What Does The Statement "I Know Jesus Rose From The Dead" Have To Do With Jesus Rising From The Dead?

[Brade]

I just want to run this quick poll to satisfy my curiosity. I'm mainly interested in what active members think, but, of course, anyone is welcome to report.

Edited November 10, 2012 by Brade

[TAO]

Eh... your wording is kinda misleading to the intent of your poll.

You need to include the word 'proven' somewhere in there. Because that's what the debate is over =p.

[Brade]

Eh... your wording is kinda misleading to the intent of your poll.

You need to include the word 'proven' somewhere in there. Because that's what the debate is over =p.

No, I used exactly the wording that was used in the thread you're talking about. This thread isn't about what is or is not proven. The intent of the pol is to get a sense for how people understand statements like "I know Jesus rose from the dead". Do you understand them to have something to do with whether Jesus rose from the dead, or not? That's the purpose of this thread and poll. That's it.

Edited November 10, 2012 by Brade

[MorningStar]

I don't really get what you're asking. It's a testimony that Jesus was resurrected.

[volgadon]

I think we need a poll on what people understand this poll to be about.

[cesc101]

please what does "has nothing [/something] to with" mean in this context?

Is it like the "I know" affects the actual event?

Or, the "I know" is suppose to affect the believe?

[Brade]

bukowski, I'm hope you're in here reading this, because I guess this is what I get for asking non-philosophers to assess a philosophical question. I'm seriously loling right now.

Edited November 10, 2012 by Brade

[cesc101]

I think we need a poll on what people understand this poll to be about.

hmm...

You Wizard of [Oops!]

O that I could rep you a thousand times!

[cesc101]

Ok Brade,

maybe a little help (like linking the thread were this poll originated from) will be very useful to someone like myself.

thanks.

[Brade]

Ok Brade,

maybe a little help (like linking the thread were this poll originated from) will be very useful to someone like myself.

thanks.

This is from the Knowing, Believing, And Doubts thread. The discussion most immediately relevant to this poll starts here. Again, this thread and poll isn't meant to settle the issues being discussed in that thread. Rather, I just want to get a sense for what you and anyone else thinks about the meaning of statements like "I know Jesus rose from the dead".

[Freedom]

What does 'I know my phone number' have to do with 'my phone number is 777-222-3333'. One is stating what you know, the other is the subject of your knowledge. I am confused to why this would require a pole. It sounds more like it requires a lesson in basic grammar.

[cesc101]

the "I Know" end of the statement goes to show a certain kind of deductive (based on reason/study) conclusion - be it True or False, it did certainly affected the "I Know".

So, yes, it has something to do with it.

[teddyaware]

The first statement could be correct if the individual claiming to know the Saviour rose from the dead is actually lying. It could also be correct in the instance of another person who claims to 'know,' who has a strongly-held, intellectually-formed opinion on the subject, without having gained a true and living testimony of the Lord's resurrection through revelation by the power of the Holy Ghost.

The second statement could be correct if the person making the claim has gained a true and living testimony of the Saviour's resurrection through personal revelation by the power of the Holy Ghost.

...no man can say (know) that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. 1 Cor 12

[teddyaware]

The first statement could be correct if the individual claiming to know the Saviour rose from the dead is actually lying. It could also be correct in the instance of another person who claims to know -- who has a strongly-held, intellectually-formed opinion on the subject -- without having gained a true and living testimony through revelation by the power of the Holy Ghost.

The second statement could be correct if the person making the claim has gained a true and living testimony of the Saviour's resurrection through personal revelation by the power of the Holy Ghost.

...no man can say (know) that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. 1 Cor 12

Edited November 10, 2012 by teddyaware

[ERayR]

How about a poll to that asks if polls have any relevance to anything.

[DH]

bukowski, I'm hope you're in here reading this, because I guess this is what I get for asking non-philosophers to assess a philosophical question. I'm seriously loling right now.

Maybe certain fancy pants philosophers need to take an English class in order to learn how to communicate.

The phrase "I know Jesus rose from the dead" obviously has something to do with whether or not Jesus rose from the dead, because that's the subject of the phrase. It doesn't prove that Jesus actually did rise from the dead, but it is most definitely about whether or not Jesus rose from the dead.

Edited November 10, 2012 by DH

[Brade]

Maybe certain fancy pants philosophers need to take an English class in order to learn how to communicate.

The phrase "I know Jesus rose from the dead" obviously has something to do with whether or not Jesus rose from the dead, because that's the subject of the phrase. It doesn't prove that Jesus actually did rise from the dead, but it is most definitely about whether or not Jesus rose from the dead.

Well, clearly you believe as I do that the phrase "I know Jesus rose from the dead" has something to do with whether Jesus rose from the dead. But it's not an uncontroversial matter in philosophy, as the other thread is demonstrating. Also, as bukowski has rightly pointed out in the other thread, the subject of the sentence "I know Jesus rose from the dead" is "I".

Edited November 10, 2012 by Brade

[Brade]

How about a poll to that asks if polls have any relevance to anything.

I should think that the past few weeks have shown that polls have at least some relevance to things. Specifically, this poll is relevant to getting a sense for how some people think their language relates to the world. But, go ahead, make a poll about polls so we can see whether people think polls have any relevance to anything.

[DH]

What if I was a physician who had seen Jesus' dead body, checked for a heartbeat, brainwaves, etc. and knew he was really dead. Then I saw him rise from the dead, and I checked his heartbeat and brainwaves again, and could verify he really was alive. Would the phrase "I know Jesus rose from the dead" then have anything to do with whether or not Jesus actually rose from the dead?

Edited November 10, 2012 by DH

[BCSpace]

I'm mainly interested in what active members think, but, of course, anyone is welcome to report.

Perhaps you should ask four questions, two for active LDS and two for other than active LDS. As for myself, the statement has everything to do with whether or not he literally rose from the dead and whether or not one believes or has a spiritual witness (knowing) that is so.

Edited November 10, 2012 by BCSpace

[MorningStar]

What does 'I know my phone number' have to do with 'my phone number is 777-222-3333'. One is stating what you know, the other is the subject of your knowledge. I am confused to why this would require a pole. It sounds more like it requires a lesson in basic grammar.

*calls Freedom*

[MorningStar]

Here's a poll. I agree that:

I know this poll makes no sense has nothing to do with this poll making no sense.

I know this poll makes no sense has something to do with this poll making no sense.

[Brade]

Here's a poll. I agree that:

I know this poll makes no sense has nothing to do with this poll making no sense.

I know this poll makes no sense has something to do with this poll making no sense.

Good, you've demonstrated you don't understand the difference between object language and metalanguage.

Edited November 10, 2012 by Brade

[RadioFreeDeath]

I guess I fail to see how this is a criticism of pragmatism. Linguistic connection are the limit we have what "actually" happened as you put it. Even the pragmatist believes there is a connection because the connection is an actual linguistic one.

[Brade]

I guess I fail to see how this is a criticism of pragmatism.

Me too, because this isn't a criticism of pragmatism. As I've said over and over again, I merely wanted to get a sense for what folks around here think.