Proof of the resurection of Jesus Christ?

by Chap 53 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  hooberus

  Firstly I'll deal with your personal remarks before moving on to your scientific points.
  

  Then your memory leaves something to be desired, as apparently does your ability to fathom what constitutes an answer to a challenge. An answer does not consist merely of posting a link to some website. An answer may consist of your own discussion of the contents of a website, along with a link to it.

  • My answers do not merely consist of posting a link to some website. For example my discussion of mitochondrial eve included my own observations about the use of a date based on humans and apes sharing a common ancestor being used to disprove a biblical chronology which starts with them being created separately.
  • When I do post links In often post a specific paragraph or two from the link which supports my specific point. This shows that I am not just posting links, but that I am backing up my statements.
  • Evolutionists here also frequently post links such as: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/java15000.html
    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_erectus.html
    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/d2700.html
  • Some of my references may appear to be links but were actually typed by hand such as the Sarfati reference which comes from his book which I have read.

  Furthermore, I was not only talking about threads in which I commented, but about the many posts of yours where you ran away from discussion with other posters.

  Why don't you give some examples?

  Sarfati is a crackpot and I will not waste space commenting on his nutty ideas. If you want to argue for him, go to it.

  The quote that I gave from Sarfati was well documented from not just creationist but evolutionary sources such as:

  24. T.J. Parsons et al., "A High Observed Substitution Rate in the Human Mitochondrial DNA Control Region," Nature Genetics, 15:363-368, 1997.
  

  25. L. Loewe and S. Scherer, "Mitochondrial Eve: The Plot Thickens," Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 12(11):422-423, 1997; A. Gibbons, "Calibrating the Mitochondrial Clock," Science, 279(5347):28-29, 1998.

  27. R.L. Dorit, Hiroshi Akashi, and W. Gilbert, "Absence of Polymorphism at the ZFY Locus on the Human Y-Chromosome," Science,268(5214):1183-85, May 26,1995; perspective in the same issue by S. Paabo, "The Y-Chromosome and the Origin of All of Us (Men)," p. 1141-1142.
• 

  hooberus

  :

  I've read some of the information on this and other homo erectus fossils from the talk-origin site. The site misrepresents what Gish's book actually says on homo-erectus.
  

  Nonsense. You have no idea what you're talking about. Here are several discussions:

  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/java15000.html
  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_erectus.html
  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/d2700.html

  Can you point out even one thing that misrepresents Gish's claims? I don't think so. I don't think so because it's painfully obvious that you're incapable of reasoning for yourself on this subject.

  AlanF

  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/sinanth.html

  "The reader [of Boule and Vallois, 1957] is invited to verify for himself that Sinanthropus occupies a position intermediate between the Anthropoid Apes and Man. If one accepts uncritically Weidenreich's model of Sinanthropus as a true portrayal of the real Sinanthropus, then he could hardly reject the above appraisal." (Gish, 1985) [emphasis added]

  In other words, although Gish does not accept the accuracy of this model, he is saying that if it was accurate, it would be almost indisputable as a transitional fossil. Now compare the model with two other Homo erectus skulls, ER 3733 and WT 15000.

  I don't have a copy of Gish's 1985 edition, however the 1995 edition reads:

  "The reader is then invited to verify for himself that Sinanthropus occupies a position intermediate between the Anthropoid apes and man. If one accepts uncritically Weidenreich's model of Sinanthropus, then he could hardly reject the above appraisal. As a matter of fact, on the basis of this model, some have been led to believe that Sinanthropus should not be considered as near-man, but should be judged fully human." Evolution the fossils still say No! 1995 edition p. 291

  "If one accepts uncritically the evidence usually presented in texts and treatises on Peking Man, the case for the existence of near-man, or a man with many primitive features, would seem established. For example, the skull model and flesh reconstructions based on this model shown in figure 31 reveal a remarkable resemblance to modern man and could hardly be called less than human." Evolution:the Fossils Still Say No! 1995 Edition p.285

  If the 1995 edition reads similar to the 1995 edition, then the talk-origin site has misrepresented Gish. If not then they haven't and I stand corrected. When I read the talk-orign site arctlice I looked up the quotes in my 1995 edition which shows Gish's position on the matter to be different than the site implies. If the references in the 1985 edition support the sites quote properly than I appologise. It would then be my fault for not checking the different editions.
• 

  hooberus

  Yes, and all are at least as ridiculous as the mobility argument. Take, for example, how YECs try to explain away the existence of millions of annual varves in the Green River formation in Wyoming. These varve layers are usually only fractions of a millimeter thick, and are often continuous over thousands of square kilometers. Physics proves that in any real situation, the varves must have been formed very slowly, over the better part of a year for each one, since in any real situation turbulence would disturb the settling of the microscopic clay particles that comprise the varves. But YECs claim that these millions of layers formed in a few months during Noah's flood, necessitating the laying down of one new varve every two seconds or so. Do you know how YEC "researchers" attempt to "prove" that such layers can be formed so rapidly? They mix up sediments in a test tube and let them settle! Buy they fail to note the effect of turbulence, which would be there in massive amounts during Noah's flood. Turbulence prevents test tube results from applying over an area of thousands of square miles. So they deliberately ignore basic physics in order to support their nonsensical claims.

  Alan, aren't there many animal fossils found there whose bodies transgress several layers? This is one of the main evidences that crreationists appeal to for the formation being formed rapidly.

  http://www.icr.org/newsletters/drjohn/drjohnjan03.html

  There's also evidence it happened rapidly. Numerous fossils are found in the Green River Formation. Catfish in abundance are found, looking much the same as they did when alive. The thickness of their bodies transgresses several layers. Obviously a fish carcass, even if it did get to the bottom of a lake would not remain undecayed and unscavenged for several years, slowly being covered by seasonal deposits.

  Even more remarkable are an abundance of bird fossils. In spite of their low density, bird fossils are copiously present here. If these sediments are from the bottom of a calm lake, as required by the standard varve interpretation, how could myriads of bird fossils be present? Bird carcasses don't lie on the bottom of a lake. What happened?
• 

  hooberus

  : While some fossils are generally found above other groups of fossils, There are more than enough instances of missing systems with no evidence of erosion to call into question the whole concept of geologic ages.

  Nonsense. Instead of doing as usual, why don't you take an example you think you can explain, and explain it to us?

  Alan, are you saying that the very common existence of "paraconformities" is "Nonsense"?
• 

  Chap

  No one has answered this question

  Have I established that the resurrection of a life is possible?

  This thread has turned into another creation vs. evolution argument and I guess that is partly my fault but I would like to make some points about the resurrection of Jesus. Since no one answered the question, I guess I will assume that everyone believes that the resurrection of a life is possible.

  1 Cor. 15:3-7 King James Verion
  For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; [4] And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: [5] And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: [6] After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. [7] After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

  This is the earliest known christian creed and can be traced back to within eight years of the crucifixion. Paul wrote it down later in what we have as the first letter to the Corinthian Church. For an event to become a fable, wouldn't there be need of more time to pass than eight years?

  The Gospel of Mark (which had the backing of Peter) could be traced to on or before 37 A.D. for this reason; he does not mention the name of the high priest (Caiaphas). This would be like me saying that the president gave orders to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If I wrote this in say 1942, the people would understand which president I was referring to. Since different high priests emerged before the writing of the other gospels, they included the name Caiaphas in their books.

  Where is Jesus' body? All someone had to do to stop Christianity in its tracks was to produce the body.
• 

  rem

  All someone had to do to stop Christianity in its tracks was to produce the body

  There are more than enough evidences to 'stop Mormonism in its tracks', yet it still flourishes. The same is true with Christianity.

  Since no one answered the question, I guess I will assume that everyone believes that the resurrection of a life is possible.

  I do not accept that resurrection of a life (in the sense that you are talking about) is possible. Once a number of cells die, and their chemical composition change irreversibly, there is no way to start the necessary chemical reactions again in the same body. Life is not a soul or a spark... it is a complex culture of chemical reactions that animate a concious or unconscious body. Doctors may resuscitate a person, but that is only because the whole system did not completely collapse upon itself yet.

  rem
• 

  hooberus

  There are more than enough evidences to 'stop Mormonism in its tracks', yet it still flourishes. The same is true with Christianity.

  The evidence for the truthfulness of Christianity and the evidence for the truthfulness of Mormonism are vastly dissimilar in terms of quality.
• 

  rem

  The evidence for the truthfulness of Christianity and the evidence for the truthfulness of Mormonism are vastly dissimilar in terms of quality.

  Maybe from your perspective. I'm sure Mormons see it much differently, as do I.

  rem
• 

  Chap

  There are more than enough evidences to 'stop Mormonism in its tracks', yet it still flourishes. The same is true with Christianity.

  The culture of ancient Jerusalem was far different than America was in the 17th century or how America is today. There were other self proclaimed "Messiahs" who were brutally killed. Their followers had a choice to be killed as well or give up there claims. They usually gave up. One of the gospels recorded a Jewish ruler reasoning with the others saying to the effect don't kill him (Jesus) because if he is the real Messiah, we will be in trouble with God but if he is not, the events will play themselves out and his followers will scatter. I can't think of where the passage is now but I'll find it if you want. There was no freedom of religion in ancient Israel. The proclaiming of Christ's resurrection to the death by numerous people is evidence for Christianity, not against it.

  Although Mormons may claim that Joseph Smith was martyred, witnesses of his day attest to his lack of morals. His neighbors basically called him a compulsive liar. I can't remember why Joseph Smith went to jail the time before he died but the circumstances were far different than Jesus. No one claimed Jesus was immoral. Although the old time Mormons were persecuted, they were free to move elsewhere, which they did.

  There isn't slaughter going on in this country for ones religious views. However, there are people in the middle and far east being murdered for simply professing that they are Christians.
• 

  Chap

  "on the third day he appeared to them restored to life...and the sect of Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared."

  This is a quote of Josephus' writings in which Mulan wrote;

  "This is generally considered to be a forgery."

  Mulan, are you saying all of Josephus' writings are considered forgeries or just the one I quoted? Where did you get the info?