Sunday, November 20, 2011 9:08:59 AM
More of the same in your previous post:
i) Some people claiming that someone else fulfilled well-known prophecies (not well-known now, but well-known amongst Jews ~2000 years ago) does not logically constitute proof of both the prophecies and the fulfillment of them.
ii) There are no contempory secular sources. There are some secular sources from a bit later, who describe what Christians believed. Describing what Christians believe does not logically constitute proof that what they believe is true. Some of the "secular" sources were faked by Christians later, anyway. To be accurate - some of them were so badly faked that the faking is obvious. There may well be better fakery involved as well, that can't now clearly be shown to be fake. Also, not all of the sources you quote specifically because they`re secular actually are secular.
Are you seriously putting forward such an obviously circular argument as if it was logical?
Your answer could serve as a textbook illustration of a variety of logical fallacies.
You're arguing that if enough people believe something them it proves that thing to be true. In particular, when that thing is an article of faith that followers are required to believe without evidence. I think that`s worse than just stating "it`s true because it`s true", then sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "LALALALALA I CAN`T HEAR YOU" as a "counterargument" to any reply. There`s more honesty in doing that.
You`re adopting a ludicrously false predicate in order to pretend that the conclusion you chose beforehand has any support. There are numerous valid explanations for the sudden growth of Christianity.
The corruption of reasoning is part of the harm of religion because it undermines the very idea of
Saturday, November 19, 2011 11:30:05 PM
We also have scholarly evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. A good article to read on this is, Contemporary Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. It states that the core principle of Christianity is the resurrection of Jesus. Unless He actually resurrected there is no valid explanation for the sudden development and growth of the Christian movement.
Saturday, November 19, 2011 11:29:16 PM
So we have the Old Testament describing prophesies detailing Jesus’s lineage, and works that He would fulfill, and then we have the New Testament describing His fulfillment of these prophesies. At this point, many of you are no doubt screaming “circular logic!”. That would be true, except we have several secular sources from around that era which back these claims up. These sources include: Cornelius Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Tallus, Phlegon, Mara Bar-Serapion, Josephus ben Mattathias, Lucian of Samosate, The Babylonian Talmud, (THE OLDEST SECULAR ACCOUNTS & HISTORICAL EVIDENCE ON THE EXISTANCE OF JESUS OF NAZARETH), and Herodotus. So now we have divine prophesies, a man who fulfilled them, and secular sources that back these accounts up. This provides evidence that Jesus is the Son of God.