• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Leah Remini to tackle Jehovah's Witnesses

You don't know that, either. You only surmise that. What you see is not necessarily all there is.

I know it. Reality knows it. You are free to believe in magic if you wish to.
 
People die for their faith either because:

1. It is true.
2. It is false and they were mistaken and/or deluded.
3. It is false and they made it up themselves.

Now, in regard to the gospels, #3 makes no sense as nobody dies for what they know is a lie of their own creation. #2 is problematic because the apostles claimed to see the risen Christ. They either did, in which case we arrive at #1 or they did not in which case they suffered some sort of mass delusion as they all kept their testimony to their deaths. So, of the three, which is the most likely? I contend that it is #1.

4. They believe in it very strongly.

No writers of the gospels claimed to be eyewitnesses.

You don't seem to understand that beliefs can't be classified simply as true or false. A believer doesn't believe because they know something is true, they only believe it is true. You can't classify religious belief as true or false because there is no basis for that classification.
 
Judaism is true as far as it goes. That, however, was not what we were discussing. We were discussing the difference between suicide and dying for your faith.

Your claim is that christian martyrdom is so unique that it is the only example of its kind of dying for a religious belief. And this type of martyrdom is uniquely the most powerful evidence of the veracity of the belief. So any other religious who die for their religion you simply dismiss. But you still don't seem to get that dying for anything says absolutely nothing about the thing you are dying for and everything about human behavior.
 
You don't know that, either. You only surmise that. What you see is not necessarily all there is.

What else is there, if you can't "see" it? By that I mean, detect it in any physical way.
 
The resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ was historically confirmed by many eyewitnesses. On one occasion he appeared to upward of 500 disciples, most of whom were still alive when the apostle Paul wrote his first letter to the Corinthians. The resurrection of Jesus Christ was so well established that Paul could write in this letter: “If, indeed, there is no resurrection of the dead, neither has Christ been raised up. But if Christ has not been raised up, our preaching is certainly in vain, and our faith is in vain. Moreover, we are also found false witnesses of God, because we have borne witness against God that he raised up the Christ, but whom he did not raise up if the dead are really not to be raised up?”​—1 Cor. 15:13-15.

First-century Christians, like the apostle Paul, knew for a certainty that Jesus had been resurrected. They were willing to face hardships of all kinds, even death itself, in the full assurance that they would be rewarded in the resurrection.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1973284?q=were+there+eyewitnesses+of+jesus+resurrection&p=par
 
The resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ was historically confirmed by many eyewitnesses. On one occasion he appeared to upward of 500 disciples, most of whom were still alive when the apostle Paul wrote his first letter to the Corinthians. The resurrection of Jesus Christ was so well established that Paul could write in this letter: “If, indeed, there is no resurrection of the dead, neither has Christ been raised up. But if Christ has not been raised up, our preaching is certainly in vain, and our faith is in vain. Moreover, we are also found false witnesses of God, because we have borne witness against God that he raised up the Christ, but whom he did not raise up if the dead are really not to be raised up?”​—1 Cor. 15:13-15.

First-century Christians, like the apostle Paul, knew for a certainty that Jesus had been resurrected. They were willing to face hardships of all kinds, even death itself, in the full assurance that they would be rewarded in the resurrection.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1973284?q=were+there+eyewitnesses+of+jesus+resurrection&p=par

Paul could not have known it for a certainty. He wasn't there when/if it happened.
 
Testimonies That Dispel Doubts

The ignominious execution of Jesus as a contemptible criminal provides “the most convincing argument against opponents of the historicity of Jesus,” states Trilling. Why? Because the execution “encumbered, even hindered, the dispersion of the new faith among Jews and non-Jews.” (Compare 1 Corinthians 1:23.) If the execution of Jesus the Messiah was such an effrontery to both Jews and Gentiles, it hardly would have been an invention of the apostles! Furthermore, Jesus’ death is attested to as an historical event not only by the four Gospels but also by the Roman writer Tacitus and by the Jewish Talmud.*

Other events during Jesus’ life are also viewed as internal evidence of the credibility of the Gospels, hence of what they tell us about him. For example, would the followers of Jesus have fabricated his coming from Nazareth, a place seemingly out of favor? Or is it likely that they would have invented his betrayal by Judas, a trusted companion? Does it seem realistic to think that they would have made up a story about Jesus’ being abandoned by the rest of the disciples in such a cowardly manner? It is surely illogical that the disciples would have constructed particulars so detrimental in nature and then proclaimed them far and wide! In addition, the art of teaching employed by Jesus was characterized by a unique style. Jewish literature of the first century contains nothing comparable to his illustrations. Which anonymous person could ever have “invented” such a masterpiece as the Sermon on the Mount? These arguments all tend to corroborate the trustworthiness of the Gospels as reports of Jesus’ life.

There is also external evidence for the historicity of Jesus. The four Gospels portray him against a specific, accurately detailed, historical background. Places, such as Bethlehem and Galilee; prominent individuals and groups, such as Pontius Pilate and the Pharisees; as well as Jewish customs and other peculiarities were not simply concocted. They formed part of the structure of life in the first century, and they have been confirmed by non-Biblical sources and by archaeological findings.

There is, thus, convincing evidence, both internal and external, that Jesus is a historical person.

Doubts About Jesus’ Resurrection Justified?

Consider first a piece of strong circumstantial evidence that supports the truthfulness of the resurrection of Jesus​—his empty tomb. The fact that Jesus’ grave was discovered to be empty was undisputed by his contemporaries, even by his opposers. (Matthew 28:11-15) Deception would easily have been exposed! The above-mentioned reference work rightly concludes: “No valid explanation for the empty tomb has ever been suggested except the biblical statement, ‘He is not here; for he is risen’ (Matt. 28:6).”

Some object, saying that it was only Jesus’ own disciples who proclaimed everywhere that he was the resurrected Messiah. They did. But was not the credibility of their message firmly anchored in historical fact, especially the death and resurrection of Jesus? Of course. The apostle Paul was aware of this connection when he wrote: “If Christ has not been raised up, our preaching is certainly in vain, and our faith is in vain. Moreover, we are also found false witnesses of God, because we have borne witness against God that he raised up the Christ.”​—1 Corinthians 15:14, 15; compare John 19:35; 21:24; Hebrews 2:3.

In the first century, there were many people whose identities were well-known and who could bear witness to the appearance of Jesus after his death. Among them were the 12 apostles and Paul, as well as more than 500 other eyewitnesses.* (1 Corinthians 15:6) Bear in mind also the reason why Matthias fulfilled the qualifications to succeed the unfaithful apostle Judas. Acts 1:21-23 reports that Matthias could testify to Jesus’ resurrection and to earlier events in connection with Him. If the life and resurrection of Jesus had been fiction instead of fact, such a requirement for the appointment would certainly have been completely pointless.

Because so many first-century eyewitnesses could testify to the life, miracles, death, and resurrection of Jesus, Christianity spread relatively quickly throughout the Roman Empire, despite the above-mentioned obstacles. His followers were willing to put up with hardship, persecution, and even death so as to declare everywhere the resurrection and the fundamental truth emanating from it. Which truth? That his resurrection had been possible only by reason of the power of God. And why had Jehovah God resurrected Jesus from the dead? The answer to that question shows who the historical Jesus is.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1995603?q=were+there+eyewitnesses+of+jesus+resurrection&p=par
 
You don't know that, either. You only surmise that. What you see is not necessarily all there is.

hey im all for people jut getting up from being dead dead being possible

you might be a vampire i might be an alien

why should any one believe that


its suspicious all the magicly alive people split town instead just hanging around being immortal jesus could have used his magic to usher in a kingdom under his rule with his miracles and immortality being proof to the world that his will was backed up by power and serving him had benefits

but nope we get a story that such a thing will totally happen when he comes back some day but your ****ed if you don't believe it because um.....we need people to spread are faith and influence maybe? i mean no because god wills it ya that's it
 
4. They believe in it very strongly.

No writers of the gospels claimed to be eyewitnesses.

You don't seem to understand that beliefs can't be classified simply as true or false. A believer doesn't believe because they know something is true, they only believe it is true. You can't classify religious belief as true or false because there is no basis for that classification.

As long as you think none of the gospel writers were eyewitnesses or knew people who were eyewitnesses, we will not get anywhere. My faith is based on my belief in the trustworthiness of their accounts. You have provided no explanation whatever for them to believe that Christ was risen to the point that they would die for it. They either saw the risen Christ or they were lunatics. Take your pick.
 
hey im all for people jut getting up from being dead dead being possible

you might be a vampire i might be an alien

why should any one believe that


its suspicious all the magicly alive people split town instead just hanging around being immortal jesus could have used his magic to usher in a kingdom under his rule with his miracles and immortality being proof to the world that his will was backed up by power and serving him had benefits

but nope we get a story that such a thing will totally happen when he comes back some day but your ****ed if you don't believe it because um.....we need people to spread are faith and influence maybe? i mean no because god wills it ya that's it


It is what it is. Just because you don't like or fear it, doesn't change anything. God will carry out His plan despite what any of us think and on His own timetable. If God doesn't exist then you have nothing to concern yourself over.
 
Your claim is that christian martyrdom is so unique that it is the only example of its kind of dying for a religious belief. And this type of martyrdom is uniquely the most powerful evidence of the veracity of the belief. So any other religious who die for their religion you simply dismiss. But you still don't seem to get that dying for anything says absolutely nothing about the thing you are dying for and everything about human behavior.

No, not when you claim that the apostles made up the story of the resurrection. That's where your argument fails. They either saw what they said they saw or they made it up. So, you have to explain, knowing what we know about human behavior, why they would die for that which they made up and knew to be false. If you claim that they merely "thought" they saw the risen Christ, you have to explain why this mistaken idea would have infected so many people and what they really saw. There would have had to be mass delusion or lunacy. Again, it's a rather unlikely scenario.
 
No, not when you claim that the apostles made up the story of the resurrection. That's where your argument fails. They either saw what they said they saw or they made it up. So, you have to explain, knowing what we know about human behavior, why they would die for that which they made up and knew to be false. If you claim that they merely "thought" they saw the risen Christ, you have to explain why this mistaken idea would have infected so many people and what they really saw. There would have had to be mass delusion or lunacy. Again, it's a rather unlikely scenario.

Dead people coming back to life after three days is a far more unlikely scenario.
 
Here is the account from Irmgard Schloegl's "The Zen Teaching of Rinzai".

"One day at the street market Fuke was begging all and sundry to give him a robe. Everybody offered him one, but he did not want any of them. The master [Linji] made the superior buy a coffin, and when Fuke returned, said to him: "There, I had this robe made for you." Fuke shouldered the coffin, and went back to the street market, calling loudly: "Rinzai had this robe made for me! I am off to the East Gate to enter transformation" (to die)." The people of the market crowded after him, eager to look. Fuke said: "No, not today. Tomorrow, I shall go to the South Gate to enter transformation." And so for three days. Nobody believed it any longer. On the fourth day, and now without any spectators, Fuke went alone outside the city walls, and laid himself into the coffin. He asked a traveler who chanced by to nail down the lid.

The news spread at once, and the people of the market rushed there. On opening the coffin, they found that the body had vanished, but from high up in the sky they heard the ring of his hand bell."[30]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection
 
Dead people coming back to life after three days is a far more unlikely scenario.

The fact that those who claimed that they saw the risen Christ went to their deaths, cannot be explained other than by the conclusions I outlined. They were either telling the truth or they all suffered from some unexplained delusion. You simply have to decide which makes more sense.
 
Last edited:
Here is the account from Irmgard Schloegl's "The Zen Teaching of Rinzai".

"One day at the street market Fuke was begging all and sundry to give him a robe. Everybody offered him one, but he did not want any of them. The master [Linji] made the superior buy a coffin, and when Fuke returned, said to him: "There, I had this robe made for you." Fuke shouldered the coffin, and went back to the street market, calling loudly: "Rinzai had this robe made for me! I am off to the East Gate to enter transformation" (to die)." The people of the market crowded after him, eager to look. Fuke said: "No, not today. Tomorrow, I shall go to the South Gate to enter transformation." And so for three days. Nobody believed it any longer. On the fourth day, and now without any spectators, Fuke went alone outside the city walls, and laid himself into the coffin. He asked a traveler who chanced by to nail down the lid.

The news spread at once, and the people of the market rushed there. On opening the coffin, they found that the body had vanished, but from high up in the sky they heard the ring of his hand bell."[30]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection

I'm not sure why this is supposed to mean anything to me. I'm only concerned with what Christianity claims and the reliability of Jesus as an actual historical figure.
 
The fact that those who claimed that they saw the risen Christ went to their deaths, cannot be explained other than by the conclusions I outlined. They were either telling the truth or they all suffered from some unexplained delusion. You simply have to decide which makes more sense.

The bible claims it. The people who supposedly witnessed it did not write the gospels.
 
I'm not sure why this is supposed to mean anything to me. I'm only concerned with what Christianity claims and the reliability of Jesus as an actual historical figure.

Historical maybe, magic Jesus is a myth based on older myths.
 
The bible claims it. The people who supposedly witnessed it did not write the gospels.

Even if that were true, so what? If they witnessed something and passed that to others who faithfully recorded it and then those original witnesses went to their deaths for it, what does that tell you? You're right back to the same choice. Either they were truthful or deluded.
 
Even if that were true, so what? If they witnessed something and passed that to others who faithfully recorded it and then those original witnesses went to their deaths for it, what does that tell you? You're right back to the same choice. Either they were truthful or deluded.

Deluded.
 
The fact that those who claimed that they saw the risen Christ went to their deaths, cannot be explained other than by the conclusions I outlined. They were either telling the truth or they all suffered from some unexplained delusion. You simply have to decide which makes more sense.

Of course there are other explanations. You have to decide to be more nuanced in your view of how a religion can arise other than by eyewitnesses seeing something. Unless you were there. Were you?
 
No, not when you claim that the apostles made up the story of the resurrection. That's where your argument fails. They either saw what they said they saw or they made it up. So, you have to explain, knowing what we know about human behavior, why they would die for that which they made up and knew to be false. If you claim that they merely "thought" they saw the risen Christ, you have to explain why this mistaken idea would have infected so many people and what they really saw. There would have had to be mass delusion or lunacy. Again, it's a rather unlikely scenario.

Who said they believed it was false? How many drank the kool-aide for Jim Jones? I would bet they all thought that what he taught was true, at least the adults. People dying for a belief that was false is far more common than you imply. That is a common, but bad argument.
 
Who said they believed it was false? How many drank the kool-aide for Jim Jones? I would bet they all thought that what he taught was true, at least the adults. People dying for a belief that was false is far more common than you imply. That is a common, but bad argument.

Nobody said they believed it was false. The point is that they died because they insisted it was true, that they had seen the risen Christ. That leaves you with three possible conclusions:

1. They saw what they said they saw and were telling the truth.
2. They made it up out of whole cloth and died knowing what they made up was false.
3. They were somehow deluded into thinking they saw and talked to the risen Christ.

It can only be one of these three. The Jim Jones thing is completely irrelevant. Those people killed themselves. I'm not sure why examples of suicide keep being used as comparison to the martyrdom of the apostles. They are completely invalid.
 
Of course there are other explanations. You have to decide to be more nuanced in your view of how a religion can arise other than by eyewitnesses seeing something. Unless you were there. Were you?

I've already been through this time and again. These people insisted they DID see something extraordinary. That's the whole point. If you won't accept the basic facts then no use talking about it.
 
Back
Top Bottom