An opinion on this alleged refutation of the Resurrection

[abe1]

Look up The Great Mars Hill Resurrection Debate (2012) (PDF) by Robert Greg Cavin and Carlos A. Colombetti (infidels.org)

I honestly believe its a joke. Poor research and so many holes in it that you can sink a boat underwater! IF this is the best they can do…yikes!

I put this in no particular order:

2nd law of Thermodynamics? They believe God COULD NOT break this law to resurrect Jesus! (Putting limits on an all powerful God did they?) Their explanation is very bizarre.
God can’t enter a closed universe? They didn’t even define him as transcendent in their argument! They set up a straw god they can easily refute! They do not mention God transcending from Space Time and existing outside of time! Pg 295 is good for laughs!
They show ignorance of the Gospel narratives…not understanding why they were written differently to begin with (Especially Mark and Luke)
They talk about mathematics like Bayes theorem…when you see a equation were B=our background information in the anti Bayes theorem…keep in mind that their variables in the equation come from their faulty research. Don’t be surprised if the math agrees with them…I am not a expert on Bayes or Anti-Bayes theorem…but I have great suspicion.

A Catholic expert can refute all 400 pages in a sitting…

Opinions?

I’m asking the Catholic Experts!

God Bless!

 

[Jon_S_1]

Look up The Great Mars Hill Resurrection Debate (2012) (PDF) by Robert Greg Cavin and Carlos A. Colombetti (infidels.org)

I honestly believe its a joke. Poor research and so many holes in it that you can sink a boat underwater! IF this is the best they can do…yikes!

I put this in no particular order:

2nd law of Thermodynamics? They believe God COULD NOT break this law to resurrect Jesus! (Putting limits on an all powerful God did they?) Their explanation is very bizarre.
God can’t enter a closed universe? They didn’t even define him as transcendent in their argument! They set up a straw god they can easily refute! They do not mention God transcending from Space Time and existing outside of time! Pg 295 is good for laughs!
They show ignorance of the Gospel narratives…not understanding why they were written differently to begin with (Especially Mark and Luke)
They talk about mathematics like Bayes theorem…when you see a equation were B=our background information in the anti Bayes theorem…keep in mind that their variables in the equation come from their faulty research. Don’t be surprised if the math agrees with them…I am not a expert on Bayes or Anti-Bayes theorem…but I have great suspicion.

A Catholic expert can refute all 400 pages in a sitting…

Opinions?

I’m asking the Catholic Experts!

God Bless!

I stopped reading at Mars Hill…Nuff said about the (lack of ) quality by that alone!

 

[abe1]

LOL!

 

[abe1]

If this is the best they can do…all it that is just slides and badly drawn out ‘research’…infidels show such ‘infidelity’ to actual scholarship…

 

[themonk86]

Yeah its sad that atheist put out this kind of sad work. William Lane Craig has done some good debates and talks about the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. You can check them out at :

www.reasonablefaith.org

 

[Semangelof]

Yeah its sad that atheist put out this kind of sad work. William Lane Craig has done some good debates and talks about the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. You can check them out at :

I’ll second that. I’ve watched more than 6 hours of Dr Craigs debates. His premises and logic is solid and he does it humbly as a Christian should.

I like to listen to debates and bible studies from youtube as I multitask. There are all kinds of great debates that can be found on youtube. Thats how I discovered Dr Craig.

 

[abe1]

Thanks guys. I can’t believe there were approx 400 slides in that Mars Hill! I skimmed down and thought HUH? How can you be expected to be taken seriously with cheap drawings and colorful text without citing anything as reliable sources? This has failed as an academic exercise! No serious scholar would give this a second look.

I love the last page…their conclusion…so childish.