<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What We Know About Jesus and the Resurrection</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.coffeehousetheology.com</link>
	<description>The Unvarnished Truth About Religion, Christianity and Spirituality</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:27:14 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Stuart Greene</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/comment-page-1/#comment-32646</link>
		<dc:creator>Stuart Greene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 12:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/?page_id=10#comment-32646</guid>
		<description>God has only given limited knowledge to Man to think ...its for us to beilieve it or not.. Jesus did rise from the dead.. he was not buried in Kashmir ..he never did go ther..he was caught up in the clouds.. people who need an explanation on this..should accept christianity is not a religion..its a relationship we share with GOD our father...where Jesus is with him.. and the only way we can understand GOD is by accepting Jesus as our personal saviour...he is the only way to God our Father in heaven.. !!! well its a choice one has to make.. instead of arguing about what already has been created by the hands of GOD himself .. we will all only believe when we are raised from the dead on the judegement day !!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>God has only given limited knowledge to Man to think &#8230;its for us to beilieve it or not.. Jesus did rise from the dead.. he was not buried in Kashmir ..he never did go ther..he was caught up in the clouds.. people who need an explanation on this..should accept christianity is not a religion..its a relationship we share with GOD our father&#8230;where Jesus is with him.. and the only way we can understand GOD is by accepting Jesus as our personal saviour&#8230;he is the only way to God our Father in heaven.. !!! well its a choice one has to make.. instead of arguing about what already has been created by the hands of GOD himself .. we will all only believe when we are raised from the dead on the judegement day !!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Griffith</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/comment-page-1/#comment-31074</link>
		<dc:creator>James Griffith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 18:03:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/?page_id=10#comment-31074</guid>
		<description>How do you know Aril&#039;s concern is sincere? It may be, but you are in no position to know. This is an oft repeated concern by many people who are sincere, but to know that any one person&#039;s expression of the concern is sincere, you would have to know something more about the person than the fact that they voiced (or wrote) such a concern.

Aril&#039;s concern _is_ a _legitimate_ one, sincere or not. Your reply however, is an obvious and erroneous plug for Mormonism or a similar offshoot. The Bible does not support that God guided his people through &quot;one&quot; prophet. Frequently, there were multiple prophets &quot;receiving constant revelation&quot;. There were not twelve apostles until the time of Christ, and this number lasted for less than a generation. Yes, the other apostles replaced Judas, but then there is no mention of the replacing of the other apostles as they were martyred. Also, if we take seriously Paul&#039;s title as &quot;apostle&quot; to the nations, then there were thirteen for a short time.

In addition, there is little reason to believe that the gift of prophecy would necessarily continue. Paul&#039;s writings make clear that all of the gifts of the spirit (including prophecy, speaking in tongues, miracle healings, etc.) would cease to be _except_ love.

Finally, to what do you refer with the term &quot;priesthood&quot;? If you mean teachers or preachers, that ceased to exist with the establishment of Christ&#039;s new covenant. All Christians were preachers and most, if not all, were teachers. If you mean leaders of the church, these were simply referred to as &quot;older men&quot; or something similarly translated. As for laying on of hands, this is also nonsense. Who laid hands on the first member of the priesthood? No mention of laying on of hands is mentioned in the account of Pentecost in 33 C.E.. What _is_ mentioned is God&#039;s holy spirit, which requires no hands and can be given to anyone by God at whatever time God chooses. The only clear evidence we are given (that I know of) to judge of such possession of spirit is recorded in Galatians 5, the fruits of the spirit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How do you know Aril&#8217;s concern is sincere? It may be, but you are in no position to know. This is an oft repeated concern by many people who are sincere, but to know that any one person&#8217;s expression of the concern is sincere, you would have to know something more about the person than the fact that they voiced (or wrote) such a concern.</p>
<p>Aril&#8217;s concern _is_ a _legitimate_ one, sincere or not. Your reply however, is an obvious and erroneous plug for Mormonism or a similar offshoot. The Bible does not support that God guided his people through &#8220;one&#8221; prophet. Frequently, there were multiple prophets &#8220;receiving constant revelation&#8221;. There were not twelve apostles until the time of Christ, and this number lasted for less than a generation. Yes, the other apostles replaced Judas, but then there is no mention of the replacing of the other apostles as they were martyred. Also, if we take seriously Paul&#8217;s title as &#8220;apostle&#8221; to the nations, then there were thirteen for a short time.</p>
<p>In addition, there is little reason to believe that the gift of prophecy would necessarily continue. Paul&#8217;s writings make clear that all of the gifts of the spirit (including prophecy, speaking in tongues, miracle healings, etc.) would cease to be _except_ love.</p>
<p>Finally, to what do you refer with the term &#8220;priesthood&#8221;? If you mean teachers or preachers, that ceased to exist with the establishment of Christ&#8217;s new covenant. All Christians were preachers and most, if not all, were teachers. If you mean leaders of the church, these were simply referred to as &#8220;older men&#8221; or something similarly translated. As for laying on of hands, this is also nonsense. Who laid hands on the first member of the priesthood? No mention of laying on of hands is mentioned in the account of Pentecost in 33 C.E.. What _is_ mentioned is God&#8217;s holy spirit, which requires no hands and can be given to anyone by God at whatever time God chooses. The only clear evidence we are given (that I know of) to judge of such possession of spirit is recorded in Galatians 5, the fruits of the spirit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dalibor Sver</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/comment-page-1/#comment-30771</link>
		<dc:creator>Dalibor Sver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:20:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/?page_id=10#comment-30771</guid>
		<description>I just briefly read few pages from page 14, and I can&#039;t help but wonder is the author serious or is he joking.
Jesus - beaten, whipped, crucified, stabbed etc. - without medical attention somehow leaves tomb and appears to disciples? After that, he walks casually several miles to Emmaus? I think this is far more unthinkable than resurrection.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just briefly read few pages from page 14, and I can&#8217;t help but wonder is the author serious or is he joking.<br />
Jesus &#8211; beaten, whipped, crucified, stabbed etc. &#8211; without medical attention somehow leaves tomb and appears to disciples? After that, he walks casually several miles to Emmaus? I think this is far more unthinkable than resurrection.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dalibor Sver</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/comment-page-1/#comment-30760</link>
		<dc:creator>Dalibor Sver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:20:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/?page_id=10#comment-30760</guid>
		<description>Dear Tony,
there are many statements here and I&#039;m jumping in late in the discussion, but I&#039;ll try to address just a few issues that you raised in last few replies:

&quot;People follow Mormonism and scientology when they are clearly absolute nonsense...&quot; - Those movements are not worldwide. Even if they are, it is much much easier for something to be a &quot;worldwide&quot; in globalistic society today than in 1st century. More important: would vast majority of say Scientologists be ready to die or give up their wealth for their ideology? Early Christians did.

&quot;It is horrifically violent...&quot; Yes it is. And it&#039;s shocking to everyone, especially to those who love God. And there are reasons for that, way beyond this scope, but it teaches us something about being obedient to God. In short: Caananites are evil. God says Moses after crossing Red Sea that God will do all the job of driving out Caananites to give their beautiful land to Israelites (Exodus 23:20). Israelites hesitate and fear of tall men. God changes his order: now Israelites will have
to kill and drive out all of them - including innocent children - because they didn&#039;t put their faith in him.

&quot;We have learned a great deal more about the world by studying the world, than by reading the bible.&quot; True, we&#039;re supposed to learn more about how to treat each other from the Bible than to learn about world. Somebody said &quot;Bible says how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go&quot;. But then again, there are books written about how Bible authors knew some scientific facts several thousands years ago. You don&#039;t need to look for books, there are plenty of websites available.

As for logical arguments why resurrection must be true, I&#039;ll shortly post some of them:
Even if they could, why would Christians stole the body, when there&#039;s no gain - only persecution. Afterwards, if they were in it for the gain, and were dissapionted when they met persecution, why didn&#039;t they give up and admit they lied? You might say, maybe they were delusional or crazy. Maybe one of them, or two or ten. But hundreds? And later so many, all the way in the known world of that time? Bear in mind - their faith is not just an opinion what color they prefer. It&#039;s a way of living, and willing to do anything, even die for the faith.
Furthermore, as Perry Marshall put, there are numerous extra-biblical Roman, Greek and Jewish writers that admit Jesus existed. So how come his opponents (such as Jews for example) never produced body?

One interesting page that I came across today is &quot;Did the apostles make it all up?&quot; (http://knowitstrue.com/?p=904)

Wish you well,
Dalibor</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Tony,<br />
there are many statements here and I&#8217;m jumping in late in the discussion, but I&#8217;ll try to address just a few issues that you raised in last few replies:</p>
<p>&#8220;People follow Mormonism and scientology when they are clearly absolute nonsense&#8230;&#8221; &#8211; Those movements are not worldwide. Even if they are, it is much much easier for something to be a &#8220;worldwide&#8221; in globalistic society today than in 1st century. More important: would vast majority of say Scientologists be ready to die or give up their wealth for their ideology? Early Christians did.</p>
<p>&#8220;It is horrifically violent&#8230;&#8221; Yes it is. And it&#8217;s shocking to everyone, especially to those who love God. And there are reasons for that, way beyond this scope, but it teaches us something about being obedient to God. In short: Caananites are evil. God says Moses after crossing Red Sea that God will do all the job of driving out Caananites to give their beautiful land to Israelites (Exodus 23:20). Israelites hesitate and fear of tall men. God changes his order: now Israelites will have<br />
to kill and drive out all of them &#8211; including innocent children &#8211; because they didn&#8217;t put their faith in him.</p>
<p>&#8220;We have learned a great deal more about the world by studying the world, than by reading the bible.&#8221; True, we&#8217;re supposed to learn more about how to treat each other from the Bible than to learn about world. Somebody said &#8220;Bible says how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go&#8221;. But then again, there are books written about how Bible authors knew some scientific facts several thousands years ago. You don&#8217;t need to look for books, there are plenty of websites available.</p>
<p>As for logical arguments why resurrection must be true, I&#8217;ll shortly post some of them:<br />
Even if they could, why would Christians stole the body, when there&#8217;s no gain &#8211; only persecution. Afterwards, if they were in it for the gain, and were dissapionted when they met persecution, why didn&#8217;t they give up and admit they lied? You might say, maybe they were delusional or crazy. Maybe one of them, or two or ten. But hundreds? And later so many, all the way in the known world of that time? Bear in mind &#8211; their faith is not just an opinion what color they prefer. It&#8217;s a way of living, and willing to do anything, even die for the faith.<br />
Furthermore, as Perry Marshall put, there are numerous extra-biblical Roman, Greek and Jewish writers that admit Jesus existed. So how come his opponents (such as Jews for example) never produced body?</p>
<p>One interesting page that I came across today is &#8220;Did the apostles make it all up?&#8221; (<a href="http://knowitstrue.com/?p=904" rel="nofollow">http://knowitstrue.com/?p=904</a>)</p>
<p>Wish you well,<br />
Dalibor</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexei</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/comment-page-1/#comment-30758</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexei</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:05:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/?page_id=10#comment-30758</guid>
		<description>olusina - You  raised a difficult question (Shams Book ). But this is a very delicate subject. I can only speak of my very subjective opinion. I have no doubts about the facts surrounding the birth of Islam. But information about these events is very small. There&#039;s only Arab sources. They are very different. For example, to me closer and clearer position of Sufism. At the same time about the events associated with Jesus is not just a lot of sources. These written records belong to many nations. Often these are not supporters of Christianity. About the Shams book? As a Muslim and member of the Ahmadiyya movement, his religious prejudices could not have allowed him to question the most important personages of Islam. All said and done, Where Did Jesus Die? is an interesting controversial book which Christians and non-Christians alike should read with open minds.
Sincerely yours,Alexei</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>olusina &#8211; You  raised a difficult question (Shams Book ). But this is a very delicate subject. I can only speak of my very subjective opinion. I have no doubts about the facts surrounding the birth of Islam. But information about these events is very small. There&#8217;s only Arab sources. They are very different. For example, to me closer and clearer position of Sufism. At the same time about the events associated with Jesus is not just a lot of sources. These written records belong to many nations. Often these are not supporters of Christianity. About the Shams book? As a Muslim and member of the Ahmadiyya movement, his religious prejudices could not have allowed him to question the most important personages of Islam. All said and done, Where Did Jesus Die? is an interesting controversial book which Christians and non-Christians alike should read with open minds.<br />
Sincerely yours,Alexei</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: olusina</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/comment-page-1/#comment-30679</link>
		<dc:creator>olusina</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 17:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/?page_id=10#comment-30679</guid>
		<description>Hi,
I wish to share my knowledge on Jesus and Resurrection issue. For whoever care to get facts of what really happened, I recommend this link: http://www.alislam.org/library/books/WhereDidJesusDie.pdf. Highly informative and interesting</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,<br />
I wish to share my knowledge on Jesus and Resurrection issue. For whoever care to get facts of what really happened, I recommend this link: <a href="http://www.alislam.org/library/books/WhereDidJesusDie.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.alislam.org/library/books/WhereDidJesusDie.pdf</a>. Highly informative and interesting</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aexei Levtchenko</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/comment-page-1/#comment-29432</link>
		<dc:creator>Aexei Levtchenko</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:24:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/?page_id=10#comment-29432</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m surprised more and more about the subject of dispute. Everyone chooses a faith based on internal feelings rather than logic. Who ever before. Who later. Each will receive result under his faith. Right choice. Atheism is a belief too. Often very fanatical. Unbelievers on earth has been and never will be. I think that religion and faith are different things. Religion is a tool. Faith is a spiritual condition. We can consider the biblical texts literally. They can be regarded as a grand allegory of the spiritual condition of society in his time. What does it change? A little fantasy. If Jesus or Sakya - Mooney or, later, St. Francis of Assisi was asked about the physical or metaphysical essence of God, they just would not get the idea. Each of them felt a particle of God in itself. When in the soul is not even the tiniest particles of this type … it’s great trouble. Perhaps this is the main cause of repeated thousands of years of horrors in human history. And they end in sight. It is not excluded that it could get grim.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xmazhs_apocalypse-to-be-or-not-be_music
I apologize for any errors in the text. English is not my native language.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m surprised more and more about the subject of dispute. Everyone chooses a faith based on internal feelings rather than logic. Who ever before. Who later. Each will receive result under his faith. Right choice. Atheism is a belief too. Often very fanatical. Unbelievers on earth has been and never will be. I think that religion and faith are different things. Religion is a tool. Faith is a spiritual condition. We can consider the biblical texts literally. They can be regarded as a grand allegory of the spiritual condition of society in his time. What does it change? A little fantasy. If Jesus or Sakya &#8211; Mooney or, later, St. Francis of Assisi was asked about the physical or metaphysical essence of God, they just would not get the idea. Each of them felt a particle of God in itself. When in the soul is not even the tiniest particles of this type … it’s great trouble. Perhaps this is the main cause of repeated thousands of years of horrors in human history. And they end in sight. It is not excluded that it could get grim.<br />
<a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xmazhs_apocalypse-to-be-or-not-be_music" rel="nofollow">http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xmazhs_apocalypse-to-be-or-not-be_music</a><br />
I apologize for any errors in the text. English is not my native language.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Caleb Neff</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/comment-page-1/#comment-28118</link>
		<dc:creator>Caleb Neff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 17:23:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/?page_id=10#comment-28118</guid>
		<description>First off, the flood was local, so this criticism fails. Second, I would say that the existence of our universe is an immense testament to creation. Afterall, atheism lacks a cause that works. Further, in order to minimize the reply space, can you explain where there are contradictions? So far, they have all been refuted somewhere, such as Demolishing 40 Bible Contradictions (which handles the major ones). Sure, Mohammed is more influential it would seem, but you are forgetting something: Mohammed was inspired, according to my History and Geography book, by what he thought was an angel, who was supposed to be God&#039;s angel. Given that God and Jesus are one and the same.... I think I have answered all your important objections.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First off, the flood was local, so this criticism fails. Second, I would say that the existence of our universe is an immense testament to creation. Afterall, atheism lacks a cause that works. Further, in order to minimize the reply space, can you explain where there are contradictions? So far, they have all been refuted somewhere, such as Demolishing 40 Bible Contradictions (which handles the major ones). Sure, Mohammed is more influential it would seem, but you are forgetting something: Mohammed was inspired, according to my History and Geography book, by what he thought was an angel, who was supposed to be God&#8217;s angel. Given that God and Jesus are one and the same&#8230;. I think I have answered all your important objections.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony Bigelow</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/comment-page-1/#comment-27792</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony Bigelow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Oct 2011 11:36:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/?page_id=10#comment-27792</guid>
		<description>Dear Mr Perry. I see you have chosen to delete my replies. Shame, obviously they did not suit you.
What a pity that this site does not therefore live up to its premise of &quot;Tough questions, real answers&quot;. I have posed questions you can’t answer, so you choose not to show them. I am not surprised, as this is how religion works, i.e. cherry pick the bits you like, ignore everything to the contrary. Its puerile, but typical.
You might find this interesting, it is from Jerry Coynes, “Why Evolution is true”
Thanks to Steve Smith for posting this:
1.	All known archaeological and historical evidence contradicts the entirety of the Bible’s history, before Genesis 11 and after, including the New Testament. The Jews were never in Egypt, there was never an Exodus, no Jewish conquest of the land of Israel, and no Davidic or Solomonic empire or kingdom. In fact, the Jews were still polytheists after the Ten Commandments was supposed to have been delivered. Tel Aviv U. archaeologist Ze’ev Herzog on these facts: “the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom. And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the God of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai. … The archaeology of the Land of Israel is completing a process that amounts to a scientific revolution in its field. It is ready to confront the findings of biblical scholarship and of ancient history. But at the same time, we are witnessing a fascinating phenomenon in which all this is simply ignored by the Israeli public. Many of the findings mentioned here have been known for decades. … These symbolic elements constitute such a critical component of the construction of the Israeli identity that any attempt to call their veracity into question encounters hostility or silence. It is of some interest that such tendencies within the Israeli secular society go hand-in-hand with the outlook among educated Christian groups. I have found a similar hostility in reaction to lectures I have delivered abroad to groups of Christian bible lovers, though what upset them was the challenge to the foundations of their fundamentalist religious belief.”</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Mr Perry. I see you have chosen to delete my replies. Shame, obviously they did not suit you.<br />
What a pity that this site does not therefore live up to its premise of &#8220;Tough questions, real answers&#8221;. I have posed questions you can’t answer, so you choose not to show them. I am not surprised, as this is how religion works, i.e. cherry pick the bits you like, ignore everything to the contrary. Its puerile, but typical.<br />
You might find this interesting, it is from Jerry Coynes, “Why Evolution is true”<br />
Thanks to Steve Smith for posting this:<br />
1.	All known archaeological and historical evidence contradicts the entirety of the Bible’s history, before Genesis 11 and after, including the New Testament. The Jews were never in Egypt, there was never an Exodus, no Jewish conquest of the land of Israel, and no Davidic or Solomonic empire or kingdom. In fact, the Jews were still polytheists after the Ten Commandments was supposed to have been delivered. Tel Aviv U. archaeologist Ze’ev Herzog on these facts: “the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom. And it will come as an unpleasant shock to many that the God of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort and that the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai. … The archaeology of the Land of Israel is completing a process that amounts to a scientific revolution in its field. It is ready to confront the findings of biblical scholarship and of ancient history. But at the same time, we are witnessing a fascinating phenomenon in which all this is simply ignored by the Israeli public. Many of the findings mentioned here have been known for decades. … These symbolic elements constitute such a critical component of the construction of the Israeli identity that any attempt to call their veracity into question encounters hostility or silence. It is of some interest that such tendencies within the Israeli secular society go hand-in-hand with the outlook among educated Christian groups. I have found a similar hostility in reaction to lectures I have delivered abroad to groups of Christian bible lovers, though what upset them was the challenge to the foundations of their fundamentalist religious belief.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony Bigelow</title>
		<link>http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/what-we-know-about-jesus-and-the-resurrection/comment-page-1/#comment-27598</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony Bigelow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2011 21:08:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coffeehousetheology.com/?page_id=10#comment-27598</guid>
		<description>In response to your comments regarding so called “miracles”. When you consider the hundreds / thousands of millions of prayers that have been offered to “god”, and the innumerable times people have suffered and died horribly throughout history, yet in response to this tirade of pleas to a merciful god for help, you can provide a dozen or so “miracles”. Does this not strike you as utterly pathetic? Just what percentage of prayers made results in a “miracle “granted? It is such an infinitesimally small proportion that it counts as non-existent. What is a miracle is that we do not see more “miracles” just purely based on the statistical likelihood of anomalies occurring in such a massive sample.  I am sorry; this just does not count as evidence of anything at all. If anything it is a very good case for atheism, because this god does so very little to confirm his existence. Sometimes strange things happen, and the reasons may not be immediately obvious. This does not make them miraculous, and certainly does not support the case for divine intervention.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In response to your comments regarding so called “miracles”. When you consider the hundreds / thousands of millions of prayers that have been offered to “god”, and the innumerable times people have suffered and died horribly throughout history, yet in response to this tirade of pleas to a merciful god for help, you can provide a dozen or so “miracles”. Does this not strike you as utterly pathetic? Just what percentage of prayers made results in a “miracle “granted? It is such an infinitesimally small proportion that it counts as non-existent. What is a miracle is that we do not see more “miracles” just purely based on the statistical likelihood of anomalies occurring in such a massive sample.  I am sorry; this just does not count as evidence of anything at all. If anything it is a very good case for atheism, because this god does so very little to confirm his existence. Sometimes strange things happen, and the reasons may not be immediately obvious. This does not make them miraculous, and certainly does not support the case for divine intervention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

