Here are some questions that grodney has asked (I added the numbers):

"1) What makes your Easter fairy tale any different than the easter bunny? Or Santa Claus?

2) What makes your fairy tale cult leader any different than David Koresh?

3) And in general, with what arrogance do you presume that you got the right religion? You just HAPPEN to live at the right time in history? And be born in the right hemisphere? It's just bad luck for the other 4.5 billion people alive right now?

I really, REALLY, don't understand how able-minded adults can look at the christian Easter story and not see it for the fairy tale that it is. It is just ASTOUNDING. A little sad, but mostly astounding."

grodney,

I just copied your post over here so that the point of the non-contradiction thread keeps clear.

from grodney "In my easter thread in the athiest group, I was separating "belief in some higher being or force" from "belief in the easter story". They are two completely different things to me. If you need to join them, then we really have nothing to discuss.

To put it another way, to *ME*:
- Belief in a something nobody understands -- a higher force, a god, a sprituality, etc -- is nothing I really care to dispute.
- Belief in a particular story in a particular religion, which contains supernatural elements and absolutely no verifiable proof that it ever happened, and on top of that claims to be for the forgiveness of the sins of all believers (or is it everyone, I forget?) , is crazy."

Rodney,

I don't see how belief in a higher being (God) can be separated from belief in the Easter story. Here's why-- Jesus claimed to be God, and if he was raised from the dead it proves that there is a God, and that Jesus' claim to be God is true. The resurrection of Jesus is the cornerstone of the Christian faith. Without the resurrection of Jesus on the first Easter there is no Christian faith. It was a historic event and thus the starting point is to use the historical/ legal method must be used to determine whether it happened or not. Deciding the issue uses some deductive reasoning but inductive reasoning (weighing the evidence) is the primary process.

It can be separated because there are lots of people (my wife and brother included) who believe there is probably something bigger to life, but see the christian easter story as a total fairy tale.

You're a believer in both, so for you they are joined.

Rodney,

You asked me for answers to your questions, so I'll write a little bit. But these questions are not only intellectual, they also involve the emotions and the will, so anything I can write here is too limited to be of that much value. One of the big questions is "how does it work in real life?" Since you can't see that in my life there is very limited value to extended discussions on the internet.

Also, there are many books and many resources on the internet that give answers to every question that you have asked. There are answers that make sense to me, but I'm not sure you would believe them because the emotions and will are also involved. Ultimately these questions may lead to a change in one's life because these are the ultimate questions in life.

I'd like to start by looking at the resurrection of Jesus that is the heart of the Easter story. But let me start with a few questions.

1) The starting point is the internal consistency of the event. Have you read the biography of Jesus, especially the gospels of Luke and John? The resurrection is at the end of each of these books (Luke 22-24, John 18-21).

2) If enough valid evidence was presented would you believe in the resurrection of Jesus? If not, then isn't it a waste of both our time to continue discussing it?

Lowe, you can stop wasting your time. No, I haven't read the gospel (although I probably read parts of it during confirmation); and no, I would never believe anything from a specific religion about something that allegedly happened 2000 years ago. That is, not without solid scientific evidence (not storytelling).

In hindsight, and reading my questions again, I really didn't want answers to my questions. I just wanted you, or someone, to see the easter story for the fable it is, wake up, and dis-believe it. Guess I was just trying to be "kind" to you, as you put it.

By the way, in addition to my wife and brother, there are probably easily 3 or 4 billion people on the planet that believe in "god", but don't give 2 shakes about the easter story, or even know it exists. Honestly, and this is NOT a personal attack on you, when I see believers write things about the easter story and the existence of "God", I see it as self-centered, myopic, and arrogant. That's what lead me to my rant on the athiest board in the first place.

I was already working on this, so I'll go ahead and post it anyway...


Of course, as a general principle many people have these 2 beliefs.

But you were asking specifically about the credibility of the Easter story, and this event does include supernatural, yes miraculous, elements. So if you want to know if Jesus was resurrected from the dead (Easter) then you have to deal with the miraculous and supernatural. You can't totally disregard the supernatural to look at this particular issue, but you can also make a case using the methods of history. However, since this deals with a supernatural miracle your theology is also inextricable. If your naturalistic worldview has already decided that miracles are completely impossible, no matter what the evidence, then the issue ends there. One has to at least be open to the possibility that a miracle can happen, and that would seem to me what an open minded person should do. Make sense? Do you agree?

Oh yeah, rodney also said there is "absolutely no verifiable proof that it ever happened".
I beg to differ. Actually, there is evidence that accords with the inductive method used by history and law. You asked for scientific proof, but this is not a scientific question because the resurrection of Jesus was a one time event that cannot be repeated. Science cannot answer such questions, although a science such as archeology may provide some evidence.
On top of that, even if we can establish that the resurrection of Jesus was a historical event, then we still need theology to determine the meaning of the event.

Again, I'm not a religious scholar, and I don't know beans about christianity or any other religion.

But I'm just going to guess that every other major religion has just as much "evidence that accords with the inductive method used by history and law" that IT is the REAL religion.

I don't think so. I know of no other major religion that is tied to history. Every other religion is only based on doctrine. Jesus is the only one to (credibly) claim "I am the truth". He didn't say that his teaching is truth, but that He is truth.

BTW, the reason that Jesus was killed was because He claimed to be God. That was the charge against him. I also don't know of anyone else who has claimed to be God and given proof of the claim, do you?

Funny, I didn't know he gave proof? I would like hear about this proof.

Plus, if you feel Jesus is god, what is the obsession with Jesus? Just explain god. At least I think you believe they are one in the same.