milk.

But what does that prove?

Why would one put their God up against such an unstable metamorphic organism such as the American Justice System or any scientific discipline?

The only reason I can think of is that folks who do must believe that the secular stuff is the real reality...so to speak.

Last edited by buckeyefan78; 08-25-2008 at 08:43 PM.
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2008, 08:42 PM   #90
catman
Humble MLB Moderator
 
catman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 9,325
catman will become famous soon enough
Default

No problem, Buck. Just showing that there is documentation for the resurrection that is credible and believable.
__________________
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans...." John Lennon

Catman
Rest in Peace, Buck. You were truly a giant among men.
catman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BCS Rejects Playoff Proposal themush College Football 10 08-03-2008 11:03 PM
What do you guys think about this 6-team playoff proposal? govols College Football 20 12-02-2002 10:54 PM
Ha ha (NOT!) .... VERY funny, Patrick. lmanchur. The Lounge 10 07-04-2001 01:21 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:31 AM.