Is the Bible "evidence" when it comes to Science?

chair

Well-known member
This came up in a different thread:
Here is a test to see if the Bible is true:
Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen.And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty...

In other words, if Christ was not raised from the dead, Christianity (and the Bible by extension) is false. On the other hand, if Christ WAS raised from the dead, then all other religions and beliefs (including the belief that the universe is old, and not less than 10,000 years) are false.

Can you prove that Christ was raised from the dead?
 
To YOU??? Nope.

Next question??

LOL!

Luke 16

22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
25 But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
 

Bob Carabbio

New member
Who can you prove it to? Only people who already believe it?
How is that a basis for scientific discussion?

NOBODY. "Scientific discussions" in this case mean ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. They're nothing but the BLIND leading the Blind.

The HOLY SPIRIT can PROVE things to you. I'm not Him.

Next question?
 

The Berean

Well-known member
For starters, something that wouldn't hold equally well for another religion and their holy book.

I don't understand. The Bible makes the historical claim that Jesus died and was supernaturally resurrected from the dead and that his followers and 500 other people saw Jesus alive after his death on the cross. Several of the New Testament writers claim to be first person witnesses to these events. Do believe that the claim that Jesus rose from the dead is not a factual historical event?

I asked you what type of evidence you would accept but you really didn't answer the question.
 

chair

Well-known member
I don't understand. The Bible makes the historical claim that Jesus died and was supernaturally resurrected from the dead and that his followers and 500 other people saw Jesus alive after his death on the cross. Several of the New Testament writers claim to be first person witnesses to these events. Do believe that the claim that Jesus rose from the dead is not a factual historical event?

I asked you what type of evidence you would accept but you really didn't answer the question.

Oh, I did answer, but not clearly enough.

What you just presented was a claim by your holy book that an event happened, and a claim by the same holy book that 500 people witnessed the event.
How is that different than claims made by the Koran, or Book of Mormon, or a hundred other religious claims?

Edit:
Think about this, I realized that I should point out a few related things. I've had this discussion before...
1. The claim that many people witnessed something is just another claim. You could say that "yeah- but if it wasn't true, people would have noticed and rejected it". Except that people believe all sorts of weird things, especially (but not only!) if they happened a while back.
2. I am aware that 'proofs' that the Old Testament is true have the same shortcomings.
3. Jesus rising form the dead is an unusual occurrence- a miracle. One would expect very solid evidence for it actually happening.
4. Those who choose to accept the New Testament story are welcome to- but don't expect others to buy into it- and don't expect others to accept the Bible as a solid fact when discussing scientific matters.
 
Last edited:

The Berean

Well-known member
Oh, I did answer, but not clearly enough.

What you just presented was a claim by your holy book that an event happened, and a claim by the same holy book that 500 people witnessed the event.
How is that different than claims made by the Koran, or Book of Mormon, or a hundred other religious claims?

Edit:
Think about this, I realized that I should point out a few related things. I've had this discussion before...
1. The claim that many people witnessed something is just another claim. You could say that "yeah- but if it wasn't true, people would have noticed and rejected it". Except that people believe all sorts of weird things, especially (but not only!) if they happened a while back.
2. I am aware that 'proofs' that the Old Testament is true have the same shortcomings.
3. Jesus rising form the dead is an unusual occurrence- a miracle. One would expect very solid evidence for it actually happening.
4. Those who choose to accept the New Testament story are welcome to- but don't expect others to buy into it- and don't expect others to accept the Bible as a solid fact when discussing scientific matters.
Ok but my question is what TYPE of evidence would you consider convincing? You said you would expect solid evidence. What would this solid evidence entail? So first person testimonies are not convincing to you it seems. Are you expecting forensic evidence of some type? If first person accounts do not convince you then do you have doubts about historical documents in general? Do you believe Julius Caesar was a real person and was assassinated? Do you believe that Spartacus existed and led a massive slave revolt?

I know you are Jewish. Do you consider what is written about the patriarchs in Genesis, Exodus, or the narrative of David and Solomon to be actual real history? Do you believe that God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah? Do you believe Jacob wrestled a supernatural being?
 

chair

Well-known member
Ok but my question is what TYPE of evidence would you consider convincing? You said you would expect solid evidence. What would this solid evidence entail? So first person testimonies are not convincing to you it seems. Are you expecting forensic evidence of some type? If first person accounts do not convince you then do you have doubts about historical documents in general? Do you believe Julius Caesar was a real person and was assassinated? Do you believe that Spartacus existed and led a massive slave revolt?

I know you are Jewish. Do you consider what is written about the patriarchs in Genesis, Exodus, or the narrative of David and Solomon to be actual real history? Do you believe that God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah? Do you believe Jacob wrestled a supernatural being?

Evidence would have to be external histories, or archaeological evidence.

I personally accept the Old Testament, but I am aware that I only accept it because of Tradition. I cannot prove it that it is true to others. And I am aware that it is self contradictory in places.
 

7djengo7

New member
This came up in a different thread:


Can you prove that Christ was raised from the dead?

And in that same thread, you wrote

prove to me that "He has been raised from the dead"

and then I asked you

By "prove to me", what exactly are you requesting us to do? To force you, against your will, to switch from your present denial that Jesus has been raised from the dead to belief that Jesus has been raised from the dead?

If not that, then what (if anything) do you mean by "prove to me"?

Of course, you never answered the question as to what (if anything) you meant by "prove to me". Instead, you just fled the scene and started this thread, so as to repeat the same stupidity you had handed out in the other thread.

So long as you are incapable of telling us exactly what it would be for us to "prove to [you]" something you obviously, with an iron will, are willing to refuse to believe, and willing to deny, you're going to keep forcing yourself to continue having your conversation with yourself, alone. But, that seems to be the way you like it anyway, seeing as you're an enemy of the truth.
 

7djengo7

New member
Who can you prove it to? Only people who already believe it?
How is that a basis for scientific discussion?

How is your inability and failure to tell us what (if anything) you mean by "prove" the basis for rational discussion?
 
Top