|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jan 29, 2018 0:55:14 GMT
Well let's imagine you decide for some bizarre reason, Jim has decided to play a very detailed practical joke on you and some of your friends. He has gone so far as to set up an elaborate scheme, including setting up "witnesses" to confirm his story. Especially when you think about the fact that Jim is one of the biggest practical jokers you know, the story begins to fit together. Still, you cannot let it lie. You confront one of supposed witnesses with your scenario, and finally he cracks a smile. You both start a good laugh. The mystery is solved! BUT what if this tactic does not work? What if one by one, each of the witnesses was to confirm that everything said was true, even when confronted with your claim that this was all a setup? Then I would probably lean more towards insanity than lying. Again wouldn't really change much.
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jan 29, 2018 1:01:12 GMT
Well let's imagine you decide for some bizarre reason, Jim has decided to play a very detailed practical joke on you and some of your friends. He has gone so far as to set up an elaborate scheme, including setting up "witnesses" to confirm his story. Especially when you think about the fact that Jim is one of the biggest practical jokers you know, the story begins to fit together. Still, you cannot let it lie. You confront one of supposed witnesses with your scenario, and finally he cracks a smile. You both start a good laugh. The mystery is solved! BUT what if this tactic does not work? What if one by one, each of the witnesses was to confirm that everything said was true, even when confronted with your claim that this was all a setup? So the "witnesses" are good at sticking to their story while keeping a straight face. It's not all that hard to do. Are you going to tell us what point you're trying to make or not?
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jan 29, 2018 1:04:01 GMT
Well let's imagine you decide for some bizarre reason, Jim has decided to play a very detailed practical joke on you and some of your friends. He has gone so far as to set up an elaborate scheme, including setting up "witnesses" to confirm his story. Especially when you think about the fact that Jim is one of the biggest practical jokers you know, the story begins to fit together. Still, you cannot let it lie. You confront one of supposed witnesses with your scenario, and finally he cracks a smile. You both start a good laugh. The mystery is solved! BUT what if this tactic does not work? What if one by one, each of the witnesses was to confirm that everything said was true, even when confronted with your claim that this was all a setup? So the "witnesses" are good at sticking to their story while keeping a straight face. It's not all that hard to do. Are you going to tell us what point you're trying to make or not?
We should be open to absurd claims that don't have any real evidence. I think that's his point.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jan 29, 2018 1:11:00 GMT
If he was a friend I would either ignore it or make fun of him.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jan 29, 2018 1:11:04 GMT
No the point is very clear. And it's this: If someone you know well were to claim he had the power to raise people from the dead, you would find it all but impossible to accept the claim, no matter how seriously it was made. You would assume(as you have) that your friend was either a blatant liar or that he was crazy. But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was?
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jan 29, 2018 1:14:54 GMT
No the point is very clear. And it's this: If someone you know well were to claim he had the power to raise people from the dead, you would find it all but impossible to accept the claim, no matter how seriously it was made. You would assume(as you have) that your friend was either a blatant liar or that he was crazy. But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was? "But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was?" David Copperfield?
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jan 29, 2018 1:15:05 GMT
No the point is very clear. And it's this: If someone you know well were to claim he had the power to raise people from the dead, you would find it all but impossible to accept the claim, no matter how seriously it was made. You would assume(as you have) that your friend was either a blatant liar or that he was crazy. But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was? Jim?
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jan 29, 2018 1:15:47 GMT
No the point is very clear. And it's this: If someone you know well were to claim he had the power to raise people from the dead, you would find it all but impossible to accept the claim, no matter how seriously it was made. You would assume(as you have) that your friend was either a blatant liar or that he was crazy. But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was? I already did guess. Jesus.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jan 29, 2018 1:18:09 GMT
No the point is very clear. And it's this: If someone you know well were to claim he had the power to raise people from the dead, you would find it all but impossible to accept the claim, no matter how seriously it was made. You would assume(as you have) that your friend was either a blatant liar or that he was crazy. But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was? Jim? Incorrect. Jim never declared openly to the public. Jesus Christ did!
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Jan 29, 2018 1:21:51 GMT
tpfkar No the point is very clear. And it's this: If someone you know well were to claim he had the power to raise people from the dead, you would find it all but impossible to accept the claim, no matter how seriously it was made. You would assume(as you have) that your friend was either a blatant liar or that he was crazy. But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was? All he has to do is demonstrate it under sufficient scrutiny. Wonder why he wouldn't. Science proven wrong yet AGAIN.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jan 29, 2018 1:21:54 GMT
No the point is very clear. And it's this: If someone you know well were to claim he had the power to raise people from the dead, you would find it all but impossible to accept the claim, no matter how seriously it was made. You would assume(as you have) that your friend was either a blatant liar or that he was crazy. But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was? "But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was?" David Copperfield? Jesus doesn't need a magic wand to pull it off, that's the difference. 🙂
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Jan 29, 2018 1:24:45 GMT
Incorrect. Jim never declared openly to the public. Jesus Christ did! Tell me. Would YOU believe your friend Jim's claim that he could raise the dead because he introduced you to a few people who also told you that he could?
|
|
|
Post by progressiveelement on Jan 29, 2018 2:13:48 GMT
Imagine for a moment that you're having a conversation with a close friend. Let's say his name is Jim. You've always thought of Jim as a fairly normal person. Anyway during the conversation, Jim tells you that he has the ability to raise people from the dead. How do you think you would respond to this claim? And how would it effect the way you think about him? NECROMANCER!!! DIE!!!
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 29, 2018 4:08:37 GMT
If he was serious, I'd call some local scientists and take them and Jim on a trip to the local morgue. Easy enough claim to prove. No way would I take the word of any random witnesses.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 29, 2018 4:26:39 GMT
Cody,
I KNOW that you are a religious 'tragic' butt
do you really have to pull these stupid stunts that only reveal you to be a religious tragic and don't really make any significant point, in the scheme of things?
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Jan 29, 2018 9:44:06 GMT
No the point is very clear. And it's this: If someone you know well were to claim he had the power to raise people from the dead, you would find it all but impossible to accept the claim, no matter how seriously it was made. You would assume(as you have) that your friend was either a blatant liar or that he was crazy. But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was? If you're talking about Jesus: We don't know if he ever made the claim. What we know is that, decades after he had died, some people pretended he had said and done it. No eyewitnesses ever confirmed it.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jan 29, 2018 16:15:29 GMT
No the point is very clear. And it's this: If someone you know well were to claim he had the power to raise people from the dead, you would find it all but impossible to accept the claim, no matter how seriously it was made. You would assume(as you have) that your friend was either a blatant liar or that he was crazy. But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was? If you're talking about Jesus: We don't know if he ever made the claim. What we know is that, decades after he had died, some people pretended he had said and done it. No eyewitnesses ever confirmed it. This is completely untrue although the analogy is pretty horrible if it's supposed to represent Jesus. When people say this, it usually means they are not satisfied with the eyewitness accounts as proven by what you state which for some reason you think has greater proof attached to it which is silly. Proven by the automatic discounting of 2 of the Gospels by the apostles as well as Mark who traveled with an eyewitnesses, & Luke who interviewed scores of eyewitnesses perhaps even the ones resurrected. Now I'm not stating the obvious on any of this for an argument since there is no dispute regarding the notion that there were eyewitnesses and the notion of not believing thy were eyewitnesses is not the point. The only thing in dispute is what you said which is grossly incorrect since you seem to think your opinion is factual.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 29, 2018 16:16:45 GMT
Imagine for a moment that you're having a conversation with a close friend. Let's say his name is Jim. You've always thought of Jim as a fairly normal person. Anyway during the conversation, Jim tells you that he has the ability to raise people from the dead. How do you think you would respond to this claim? And how would it effect the way you think about him? I knew a woman like Jim once.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2018 16:21:53 GMT
It depends. Did I see this person perform other miracles? If so, I would believe him and I wouldn't require witnesses to invest that faith.
If not, I would think he was either crazy or a liar. Regarding the witnesses, it would depend as well. If it is a witness I know and trust (I only trust about 12 people), I would believe. If none of the witnesses were people I knew and trusted, I would think they were also crazy or lying.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 29, 2018 16:22:26 GMT
No the point is very clear. And it's this: If someone you know well were to claim he had the power to raise people from the dead, you would find it all but impossible to accept the claim, no matter how seriously it was made. You would assume(as you have) that your friend was either a blatant liar or that he was crazy. But there was once a man who claimed, not just to his friends but also openly to the public, that he could raise people from the dead. Guess who that man was? If you're talking about Jesus: We don't know if he ever made the claim. What we know is that, decades after he had died, some people pretended he had said and done it. No eyewitnesses ever confirmed it. “We … distinctly declare that we regard the history of the resurrection of Lazarus, not only as in the highest degree improbable in itself, but also destitute of external evidence; and this whole chapter… as an indication of the unauthenticity of the fourth gospel.” (From the classic text Life of Jesus Critically Examined David Friedrich Strauss §100, pg. 494)
|
|