toneyb:

Your evidence to show that a man named Jesus died and rose again after 3 days beside the stories you have accepted as true is what? According to the bible Jesus was not the only person to have died and risen so your statement here is false, the bible has so many tales of people dying and rising from the dead.

You know what I mean. The bible mentions several people who were raised from the death. All these still died. Only one man who after crucifixion and three days in the grave, rose triumphantly and is still alive.

toneyb:

You are making a very tall claim here, Which body exactly are you talking about? Where is your evidence that people were requesting for the body of a risen Jesus in the first centuary palestine? The Jews HAVE NO record of Jesus any where. The roman's also do not have any record of any Jesus that was crucified during the reing of Pilate. You will first of all have to produce just ONE writing where the Jews believed that some one named Jesus died and rose from the dead and tired to dispute that claim out side the bible, produce just ONE peice of writing outside the bible from the 1st centuary palestine were the jews of that time believed that a man named Jesus died and rose from the dead. The Jews do not have to produce any body because there was NO body to present, because the Christians started telling their stories long after Jesus was allegedly killed.

I begin to believe that most of the NL atheists are half-educated, just professing atheism because to them it seems the fashionable thing to do. You make appeals to history, yet keep making obviously false statements like those above. Consider the following:
1. The Roman historian Tacitus wrote of Nero’s falsely blaming “persons commonly called Christians” for the fiery destruction of Rome. According to Tacitus, these Christians were followers of “Christus” (Tacitus’ rendering of Christ) who was “put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius.”
2. Jewish historian Josephus makes at least two references to Jesus.
3. There are also references to Jesus in the writings of
 a. Roman historian Suetonius,
 b. second century Greek  Lucian, and
 c. Syrian philosopher Mara Bar-Serapion.

The Jews did not believe that Jesus rose from death. That was the point of the controversy between the 1st century Christians and the Jews. They certainly didn't deny his existence like you! If a man comes up to you and claims that Abacha rose from death, all you have to do to puncture that claim is simply point to his grave or produce his body. The Jewish and Roman authorities were never able to do that with respect to Jesus of Nazareth.

toneyb:

Your evidence that all the 12 apostels died is what? Apart from the church writings which claim that some of the disciples of Jesus were martyrs what other evidence do you have beside the church propaganda? Where is your evidence to show that luke died for his beliefs out side the church propaganda? Dying for your belief means nothing, Joseph Smith also died for his beliefs, The Cathars were completely wiped out for their beliefs, some of the early followers of mohammed died and suffered persecutions in battles for their beliefs so this is a moot point.

Again I repeat; people are willing to die for what they believe to be true but never for what they know to be false.  The twelve were the closest companions of Jesus of Nazareth, so they would know if he rose from death or not. They certainly wouldn't have risked all just to propagate what they knew to be false. Are you toneyb willing to suffer imprisonment, torture and death for what you know to be false? Why then do you think these men are different from you in this regard?

aletheia:

You know what I mean. The bible mentions several people who were raised from the death. All these still died. Only one man who after crucifixion and three days in the grave, rose triumphantly and is still alive.

What is your evidence to show that others still died from the bible? According to the bible in the book of Matthew the bodies of all the Jewish saints that were dead rose up from the grave and walked all over the city of Jerusalem and were seen by many on the day that Jesus was crucified, The story does not say that they died again. So what is your evidence that Jesus is still alive? Can you point to where he is so that we can go and see him?

I begin to believe that most of the NL atheists are half-educated, just professing atheism because to them it seems the fashionable thing to do. You make appeals to history, yet keep making obviously false statements like those above.

You are the one that is truly half educated because you only regurgitate the pitiful apologies that others have put forth without looking at it to see if its true.

Consider the following:
1. The Roman historian Tacitus wrote of Nero’s falsely blaming “persons commonly called Christians” for the fiery destruction of Rome. According to Tacitus, these Christians were followers of “Christus” (Tacitus’ rendering of Christ) who was “put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius.”

I believe that you are deliberately trying to be dishonest here. You are only picking parts of what was written not the entire fact of what Tacitus actually wrote. Tacitus wrote about what the Christians at that time were claiming because he must have heard it from them and he called it the most mischievous superstition of all time. You don't label superstition as history do you? Tacitus talked about a Christ which means an anointed person, For which there were many at that time He did not even say that the person's name was Jesus. He categorically declared that it was a mischievous superstition telling you that he did not even believe in the story because it was only superstition. It was only a hear say report that Tacitus was giving.

2. Jewish historian Josephus makes at least two references to Jesus.

Even Christian Scholars agree that the passages were NOT written by Josephus. Eusebius forged those documents. He also forged a lot of documents in his time.

3. There are also references to Jesus in the writings of
 a. Roman historian Suetonius,
 b. second century Greek  Lucian, and
 c. Syrian philosopher Mara Bar-Serapion.

And what did these people say about Jesus? They talked about Christians not a historical Jesus.

What about Jesus's contemporaries?None of the literate contemporaries of Jesus know anything of him. The Jewish historian Justus of Tiberia who lived at the time of Jesus, do not know of him. (Tiberia was a place not far from Capernaum which Jesus often visited, according to the Bible).

The Jewish scholar and leader of the Jewish society in Alexandria, Philon of Alexandria (around AD 30 - 45) does not mention any Jesus anywhere in his texts. Philo was a famous scholar of the Old Testament and had deep knowledge of the Jewish cults of his time. He died ca. AD 50. There is thus no real historical evidence of a historical Jesus. One would suppose that, a character like Jesus who according to the gospels raised the dead, healed the sick and annoyed both the Jewish establishment and the mighty Romans to such a degree that they finally had to execute him, one should think such a character would make it into at least some contemporary historical texts. Nope. No record. All the comteporaries of Jesus never wrote anything about him.

The Jews did not believe that Jesus rose from death. That was the point of the controversy between the 1st century Christians and the Jews. They certainly didn't deny his existence like you! If a man comes up to you and claims that Abacha rose from death, all you have to do to puncture that claim is simply point to his grave or produce his body. The Jewish and Roman authorities were never able to do that with respect to Jesus of Nazareth.

You have not pointed to any first century writing of the Jews that shows that they know of any Jesus have you? Please point to just ONE first century writing of the Jews that acknowledges the existence of Jesus by the Jews of that time. Just one source will do. As Mazaje has said there is NO empty tomb of Jesus, No body even knows where it is or has heard about it. There is no record to show that the Jews were disputing the resurrection of Jesus to be found any where.

Again I repeat; people are willing to die for what they believe to be true but never for what they know to be false.  The twelve were the closest companions of Jesus of Nazareth, so they would know if he rose from death or not. They certainly wouldn't have risked all just to propagate what they knew to be false. Are you toneyb willing to suffer imprisonment, torture and death for what you know to be false? Why then do you think these men are different from you in this regard?

Where is your evidence to show that these people truly died for what they believe in? Do you have a burst of Mathew, Mark , John or Luke? Outside the propaganda writings of the early church fathers where is your own evidence to show that these people ever existed talk less of them dying for their beliefs. Your evidence that Luke was tortured to death is what? Is there any book outside the propaganda of the early church fathers that mentions a Luke dying for his beliefs? People sometimes die for what they know to be false, Have you heard about Jim Jones?

toneyb:

I believe that you are deliberately trying to be dishonest here. You are only picking parts of what was written not the entire fact of what Tacitus actually wrote. Tacitus wrote about what the Christians at that time were claiming because he must have heard it from them and he called it the most mischievous superstition of all time. You don't label superstition as history do you? Tacitus talked about a Christ which means an anointed person, For which there were many at that time He did not even say that the person's name was Jesus. He categorically declared that it was a mischievous superstition telling you that he did not even believe in the story because it was only superstition. It was only a hear say report that Tacitus was giving.

So what Christ did the Christians of Tacitus' time believe in? Jesus Christ of Nazareth. The bible which you revile declares that there will be false christs. Mat 24:24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

toneyb:

Even Christian Scholars agree that the passages were NOT written by Josephus. Eusebius forged those documents. He also forged a lot of documents in his time.

What Christian scholars?. You will need to provide chapter and verse on this. No more unsubstantiated claims by you. You are now claiming Eusebius forged "Antiquities of the Jews" & "War of the Jews"? You are an intellectually dishonest atheist.

toneyb:

You have not pointed to any first century writing of the Jews that shows that they know of any Jesus have you?

"Antiquities of the Jews", was completed in 93 AD, while "War of the Jews" even earlier in 78 AD. I guess in your book; that would be 21st century AD.

aletheia:

So what Christ did the Christians of Tacitus' time believe in? Jesus Christ of Nazareth. The bible which you revile declares that there will be false christs. Mat 24:24  For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

Will you stop trying to put your tail in between your legs? You talked about Tacitus referring to Jesus as a historical person when his writings show that he did not believe in the claims of the Christians and labeled it a mischievous superstition.

What Christian scholars?. You will need to provide chapter and verse on this. No more unsubstantiated claims by you. You are now claiming Eusebius forged "Antiquities of the Jews" & "War of the Jews"? You are an intellectually dishonest atheist

Eusebius forged the Passage in the Testimonium Flavianum. There were people like Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen and Clement of Alexandria who would have been eager to hurl the passage at their Jewish opponents in their many controversies because they knew very well about the writings of Josephus but non of them ever mentions the passage in the testemonium flavianum as evidence for Jesus out side the church writings. Eusebius was the first person to quote it as evidence for Jesus outside the traditional gospels in 324AD, . NON of the early church fathers before him knew about the passage. If they did they would have used it to help them in their many controversies with the Jews. Those before Eusebius knew very well about Josephus and his writings.

"Antiquities of the Jews", was completed in 93 AD, while "War of the Jews" even earlier in 78 AD. I guess in your book; that would be 21st century AD.

And the real writings make no mention of any Jesus Christ of Nazareth who claims to be the son of God sent to save the Jews and the who of humanity from the wrath of Yahweh.

This thread don derail, no be today

*bump*

answer to OP's question >>> Radiohaloes in rocks, the presence of carbon in diamonds and the relatively quick formation of rocks (and other types of landmass) amongst others are arguments used by YEC's to counter the assumed age of the earth, prove their preferred theory of catastrophism (as opposed to the present geological principle of uniformitarianism) and advance a possible age of the earth that is way less than the accepted (standard age). Browse the website www.creation.com for more info. on this