I will reply in all caps simply to make it easy for you to distiniquish between my answers and your replies.Using all caps makes the likelihood of me responding to what you write much lower.
AT TIMES IT CAN BE CRUEL FOR THE SIMPLE FACT THAT SOME PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE THE INTELLECTUAL RESOURCES TO FIGHT BACK. IT IS SIMPLY BEING A BULLY. [..] MANY PEOPLE NEITHER HAVE THE INTELLIGENCE AND/OR TIME TO DO THIS. IT IS SIMPLY IMMORAL TO INTELLECTUALLY WHIP THEM UP THE FLOOR.Indeed -- which is why I won't bother answering the comments of yours for which the responses are obvious to anyone familiar with my site or with infidels.org.
H: I haven't researched NDE, but I know that the scientific communityThe same community that gives out Nobel prizes for the discovery of reproducible phenomena that can't be explained with known physics.K: WHICH COMMUNITY MIGHT I ASK.ASTROPHYSCIST?
THE VAST MAJORITY OF NDE RESEARCHERS BELIEVE IT IS POWERFUL EVIDENCE FOR THE AFTERLIFE. I THINK IT IS REASONABLE TO USE THE VIEWS OF THE RESEARCHERS ON THE SUBJECT, DONT YOU?The vast majority of paranormal-phenomenon-X researchers believe in X. Does that make X real?
H: I've indeed said that a few key individual hallucinations may have been involved in the rise of ChristianityHallucinations are a scientifically documented phenomenon. Miracles aren't. If the NT evidence can be explained with a few hallucinations instead of the systematic positing of miracles, then it's obvious which hypothesis is motivated by parsimony and which by faith.K: I SIMPLY FIND THE HALLUCINATIONS TO SIMPLY BE THE FAITH OF ATHEISM
YOU MENTIONED NOTHING ABOUT THE FACT I HAD READ ATHEIST SCHOLARSHIPYou expressly said that what you had read didn't qualify as scholarship: "Why wasnt I using scholarship, who should care what Farrell Till, [etc. said]?"
AND THE FACT I HAVE STUDIED BLACKMORES IDEAS ON THE NDE [..]Before we discuss NDE, you'll first have to tell me which other paranormal phenomena on my list cannot yet be ruled out as nonsense, and why you think NDE isn't taken seriously by mainstream science.
ODD INDEED THE LEGEND WOULD USE WOMEN AS PRIMARY WITNESSES AND USE THE SUPPLIER OF THE TOMB AS A MEMBER OF THE SANHEDRIN. ODDER INDEED IS THE IDEA OF A "LEGEND" USING A TAX COLLECTOR AS A WITNESS.History is full of oddities. If these things are so "odd", why don't all historians of the Ancient Near East consider them to be dispositive proof of Christianity?
H: You're confusing core narrative historicity with inerrancy about supernatural claims.It's an objection rooted in parsimony, which is the heart of rationality. You might as well say "this is a rational objection alone". That you could write this sentence with a straight face demonstrates that you lack a basic familiarity with epistemology.K: WELL THE ONLY OBJECTION I COULD OFFER AGAINST THE NT BY THIS TIME WAS IT DEALT IN THE SUPERNATURE. AND THIS IS A PHILOSOPHICIAL OBJECTION ALONE
H: the burden is on fundamentalists to explain why it is inerrant in its supernatural claims.OK, which NT supernatural claim might be errant? If you believe one might be errant, why do you believe they all cannot be errant?K: WRONG AGAIN, INERRANTANCY IS A PET DOCTRINE WHICH I DO NOT BELIEVER.
I AM A CONSERVATIVE WHO BELIEVES IF I DID NOT ACCEPT THE OVERALL RELIABILITY OF THE NT THEN I WOULD BE A DIRTY HISTORIAN.Quote me one secular historian saying in a peer-reviewed forum that the basic historic plausibility of the Gospel narratives implies that their supernatural claims should be assumed reliable until proven otherwise.
I REALIZE THEY HAVE TREMENDOUS VALIDITY ON THE START OF CHRISTIANITY AND THEIR SUPERNATURAL CLAIMS SHOULD NOT BE JUST IGNORED.Strawman. Who says those claims should "be just ignored"? (If you allegedly know the arguments of atheism, why don't you correctly construe them?)
MANY PEOPLE TO THIS DAY REPORT GHOST (WHICH I HAVE EXPERIENCED) MIRACLES AND OTHER SUPERNATURAL OCCURENCES.Oh, well then your carpenter from Galilee must be the designer and creator of the universe. :-)
I SIMPLY BELIEVE YOUR SIDE HAS DEFINED AND IGNORED THE SUPERNATURAL OUT OF EXISTANCENo, the evidence (or lack thereof) is what currently rules the paranormal out of the existence -- and the normal into existence.