I'm a practising Anglican Christian...

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Anyway, 600 people people saw me scale the Eiffel Tower on the outside yesterday, also the Thirteen, Rocky and Jim the brother of Bod.

That is truly an act of sacrifice for ones beliefs.....banging out antitheist posts for religionethics while hanging off the side of the Eiffel Tower.

[torridon]

There is evidence, albeit non-conclusive, but you ignore it because it doesn't fit your world-view. For one thing, he was said to have appeared to approximately 200 people on one occasion, most of whom were still alive when Paul wrote about it - the point being "if you don't believe me, go and ask them!". There is also the fact that the apostles were willing to die for their belief - they'd hardly have been willing if they knew it to be false.

That rather smacks of 'the Bible must be true because the Bible says so'. Whatever happened to 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence' ?  There is no independent verification of the Resurrection from the historical record at all.

[jeremyp]

That the 500 were made is a positive assertion and infers an actual event of someone making it up.

Therefore I suppose you have evidence of that happening.

It's there in the Bible. It wouldn't be if somebody hadn't made it up.

[jeremyp]

Shite analogy

Clearly it's a good analogy because, having no counter argument, you just resort to insulting it.

Christian martyrdom is historically documented

but not the martyrdom of the Apostles specifically, unless you are counting the Biblical texts but it's the Biblical texts that we are arguing about.

JK Rowling is paid millions for having made up Voldemort

You're missing the point. It was claimed that the Apostles being martyred was evidence that Jesus was resurrected. I brought up the example to refute the logic of that argument. I do not have to prove that the stories are fiction only that somebody else's (Steve H's) assumption that they are fact is faulty.

[jeremyp]

That is truly an act of sacrifice for ones beliefs.....banging out antitheist posts for religionethics while hanging off the side of the Eiffel Tower.

I took my iPad with me.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I took my iPad with me.

That is just stretching credibility too far.

[jeremyp]

That is just stretching credibility too far.

So, in your opinion, me taking an iPad with me whilst scaling the Eiffel Tower is less credible than a dead person coming back to life.

Have you got any idea how stupid you sound to anybody who hasn’t drunk the Christian Koolade?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So, in your opinion, me taking an iPad with me whilst scaling the Eiffel Tower is less credible than a dead person coming back to life.

Have you got any idea how stupid you sound to anybody who hasn’t drunk the Christian Koolade?

Sorry Jeremy Im working out which is the most iconic image you hanging off the side the eiffel tower or King Kong off the Empire state building.
With regard the resurrection perhaps you should be concentrating on how you stand with God.

Am I worried that I sound stupid to New atheists....what do you think?

[SteveH]

Am I worried that I sound stupid to New atheists....what do you think?

https://media.giphy.com/media/QkuLPrw0zK7ja/200.gif

[Dicky Underpants]

There is evidence, albeit non-conclusive, but you ignore it because it doesn't fit your world-view. For one thing, he was said to have appeared to approximately 200 people on one occasion, most of whom were still alive when Paul wrote about it - the point being "if you don't believe me, go and ask them!". There is also the fact that the apostles were willing to die for their belief - they'd hardly have been willing if they knew it to be false.

Blimey! Are you now saying you're prepared to believe in a 'literal' resurrection? How the hell does that square with the 'non-realist' god approach? I suppose that 'process theology' might just be able to accommodate such ideas, but more in the sense that 'spirit' or 'life-force' survives death (it seems to me that there's not much difference between process theology and Bergson's ideas of Creative Evolution)

[Dicky Underpants]

How can you be christian if your beliefs can dispense with Christ altogether when you reduce them down.

I wonder then how you are defining Christian here.

It strikes me that Steve takes his faith quite seriously since its restoration through liberal christianity seemed very important to him.

It strikes me that Steve is struggling to rescue something of value in the Christian tradition, in the hope that (particularly) the Anglican Church may be able to accommodate all the views of the Critical Period, and particularly the later speculations of Paul Tillich, Bonhoeffer and even more non-traditionalist thinkers such as Don Cupitt, Jack Spong and indeed, Richard Holloway.
When he finally does decide to come down on one side of the fence or the other, I suspect it will not be too close to your own cherished 'ground of belief' (to misquote Tillich).

[jeremyp]

With regard the resurrection perhaps you should be concentrating on how you stand with God.

Why? I might as well worry about how I stand with Albus Dumbledore.

Am I worried that I sound stupid to New atheists....what do you think?

It depends on how much you want to recruit new blood into your religion.

[SteveH]

Blimey! Are you now saying you're prepared to believe in a 'literal' resurrection? How the hell does that square with the 'non-realist' god approach? I suppose that 'process theology' might just be able to accommodate such ideas, but more in the sense that 'spirit' or 'life-force' survives death (it seems to me that there's not much difference between process theology and Bergson's ideas of Creative Evolution)

I did say "non-conclusive". To be honest, I was just pissed off with yet another airy, argument-free statement from that woman.

[jeremyp]

I did say "non-conclusive". To be honest, I was just pissed off with yet another airy, argument-free statement from that woman.

But her statement was right to a first approximation.

Such evidence as exists only shows that some Christians at the end of the first century believed Jesus resurrected, not that he actually did.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

That rather smacks of 'the Bible must be true because the Bible says so'. Whatever happened to 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence' ?  There is no independent verification of the Resurrection from the historical record at all.

Interesting point since many atheists Ive spoken to say witnessing a resurrection would clinch the existence of God for them.

So Torridon.......what would someone who was "independent" make of a resurrection?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Why? I might as well worry about how I stand with Albus Dumbledore.It depends on how much you want to recruit new blood into your religion.

More shocking ignorance from a New Atheist.