[Bored chemist]

I quoted a scholar. That is information. I shouldn't have to explain that.

A man said something, that may be information of a sort, but  it is hearsay, not evidence.
It's also childishly stupidly wrong.

[Bored chemist]

This is an other reason I don't respond to you.

Because I point out that you are wrong?

[duffyd (OP)]

The preferred method of science is to do experiments, which can then be reproduced by others, in the same (or slightly different) conditions, to produce a confirmed, published and reproducible result.

However, when it comes to an event in history (like the death and claimed resurrection of Jesus), this preferred method falls down. We can't just run experiments, rerunning history with variations - that is outside our control.

Some areas of science are like that - Astronomy and Geology, for example. We can't rerun the history of the Earth, or create stars of our own*.

So, when it comes to non-reproduce-able events, scientists adopt a modified method - they try to collect as much evidence as they can, from different sources, and attempt to build a credible picture. Other scientists will collect slightly different aspects of the data. But the goal is to produce a consensus view among experts in the field, applying the techniques of evidence and analysis. The consensus is often formed in the heat of fiery debate.

Historical events fall into this area where we must apply a modified scientific method, to look at events that appeared in the past.

While scientists have, at times resorted to insults to win debates, we don't permit that here.
- Requiring evidence is not an insult
- Setting a high bar for the evidence is expected

extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence

- Some of the evidence quoted above is based on analysis of ancient texts, which can be rather opaque to those who don't read those languages.
- While a coin minted during the reign of Nero is understandable by everyone

Overall, keep down the snide comments, and try to address the requests for evidence.

*At least, in Astronomy, we can look into space, and see stars of different ages, and piece together their life history from looking at many different stars.
- In Geology, we are (so far) very restricted in the number of other worlds we can look at to compare with Earth

If you review thoroughly the attacks others have leveled against me, you will get a clear picture why I have pointed out the problem.

I agree with much of what you said. However, the resurrection of Christ is reproducible today. It has been observed throughout history and up to and including the present. Hundreds of millions of people claim the same profound, other worldly impact that he has had on their lives personally through the Spirit He sent in His place just as He promised before He was crucified. This is a phenomenon. It is unprecedented. Scientists cannot simply dismiss what this mass of humanity swear by. They not only claim an extra ordinary rebirth, but his impact lasts for their lifetimes and the changes they describe are evident to others. We are not talking about a few people who had questionable experiences. Hundreds of millions of people, most of them unknown to the others, from every walk of life, rich and poor, of every color, nationality, young and old, educated and not educated, male and female, proclaim he is indeed risen and that he lives, literally, he lives inside them, just as he promised he would. People who know nothing of the N.T. or about the experiences of others, say the same things. They don't know what to expect and may never see the person who shared the message, or read the book or tract again, insist they met him and were transformed by him. Bart Ehrman had the same experience I had and I knew zero about Jesus. Zero. How do we explain all of this?

Additionally, reading what has been handed down to us through the N.T. it is abundantly obvious that no human being ever spoke as he did. No one. Not even close. (Excluding those who have portrayed him in plays and in movies etc., repeating his words.) Try to find one example of anyone who expressed himself in words/phrases like he did. Nothing is there. He was from a different universe and sounded like it in his teaching and conversations with others. He wept, too. He was total God and total man, even though someone commented the other day that screaming out asking God why he had forsaken him, proved he failed as God's son and ergo he couldn't be his son.

In attempting to point out his divine nature I may have "evangelized" without intending to. I don't know exactly what is permitted and what isn't, so I'm on my own.

[Bored chemist]

For example, "You made a statement to the effect that the Apostle's belief  in resurrection was  better proved than anything else from the period." No. I did not. I quoted a world renown scholar, Bruce Metzger who said, "The evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ is overwhelming. Nothing in history is more certain  ...

Thanks for the meaningless clarification.

Did you quote that scholar because you thought he was lying?
That would be odd, because you have subsequently said you believe it.

If I say " Einstein said  E=MC^2", i am tacitly making that statement.
I am certainly making a statement to that effect (I chose my words carefully)
Do you not understand that "nothing is more certain" is equivalent to nothing is better proved?

quoted a world renown scholar, Bruce Metzger who said, "The evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ is overwhelming. Nothing in history is more certain than that the disciples believed that, after being crucified, dead, and buried, Christ rose again from the tomb on the third day, and that at intervals thereafter he met and conversed with them.”

And , in my original reply to that I pointed out the problems
Firstly
" a world renown scholar,"Is the logical fallacy known as an appeal to authority.
Secondly, what the apostles believed isn't the issue here- they might have been mistaken (they might have believed what they wanted to believe).

Thirdly, and most importantly, the assertion  you reported is obviously untrue.

"Nothing in history is more certain than that ..."
Plenty of things in history are more certain than that- for example, the fact that Nero was emperor of Rome.

(In fact, his statement is more general and more absurd. Is it really more certain than that, for example, "Queen Elizabeth was crowned in 1953"?)

And yet you say you believe it...

[Bored chemist]

However, the resurrection of Christ is reproducible today.

Good.
Just show us that happening then.

[Bored chemist]

Scientists cannot simply dismiss what this mass of humanity swear by.

Yes we can.
Not least because there's an even bigger mass of humanity who do not believe it.
The "a million lemmings can't be wrong" never was valid.

[Bored chemist]

This is a phenomenon. It is unprecedented.

There are precedents recorded long before Christ.

[Bored chemist]

Hundreds of millions of people, most of them unknown to the others, from every walk of life, rich and poor, of every color, nationality, young and old, educated and not educated,

No.
They were all educated in the sense of "having been taught".
In particular, they were generally taught by people with a vested interest in convincing them.

[Bored chemist]

he lives inside them, just as he promised he would.

In some, but for the rest of us, that promise is broken.

[Bored chemist]

Additionally, reading what has been handed down to us through the N.T. it is abundantly obvious that no human being ever spoke as he did. No one. Not even close. (Excluding those who have portrayed him in plays and in movies etc., repeating his words.) Try to find one example of anyone who expressed himself in words like he did.

We already wrote off that nonsense.
He didn't speak English.
The poetry of, for example, the KJB comes from the work of the translators.

[Bored chemist]

By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life"

OK, show everybody where I said that.

[duffyd (OP)]

This is an other reason I don't respond to you.

Because I point out that you are wrong?

thank you for this, bc. you have provided a perfect example why I refuse to respond to you. I just pointed out a couple more errors you've made and you replied in your classic style.
again, please stop harassing me.

[Bored chemist]

By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life"

OK, show everybody where I said that.

[Bored chemist]

I just pointed out a couple more errors you've made

Where?

[Bored chemist]

please stop harassing me.

Calling you out for making false statements is not harassment, not least because you can so easily avoid it.

[duffyd (OP)]

Additionally, reading what has been handed down to us through the N.T. it is abundantly obvious that no human being ever spoke as he did. No one. Not even close. (Excluding those who have portrayed him in plays and in movies etc., repeating his words.) Try to find one example of anyone who expressed himself in words like he did.

We already wrote off that nonsense.
He didn't speak English.
The poetry of, for example, the KJB comes from the work of the translators.

thank you one more time. I couldn't have found a more perfect example of the way you conduct yourself--around me at least.

i always thought his English was quite good. his Russian, not so much, Japanese definitely needs divine intervention

[Bored chemist]

I couldn't have found a more perfect example of the way you conduct yourself

Yes, cruel man that I am, I tell the truth.

[Bored chemist]

By the time you said I lack clear thinking, you had already told me to, "Tell the truth for the first time in your life"

OK, show everybody where I said that.

[Bored chemist]

You also forgot to answer this.

I just pointed out a couple more errors you've made

Where?

[Bored chemist]

Have you turned back into a pumpkin?
It's gone midnight and you seem to have gone quiet.
Or do you  not want to carry on lying on a Sunday?