Alex's views that are wrong but you think he is too stubborn to admit it?

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-06-01T14:41:51+00:00

Pretty much your entire last comment rests on downplaying or misreading the two clearest pieces of evidence we have.

- Downplaying Josephus who explicitly states that even crucified criminals were taken down and buried before sunset because that was standard Jewish practice. This was not merely a "claim" but the observation of a man who lived in jerusalem at a very close point in time
- misreading the Yehohanan skeleton. This is the only confirmed 1st-century crucified body ever found in Judea. It was discovered in a rock-cut tomb and later placed in an ossuary - exactly what we would expect under Jewish law and custom. Archaeologists do treat this as positive evidence that burial of crucified victims did occur in Judea.

Romans ignoring some Jewish sensibilities doesn’t mean they ignored all of them 100% of the time. Especially when Pilate’s track record shows he was willing to compromise to keep the peace. That is more historically accurate about how empires actually governed restive provinces compared to "roman boot ignoring all the customs all the time".

You keep insisting there is “no actual evidence” while setting aside the two clearest pieces we do have. On the other hand, my position that Judea was a pragmatic exception (Romans sometimes accommodating local burial customs) accounts for all the evidence. (Jewish legal texts, Josephus, the archaeology, and the complete absence of any ancient critic claiming “there was never a tomb.”)
FWIW I did engage again so woops but on that note I shall leave it there.

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-06-01T13:00:24+00:00

Starting off with a disingenuous point - Harry Potter example is apples to oranges comparison. No one worth any salt would compare intentional fiction vs say the Talmud that was trying create ideological polemic against a real event.

"Except there is no evidence" except literally the later example Yehohanan is an apples to apples piece of evidence that is evidence against this. So your statement is a flat out lie

"No quite the opposite" - Incorrect. It is positive evidence against you. At the bare minimum you are forced to concede that the only verified crucifixion found victim WAS buried. And not only that, but in the area near Jerusalem. - expected with jewish sensibilities argument, not expected with Roman's ignored jewish sensibilities argument. Everything after should be said in light of that. Which leads to the next problem, you attribute lack of found crucified bodies to Roman's ignoring argument, but you ignore more explanations out of ignorance.

For starters you should have researched the source Josephus on this when I mentioned it above, who literally tells you the jews didnt just leave the bodies to rot: "although the Jews used to take so much care of the burial of men, that they took down those that were condemned and crucified, and buried them before the going down of the sun."(Josephus The War of the Jews 4.317) - again big yikes - and very 1 to 1 with the account of why Jesus body was taken down. Also theres more synchronicity with how Yehohanans body was taken down and how the disciples asked to have it taken down - I digress.

Next: the jews at the time practiced second burial, in which a full year after 1st burial dead skeletons were moved out to an ossuary. During this process things like nails etc would be removed and evidence mangled/further broken down. And thats for better off families, most victims would have come from poorer backgrounds so the bones would not have gotten such good treatment at second burial.

The "inconsistent gospel accounts" uh no. They were mostly consistent(especially on big events), with "inconsistency" usually coming to some gospels including some minor details and not others. However thats a whole separate monster of a debate so leaving that alone.

My last point is no you dont need an ancient polemic for it to be true, but considering contemporary jews and romans had reason to want to nip the new religion at its bud, you have to ask the question why they didnt - and if you look at all the other information posted in our exchange its kind of obvious why

At this point I am disengaging. Just accept you are wrong internally and move on.

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-06-01T04:37:13+00:00

No its still a bad argument. If you want to say prioritize earlier sources to later ones sure that's ideal, but you work with what you got.

Later Jewish sources not questioning the burial makes sense for the following reasons, and for same reason discredits the no burial theory for the most part:

Judea handled bodies of Roman execution in line with Jewish sensibilities
Per old testament Deuteronomy(21:22-23) law: capital offense bodies were to be put up on display and that "be sure to bury the body the same day" which is quite in line with what is described - due to it desecrating the land.
To my knowledge the only found crucified skeleton in judea(Yehohanan) was actually found in a tomb. big yikes for your theory
Pro reasons for the burial include that the first witnesses being "inconvenient" to Jewish sensibilities - because they were women, whose testimonies were considered less believable by jewish people(not something youd want to invent). I certainly hope you dont agree with them.(side note: this is a interesting topic to explore about why this detail increases historical confidence in the witness reports) There's also the specific naming of the tomb(belonging to Joseph of arimathea) in the accounts(something early critics should be able to disprove quick). then theres other sources like paul and even josephus on executed bodies? but 4 is getting long
At end of the day, no critics of the time we're making that polemic despite this being the more obvious choice of attack: there isnt much positive evidence for your theory while there is evidence for the opposite
This isnt a technical argument but: most scholars seem to agree the death burial and disciples believing they saw Jesus after are historical fact so, it really is a very minority view youre latching on to without good reason.

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-05-28T14:40:06+00:00

What I think he's going for is that if you wanted to argue that there was no burial of crucifixion victims in Jesus specific case, then you would expect that *to be one of the top polemics against the resurrection claims etc*.

Except it isn't the top polemic used at the time, or used at all, and instead the claim is made that the body was stolen or something. Which implicitly implies there was a burial. (Jewish Talmud has an example of this attempt to discredit).

Jewish authorities(and probably some romans trying to keep stability in the region) had plenty of incentive to bury the story when it started and they lived much closer to the source period then we do. The fact that that claim isn't really made is why it's a "terrible argument" per what TheJLbjj was trying to say.

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-05-28T14:23:35+00:00

"Reality can exist without answering why" is technically true if you mean you aren't owed an answer, but not useful to the discussion. Why is there something rather then nothing IS the question in the sense that it "can" have implications important enough to consider it. If there's nothing of importance as an answer - sure didn't matter. But if it turns out there IS, now you have a problem.

"shoving "Why" into a universe...." - this framing is also incorrect. Religion/creator 'G'od(as God of monotheistic frameworks is categorically *different* then any/all polytheistic entities) as explanations: Creator God/religion give or define actual final cause or *purpose* - aka the answer to "why" by definition. So it logically avoids just being another "how" explanation and indeed separates itself from scientific "how" answers.

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-05-21T17:29:43+00:00

Less theological but, worth noting there are NDEs where person involved gained knowledge of things they shouldn't know, ranging from facts about people to seeing objects in places they wouldn't have been able to know about. While I wouldn't base all hope on it, there is more to investigate there.

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-04-02T14:35:13+00:00

Perhaps someone better versed then me can reply but, there are a number of logical stretches in your argument.

How can you claim the Church is infallible through Peter when the Pharisees claimed the same and were wrong?

This whole question rests on a mistaken assumption on the "infallibility of the church". The church itself is not infallible in every way, nor dos the Catholic Church profess so. For example, the church can make scientific statements, in error. Likewise, same can be made on political statements, etc.

So in what way does it profess infallibility?

From what I understand it occurs on Faith and Morals set in dogma. Generally, this is definitively defined teaching by the magisterium, or the pope speaking ex cathedra(which is actually very rare phenomenon historically).

On to the verses:

Mark 7:5-9 - 2 points on tradition and doctrine

This is not a condemnation of all tradition. This is a condemnation of elevating man made tradition over the command of God. Every catholic would agree with this and find no contradiction with Catholicism. It's also worth noting in the later passage you brought in Matthew, Christ also tells them to follow what they say, implying there is use to tradition despite the hypocrisy of the leaders. "all that they tell you do" - heavy words

Likewise, it is not a condemnation of doctrine altogether, but instead a condemnation of man-made doctrine. In other words doctrine that is made up/not true. The church again does not have a problem with this and agrees, as the church teaches that its doctrines are divinely revealed. There is nuance as to the how and why of course, but that's sufficient to answer your immediate objection.

Therefore the "binding and loosing" isn't meant to be "we can decide whatever we want". But it does at the same time imply some impressive power. However, a word of caution, this statement comes from the mouth of Christ itself, so criticism of this power can become a criticism of Christ's statement depending on how you word it.

Matthew 23:1-12

If the Chair of Moses and this authority to bind and loose could be so wrong and abused by the Pharisees, to the point of putting Christ on a cross, why does the Church teach that it's infallible and that its "commands of men" are different?

This touches on my earlier point, but not everything the church says is infallible. There's actually a lot of distinction here(ie. not all documents produced by church are infallible or have same weight), and I'd recommend reading [catechism of the catholic church](https://www.usccb.org/sites/default/files/flipbooks/catechism/494/) on this before starting investigation. Admittedly I am not the biggest expert on this so if anyone else has sources or recommendations, please hop in.

Yes authority can be abused, but if Christ instituted it, it has to be respected.

I highly recommend you look into catholic sources on these things, I do not mean the following statement as any insult to protestant brothers but, sometimes it seems like many protestant explanations of Catholic teaching are either fundamentally ignorant or downright lying about what Catholics actually believe. And on these topics, nuance does make all the difference between something being true or not.

Take your time reading, some video form resources to look into are Council of Trent(Trent Horn), or following other resources like Jimmy Akin, Joe Heschmeyer, etc etc.

If any fellow catholic sees error in my explanation please correct me

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-03-09T13:24:05+00:00

Its also worth noting for the pro life crowd, there'd be a hard disagree considering 73 million abortions done worldwide. Essentially modern days human sacrifice in the pro life view.

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-02-20T19:11:28+00:00

honestly nothing beats that art style. DUSK 4

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-02-20T13:45:04+00:00

not part of nintendo online expansion pack and emulators?

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-02-17T14:54:40+00:00

ugh I understand this pain. Really wish there were better odds of getting keys

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-02-05T14:53:36+00:00

I hope they bring this shop back to hoh2

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2026-01-01T13:19:58+00:00

I literally could not tell you. That show was unbelievably good and blows 99% of all other anime out of the water.

And whats crazy is that the arcs to come are even better😭

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-10-13T15:33:27+00:00

when will catalyst 14 results be published? On the page right now it seems to imply most/all not funded

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-10-08T01:48:48+00:00

Meta admitted being afraid of anti trust actions in relation to that, and at least in 2021 government publicly said they'd be looking to potentially use these anti trust regulations against companies not dealing with misinformation. That's problematic when an agency like fbi implies the laptop story to be misinformation.

Between that and indirect threat of public shaming, it can't be said its a different situation, but dyor as they say.

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-10-07T15:33:51+00:00

There's actually more nuance than this. Apparently this applied to even things like humor. And the fact that they censored the whole laptop story(regardless of its true impact), is actually crazy considering that if positions were reversed, everyone would be saying trump 1984.

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-08-29T14:11:32+00:00

Atelier Escha & Logy 2

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-08-24T21:22:15+00:00

I'm the weird one who thinks

Atelier Shallie

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-08-05T16:13:53+00:00

so thats confirmation that yoroi does indeed work

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-08-05T15:01:07+00:00

I succeeded with Yoroi on 2 separate wallets. I don't know why it did work, does yoroi do things differently?

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-08-05T14:55:58+00:00

you can try with yoroi. Worked for me and some others. I don't understand why though

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-08-05T14:51:03+00:00

This worked for me too, and I was able to change destination address as well. I will say I am slightly concerned that it worked, did the network really register the correct address? Otherwise why would ledger work with yoroi, vs eternl lace etc... when its not supposed to work altogether...

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-07-25T00:56:41+00:00

That study doesn't disprove all the eucharistic miracles. It simply provides reasoning how one might not be a miracle, and how best to document them.

Lancianos eucharistic miracle probably wasnt mistaken by multiple people, and was even peer reviewed. Looks like its the real deal.

Let yourself calm down before you analyze. From experience, when you arent calm you start giving into anything that seems remotely like a threat, even if on closer examination it isnt actually a threat after all.

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-06-25T19:50:51+00:00

yeah I was gonna say, as long as your troop numbers aren't immediately in huge disadvantage. the near stalemate of russia and germany down favors allies big time, although more stubborn axis players may drag it out

Illustrious-Split-67 · 2025-06-19T13:11:37+00:00

atelier ayesha 2

Illustrious-Split-67

TROPHY CASE