What evidence is there for the miracles of the Bible OUTSIDE of the Bible?

by punkofnice 81 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Seraphim23
    Seraphim23

    It has to be said that there are different qualities of anecdotal evidence of course.

  • bohm
    bohm

    So in other words, the anecdotal evidence is worse than for big foot? Because we have anecdotal evidence of people who have seen big foot in person...

  • tec
    tec

    I would say the living and speaking Christ, is evidence of His resurrection. That is outside of the bible.

    But unless some experience that for themselves, it won't count. Same as any other miracle. Though even then, miracles that might happen today would more likely be classified by many as something simply 'unexplained'.

    On top of that though... even Christ did not do miracles in places there was so little faith. And while we have lots of religion and religious people, religion and faith are not the same thing. Especially as Christ is written to have wondered if He would even find faith on the earth when He returned.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • EntirelyPossible
    EntirelyPossible

    I would say the living and speaking Christ, is evidence of His resurrection.

    You would be incorrect as is it not independently verfiable.

    That is outside of the bible.

    Also incorrect. You would never have heard of Jesus if it weren't for the Bible. No Bible, no Jesus.

  • whathappened
    whathappened

    Entirely possible, your comment sums it up.

  • cofty
    cofty
    there are different qualities of anecdotal evidence of course - Seraphim23

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You offer us extraordinary claims supported by the flimsiest of evidence.

    That is not rational.

    Tammy - Thousands of people attest to being eyewitnesses of the miracles of Sri Sathya Sai Baba. You dismiss them without a second thought and rightly so.

    This should tell you how we feel about your resurrection stories.

  • tec
    tec

    You would be incorrect as is it not independently verfiable.

    It is evidence for anyone who goes to Him and hears Him. Punk only asked if there was evidence outside the bible, right?

    Also incorrect. You would never have heard of Jesus if it weren't for the Bible. No Bible, no Jesus.

    You have absolutely no way of knowing something like this.

    There was no bible for a long time. People who had not met Christ in the flesh, still heard of Him... and were pointed to Him by others who did know Him. The gospels are just a written account of what those witnesses told others.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • EntirelyPossible
    EntirelyPossible

    It is evidence for anyone who goes to Him and hears Him. Punk only asked if there was evidence outside the bible, right?

    ev·i·dence

    /'ev?d?ns/

    Noun
    The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
    Verb
    Be or show evidence of.

    Personal sounds inside someone's head can't demonstrate anything (the Tshirt test failure proved that) and it van never be or show evidence since it is not demonstrable. It is simply something a person gives credence to. Otherwise, Allah, Ms. Cleo and schizophrenic voices are also evidence (which they clearly are not).

    What you are describing is an andecdote.

    You have absolutely no way of knowing something like this.

    Yes. I do. The only place he is mentioned is the Bible. someone living in the past 1800 years has no way of knowing anything about Jesus except through what was written down.

    Have people raised in isolation suddenly heard of him? If not, why not?

    There was no bible for a long time. People who had not met Christ in the flesh, still heard of Him... and were pointed to Him by others who did know Him. The gospels are just a written account of what those witnesses told others.

    I said YOU would never have heard of him, but since you want to talk about contemporaries, we can do that.

    During the time Christ lived and after his death, of course people heard about him orally. They were mostly illiterate and stories were circulating orally. In later times, it's all what's written down. There is no one that heard the story from someone that heard the story from someone that was there.

    It's ALL and ONLY what's written down until people start hearing voices and claiming it's Jesus.

  • tec
    tec

    If nothing was written down, you think there would not have been people who still passed their accounts on orally?

    Not that it matters what we think on that matter. We cannot know that this would not have happened.. because that is not the way it did happen. Something WAS written down. WE cannot know what would have happened if nothing was written down, and people instead continued to give an oral witness pointing TO Christ; for others to then go to Christ themselves.

    Btw... anecdotal evidence... is still evidence. Might not be great evidence, but that does not mean it is false. It is just a particular form of evidence. Now it might not mean anything to someone other than the one hearing Christ... not denying that... but it certainly is evidence for the one who DOES hear Christ.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • EntirelyPossible
    EntirelyPossible

    Not that it matters what we think on that matter.

    It totally does. It amazes me how you use one idea ("I think I hear Jesus so it totes matters!") and then dismiss that when it doesn't hold true with what you choose to believe ("Despite reality, it totes DOESN'T matter what we think!")

    It's amazing to watch the chopped logic pretzel your brain has to go through to justify the ridiculous things you say.

    In any event, without the Bible, you would know nothing of Jesus. He has never spontaneoustly appeared to people living in isolation, never written a flaming persistent message in the sky, never kept his word and returned. You rely on the Bible when it suits you and treat it toilet paper when it doesn't.

    Btw... anecdotal evidence... is still evidence.

    Irrelevant. You specifically decided to stick to what Punk asked for (and got it wrong, BTW). He asked for substantial evidence outside of thje holy books showing their miracle to be true. He did not ask why you beleive your particular version of woo.

    To answer his question, there is none and you have not provided any.

    There is a reason anecdotes are never counted as evidence in court, in science, in accounting, basically anywhere it counts.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit