Matthew 27:51–53

Originally posted by @romans1009
Yes, I haven’t checked. What’s preventing you from checking?

I know what the other three Gospels have to say about what's in Matthew 27:51–53. What is surprising is that you don't.

Originally posted by @fmf
So you believe the faith that things like Matthew 27:51–53 are true must come first and then... things like Matthew 27:51–53 become true, is that what you mean?

This has to be one of the most illogical and absurd things I’ve read on here.

You believe something in history “becomes true” based on the actions or mindset of someone in the present day? Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?

Originally posted by @fmf
I know what the other three Gospels have to say about what's in Matthew 27:51–53. What is surprising is that you don't.

Why? And why did you then initially say it was unsurprising? Are you starting in with the pool whizzing already?

Originally posted by @fmf
I'll tell you when I come across it. I will go and have a look for some of those 'historical records of the time' you told me to check. If I find something that I reckon is "reasonable evidence", I will let you know.

Ok let me ask you this. Do you think it was unreasonable for you to believe God created the world when you were a Christian for decades? This belief you had for decades didn't need to be supported by a historical record did it?

Originally posted by @fmf
How does Matthew 27:51–53 "become" true then?

The account in Matthew is either true or false. It either happened or it didn’t happen. It doesn’t “become true.” It’s either true or not. I happen to believe it’s true. That doesn’t make it true. You likely think it’s false. That doesn’t make it false. Whether it’s true or false is independent of what anyone thinks.

Originally posted by @romans1009
This has to be one of the most illogical and absurd things I’ve read on here.

You believe something in history “becomes true” based on the actions or mindset of someone in the present day? Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?

On page 2, dj2becker said he honestly doesn't think things like believing Matthew 27:51–53 is possible without faith. The thing you are responding to is in response to him saying that.

Originally posted by @fmf
On page 2, dj2becker said he honestly doesn't think things like believing Matthew 27:51–53 is possible without faith. The thing you are responding to is in response to him saying that.

By the way if your interest is genuine I think you would have taken a look at this link when I posted it a while ago:

http://www.gracechapelsomd.org/books/The_New_Evidence_That_Demands_A_Verdict.pdf

Did you actually even bother to have a look at it? If so, do you have any comments about it?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Ok let me ask you this. Do you think it was unreasonable for you to believe God created the world when you were a Christian for decades? This belief you had for decades didn't need to be supported by a historical record did it?

I eventually came to the conclusion that the Bible wasn't a reliable historical source for the claims that Christians make about supernatural stuff. The fact that 20 or more years before you became a Christian, I just so happened to believe things you believe today, is a very weak argument to be using with me now that I am an atheist.

Originally posted by @fmf
I eventually came to the conclusion that the Bible wasn't a reliable historical source for the claims that Christians make about supernatural stuff. The fact that 20 or more years before you became a Christian, I just so happened to believe things you believe today, is a very weak argument to be using with me now that I am an atheist.

I just find it interesting that you cannot give me one specific example of something that lead you to the conclusion that the Bible wasn't a reliable historical record.

Originally posted by @fmf
On page 2, dj2becker said he honestly doesn't think things like believing Matthew 27:51–53 is possible without faith. The thing you are responding to is in response to him saying that.

Believing something and something being true are not always the same.

I understand what Becker is saying. I don’t think you understand what he’s saying.

He’s saying faith is necessary to believe the account in Matthew. I agree.

But whether the account in Matthew is true or not doesn’t change based on whether someone believes it.

Originally posted by @romans1009
The account in Matthew is either true or false. It either happened or it didn’t happen. It doesn’t “become true.” It’s either true or not. I happen to believe it’s true. That doesn’t make it true. You likely think it’s false. That doesn’t make it false. Whether it’s true or false is independent of what anyone thinks.

The account in Matthew is either true or false. [...] I happen to believe it’s true.

Because it's in the Bible, right?

Originally posted by @romans1009
[dj2becker is] saying faith is necessary to believe the account in Matthew. I agree.

OK, then we are on the same page about what dj2becker said.

Originally posted by @fmf
[b]The account in Matthew is either true or false. [...] I happen to believe it’s true.

Because it's in the Bible, right?[/b]

We already went over this. And not a year ago or three weeks ago or even an hour ago. More like 15 minutes ago.

Originally posted by @fmf
OK, then we are on the same page about what dj2becker said.

Sure. Faith is necessary for just about everything. If it weren’t no one would leave their bed.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I just find it interesting that you cannot give me one specific example of something that lead you to the conclusion that the Bible wasn't a reliable historical record.

It's not that I "cannot".

For example, I have spoken at length about it to hundreds of people in a room on more than one occasion and I have started countless threads about it here in this community and there have been "specific examples" of why I no longer think the Bible is a reliable historical record to support the key claims that underpin Christianity in thousands and thousands of my posts on hundreds of thread on this forum stretching back a decade.

It's not that I cannot give you one specific example; it's this: I am not interested in discussing it with you.