Re: Why Christianity is Fake
Its so funny how all these weird atheists on this forum just keep putting up these false claims that they can refute Dr. Naik easily and that hes a liar and that his arguments are not good. Okay if you think that then prove it straight up. Dont just say stuff and dont back it up. And I am pretty positive that Naik could win a debate against all you kuffar on this forum put together.
In the link posted above that started this whole discussion, the one with the christian debating him about if Jesus died on the cross, he gives a number of rather ridiculus claims and arguments, as I've already pointed out. And note that it is ATHEISTS and in my case probably the most anti-christian member of this board who is criticizing this man's arguments AGAINST chritian claims. I agree with this man's view on this matter. Jesus wasn't ressurected. But this mans arguments are just plain lame.
He also appears to be pulling definitions out of thin air and declaring them to bind us all.
Here are his arguments:
- Jesus claimed to be resurrected and a verse shows him trying to prove to his disciples that its him and not a spirit. This debater then quotes this and argues along with Jesus that jesus was not a spirit. So he's arguing that Jesus was indeed instead a resurected body? He's arguing against his own position here. The guy is defeating HIMSELF in the debate.
- He cites Mark 16:1 which depicts Mary Magdelane coming to Jesus' tomb with sweet spices to anoint his body. He argues "do jews massage dead bodies"? Apparently trying to argue that she went there to see him alive (apperently he was just camping out in the tomb as some sort of parlour trick - which totally makes Jesus out to look like a charltan, which I'm sure no muslim would say he is). He then completely ignores the verses IMMEDIATELY after this one which depict Mary magdelanes suprise at seeing him alvie (so apparently she thought he was dead after all and this argument is ruined to those who know how to read more than one verse).
- He then continues to argue against himself, as in the argument 2 paragraphs up. He argues about the linens being unbound etc and the tomb door being open and thus he wasn't a spirit but a physical body (well yes that is exactly what the Christians would want us to believe, that he was resurected).
- He then makes some strange reference to Jonah and the Whale. Apparently there is a verse saying that Jesus would be like Jonah, 3 days and 3 nights. He argues that Jonah didn't die so Jesus didn't either, because the prophecy says he'd be like Jonah. A coherent argument finally, but does it really carry any weight? Jesus wasn't swallowed by a whale like Johan, so apparently the prophecy isn't saying every detail must be the same. Also, if he doesn't meet this prophecy that doesn't mean he wasn't dead and resurected, it just means the prophecy was wrong. It wouldn't be the first.
The most peculiar thing about this debate is that the muslim fellow seems to be painting Jesus as orchastrating a giant hoax. I could see atheists or other non-abrahamics making such a case, but don't muslims consider Jesus a prophet and above such a thing? This is the most confusing point of all I think.
