Pants on Fire

[February-Saturday]

Can I ask why they're called the Pauline apostles? I just googled it and it said it was written by Paul

An epistle is a type of letter, and these letters were written by Paul. Therefore, they're called the Pauline epistles to segregate them from the rest of the New Testament and early Christian literature.

 

[Jimmy]

A lot of early Christian literature was made up of intentionally composed myths used in mystic traditions. The Gnostic texts are an example of this, and some scholars argue that so were the original Pauline epistles, although most do not.

It's possible that Jesus himself was completely made up, or a composite character that grew in legends sort of like Robin Hood or King Arthur.

There's a lot of reason to doubt that the miracles were literal events that actually occurred.

Well in that case it looks like I'm not going to believe anything really happened in the Bible.

 

[Deeje]

So all the people who actually saw the miracles never wrote them down correct? It was only written down years later am I correct?

There were many miracles written about in the first century....healing of the sick, repairing the limbs of those with deformities, restoring sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, and a host of others....even speaking languages that they had never learned. If one believes in the Creator of the Universe, who prepared this planet and created its myriad inhabitants, then what are those things by comparison? Nothing difficult really, but they were outside of the normal range of human abilities that we expect to see in the world of that time, where no medical knowledge or practice could produce such results.... We see such things today, but we don't count them as miracles because we know who performed them and the medical techniques they used to accomplish them.

What made them miracles in the first century, was the inability of humans of that time to be able to accomplish such things...none were attributable to humans, but to the power of God's spirit.

Then we have the raising of the dead.....medical science has managed to bring people back to life when cardiac arrest has resulted in cessation of breathing...but given a certain time frame, if breathing can be restored and CPR applied, as long as oxygenation of the blood supply was maintained, life could be returned when a beating heart was restored to normal rhythm and breathing resumed. But in the cases reported in the Bible, the ones who stopped breathing were well outside of anyone's ability to restore their lives except by supernatural means.....which meant reversing brain death....something science cannot do even today.....so what were the miracles for? What did they accomplish?

1) They established that a supernatural God was intervening in the lives of humans to show them his power and to demonstrate on a small scale, what would be accomplished under the rule of his future kingdom.....something that the Jews believed would be established on earth...so this was a foregleam of things to come.

2) These miracles were not usually performed on believers...only on unbelievers or for the benefit of unbelievers....to draw them to Christ or to Christianity.....they could see with their own eyes that God was backing these people. The resurrection of Lazarus was one of the reasons why the Pharisees wanted to put Jesus to death and they also wanted to do away with Lazarus to stop the news of his resurrection from spreading.

3) It showed the compassion that God has for humanity by giving them a real life demonstration of how life will be in the new world to come....not in heaven, but right here on this earth (2 Peter 3:13)....overcoming all the things that cause us grief.

It requires faith to believe in someone we have never seen, or to put faith in someone whose life we can only read about....but those who have, experience what no unbeliever possibly could. That is to experience a close and personal relationship with God, which is beyond our capacity to convey in words.....it has to be experienced first hand. I have never met an unbeliever yet who ever experienced God on that level. Their is a superficial encounter by perhaps a cursory reading of an ancient book through a lens that would allow no light to penetrate anyway......God will not invite such ones to come into his presence. Why would he?

 

[Valjean]

So all the people who actually saw the miracles never wrote them down correct? It was only written down years later am I correct?

Yes. There are no first person accounts of Jesus. There are legends, folklore, hearsay, reports on the beliefs of Christians, but there are no actual, eyewitness accounts of Jesus himself.
Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia

 

[Jimmy]

Which eye witnesses? We have a few that clearly had an agenda and wrote many years later. And one that never met Jesus in person that seems to have greatly changed the message.

His apostles. So you think they all had an agenda

 

[Jimmy]

Yes. There are no first person accounts of Jesus. There are legends, folklore, hearsay, reports on the beliefs of Christians, but there are no actual, eyewitness accounts of Jesus himself.
Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia

Yeah but his apostles witnessed miracles correct? Or were they lying?

 

[Jimmy]

There were many miracles written about in the first century....healing of the sick, repairing the limbs of those with deformities, restoring sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, and a host of others....even speaking languages that they had never learned. If one believes in the Creator of the Universe, who prepared this planet and created its myriad inhabitants, then what are those thing by comparison? Nothing difficult really, but they were outside of the normal range of human abilities that we expect to see in the world of that time, where no medical knowledge or practice could produce such results.... We see such things today, but we don't count them as miracles because we know who performed them and the medical techniques they used to accomplish them.

What made them miracles in the first century, was the inability of humans of that time to be able to accomplish such things...none were attributable to humans, but to the power of God's spirit.

Then we have the raising of the dead.....medical science has managed to bring people back to life when cardiac arrest has resulted in cessation of breathing...but given a certain time frame, if breathing can be restored and CPR applied, as long as oxygenation of the blood supply was maintained, life could be returned when a beating heart was restored to normal rhythm and breathing resumed. But in the cases reported in the Bible, the ones who stopped breathing were well outside of anyone's ability to restore their lives except by supernatural means.....which meant reversing brain death....something science cannot do even today.....so what were the miracles for? What did they accomplish?

1) They established that a supernatural God was intervening in the lives of humans to show them his power and to demonstrate on a small scale, what would be accomplished under the rule of his future kingdom.....something that the Jews believed would be established on earth...so this was a foregleam of things to come.

2) These miracles were not usually performed on believers...only on unbelievers or for the benefit of unbelievers....to draw them to Christ or to Christianity.....they could see with their own eyes that God was backing these people. The resurrection of Lazarus was one of the reasons why the Pharisees wanted to put Jesus to death and they also wanted to do away with Lazarus to stop the news of his resurrection from spreading.

3) It showed the compassion that God has for humanity by giving them a real life demonstration of how life will be in the new world to come....not in heaven, but right here on this earth (2 Peter 3:13)....overcoming all the things that cause us grief.

It requires faith to believe in someone we have never seen, or to put faith in someone whose life we can only read about....but those who have, experience what no unbeliever possibly could. That is to experience a close and personal relationship with God, which is beyond our capacity to convey in words.....it has to be experienced first hand. I have never met an unbeliever yet who ever experienced God on that level. Their is a superficial encounter by perhaps a cursory reading of an ancient book through a lens that would allow no light to penetrate anyway......God will not invite such ones to come into his presence. Why would he?

Was Lazarus a fake story that one person just made up?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I hear ya. Just out of curiosity are there any other books where many people think are fact and many people think are fiction; in regards to the same book?

Books about Atlantis have believers, but there are many skeptics, doubters, and those that reject its existence for lack of evidence.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So all the people who actually saw the miracles never wrote them down correct? It was only written down years later am I correct?

I think literacy is estimated to have been between 10 and 20% at the time, so the majority of any witnesses were not likely to have been able to write about anything. Any writing would have had to come from a smaller portion of the population. Assuming they would have taken the initiative to record the events and were good at reporting. Many of the records were written after the fact. Those writings could be based on actual events, but mostly we have to take them on faith.

 

[Jimmy]

I think literacy is estimated to have been between 10 and 20% at the time, so the majority of any witnesses were not likely to have been able to write about anything. Any writing would have had to come from a smaller portion of the population. Assuming they would have taken the initiative to record the events and were good at reporting. Many of the records were written after the fact. Those writings could be based on actual events, but mostly we have to take them on faith.

What about his apostles

 

[Valjean]

Yeah but his apostles witnessed miracles correct? Or were they lying?

The 12 disciple apostles, or the evangelical apostles?

The evangelicals never met him. The disciples left no eyewitness reports.

 

[Deeje]

Was Lazarus a fake story that one person just made up?

Why would someone make it up? Jesus' relationship with Lazarus and his two sisters was well established, so this is not just some random figure, but a close personal friend of Jesus who fell ill and Jesus deliberately did not go to him at once. He waited for Lazarus to die so that he could demonstrate the resurrection. (John 11:11-14)

 

[Deeje]

The 12 disciple apostles, or the evangelical apostles.

The evangelicals never met him. The disciples left no eyewitness reports.

Says who?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

What about his apostles

The gospels are attributed to some of the apostles and scholars recognize literacy among them at higher than the general population, but I do not know if all of them were literate.

The gospels are the main source for claims of miracles by Christ.

 

[Jimmy]

The 12 disciple apostles, or the evangelical apostles?

The evangelicals never met him. The disciples left no eyewitness reports.

I thought Matthew Mark Luke and John in the Bible were disciple apostles no?

 

[Jimmy]

Why would someone make it up? Jesus' relationship with Lazarus and his two sisters was well established, so this is not just some random figure, but a close personal friend of Jesus who fell ill and Jesus deliberately did not go to him at once. He waited for Lazarus to die so that he could demonstrate the resurrection. (John 11:11-14)

I mean no offence I'm just trying to learn here. Some people on here seem to think that it's a fictional story so I'm trying to figure it out

 

[Deeje]

I mean no offence I'm just trying to learn here. Some people on here seem to think that it's a fictional story so I'm trying to figure it out

Are you going to listen to "some people" or are you going to listen to God? You have to figure that out first....You can put your faith in what unbelievers say or you can take the position of a believer.

I thought Matthew Mark Luke and John in the Bible were disciple apostles no?

Out of the 12 Apostles only Peter John and Matthew were writers of NT books. Mark and Luke were disciples. Paul was not one of the 12 but had a special assignment to take the gospel to the nations.

 

[Deeje]

@Power Stone stone...have you ever had a Bible study? It is difficult to build faith if you don't know what to put your faith in.....

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I mean no offence I'm just trying to learn here. Some people on here seem to think that it's a fictional story so I'm trying to figure it out

My belief is based on faith and subjective experience and I know of no objective evidence to point you to as physical support of the biblical claims. Others will have different view to share, I have no doubt.

Not knowing absolutely, I tend to focus on the message of Christ.

 

[Valjean]

All cultures have their folklore and legends. Fabulous persons and events occur all over the world, with and without supporting evidence.

You'd be surprised how easily and quickly a rumor, legend or family story can become an accepted "fact." This is why legends, folklore and 'historical' accounts must be taken with a grain of salt, and corroborating evidence sought.

Folk tales and family histories get told and repeated. They get embellished; especially if embellishment would advance an agenda or family reputation, and, like the children's game of 'telephone', details can get distorted pretty quickly.