Interesting claim. I didn't realize that you spoke for so many people.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Did Jesus Christ Actually Exist?
- Thread starter Comradio251
- Start date
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I'm assuming you are speaking figuratively.
joelr
Well-Known Member
YES, IN Book of Revelation????????? WAY WAY WAY after the Persian myths were adopted and used in the NT. Before this Satan was an agent of Yahweh.
You are totally dodging the point here.
I do not care what you believe, I care about evidence. Obviously if a Mormon or JW told you they believe you have the wrong version of Christianity you would not care. If I told you Lord of the Rings was actually true, you would not care. You need evidence.
Satan, also known as the Devil and sometimes also called Lucifer in Christianity, is an entity in Abrahamic religions that seduces humans into sin or falsehood. In Judaism, Satan is seen as an agent subservient to God,
A figure known as ha-satan ("the satan") first appears in the Hebrew Bible as a heavenly prosecutor, subordinate to Yahweh (God), who prosecutes the nation of Judah in the heavenly court and tests the loyalty of Yahweh's followers. During the intertestamental period, possibly due to influence from the Zoroastrian figure of Angra Mainyu, the satan developed into a malevolent entity with abhorrent qualities in dualistic opposition to God.
And.........
"Although the Book of Genesis does not mention him, Christians often identify the serpent in the Garden of Eden as Satan."
Yet, God STILL calls him the Angel of Yahweh and Satan works as Gods agent. Until the Persian invasion.
"
During the Second Temple Period, when Jews were living in the Achaemenid Empire, Judaism was heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism, the religion of the Achaemenids.Jewish conceptions of Satan were impacted by Angra Mainyu, the Zoroastrian spirit of evil, darkness, and ignorance.[8] In the Septuagint, the Hebrew ha-Satan in Job and Zechariah is translated by the Greek word diabolos (slanderer), the same word in the Greek New Testament from which the English word "devil" is derived.[37] Where satan is used to refer to human enemies in the Hebrew Bible, such as Hadad the Edomite and Rezon the Syrian, the word is left untranslated but transliterated in the Greek as satan, a neologism in Greek.[37]
The idea of Satan as an opponent of God and a purely evil figure seems to have taken root in Jewish pseudepigrapha during the Second Temple Period,[38] particularly in the apocalypses.
A snake is in Genesis because the Eden myth has a serpent give them the knowledge.
Sumeria and ancient Greece; Renaissance
A number of parallel concepts to the biblical Garden of Eden exist in various other religions and mythologies. Dilmun in the Sumerian story of Enki and Ninhursag is a paradisaical abode[43] of the immortals, where sickness and death were unknown.[44] The garden of the Hesperides in Greek mythology was also somewhat similar to the Jewish concept of the Garden of Eden, and by the 16th century a larger intellectual association was made in the Cranach painting.Canaanite origin theory
By studying late-13th-century BCE clay tablets from Ugarit, Hebrew Bible scholars M.J.A. Korpel and J.C. de Moor reconstructed close Canaanite parallels, which they posit as being the origin of the biblical creation myth from the first chapters of Genesis including the Garden of Eden and Adam narrative.[45] Their reconstructed texts talk about the creator deity El, who lived in a vineyard or garden together with his wife Asherah on Mount Ararat.[45] Another god, Horon, tries to depose El and when thrown down from the mountain, he transforms the Tree of Life from the garden into a Tree of Death.[45] Horon also spreads around a poisonous fog, Adam is sent from the mountain to restore life on earth, Horon takes the shape of a large serpent and bites him, which leads to Adam and his wife losing their immortality.[45] However, John Day argues that these stories are not explicitly attested in the Ugaritic texts but are reconstructed on the basis of speculative and dubious suppositions.That isn't a problem at all. We have earlier Jewish writings called the Pentatuch, you may have heard. Nothing is there about Persian beliefs.
The Persian religion is dated about 1700 BCE. They invaded Israel in 600 BCE and after that their ideas slowly show up in Jewish writing.
Absolute evidence they were slowly using Persian theology. This is what the evidence presents.
No I also have actual evidence, some I presented and you ignored. Now you are pretending that doesn't exist, further demonstrating you can't even discuss the topic without resorting to delusions and falsehood. I guess this is what happens.
You are directly ignoring John Collins lecture providing specific examples, so at this point I think you are probably just trolling me.
Here is a Hebrew Bible professor dealing with this, and providing evidence directly.
Is Genesis 1–11 Reliable? A Critical Response, Part I
Is Genesis 1–11 Reliable? A Critical Response, Part II (Now with Dead Sea Scrolls!)
Is Genesis 1–11 Reliable? A Critical Response, Part III: introduction to the Documentary Hypothesis
joelr
Well-Known Member
But your book of supernatural myths is correct? Yes, geology has evidence to rule out a world flood. Funny, now you are also an expert on geology. So you know more than historians and geologists. Or could your church be telling you tall tales the same way all others are?
At this point I know you don't care about truth or evidence because you just want to believe a story no matter what. But for those who care about truth:
Modern geology and flood geology
Modern geology, its sub-disciplines and other scientific disciplines use the scientific method to analyze the geology of the earth. The key tenets of flood geology are refuted by scientific analysis and do not have any standing in the scientific community.[5][6][7][8][9] Modern geology relies on a number of established principles, one of the most important of which is Charles Lyell's principle of uniformitarianism. In relation to geological forces it states that the shaping of the Earth has occurred by means of mostly slow-acting forces that can be seen in operation today. By applying these principles, geologists have determined that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. They study the lithosphere of the Earth to gain information on the history of the planet. Geologists divide Earth's history into eons, eras, periods, epochs, and faunal stages characterized by well-defined breaks in the fossil record (see Geologic time scale).[111][112] In general, there is a lack of any evidence for any of the above effects proposed by flood geologists and their claims of fossil layering are not taken seriously by scientists.[113]
Erosion
The global flood cannot explain geological formations such as angular unconformities, where sedimentary rocks have been tilted and eroded then more sedimentary layers deposited on top, needing long periods of time for these processes. There is also the time needed for the erosion of valleys in sedimentary rock mountains. In another example, the flood, had it occurred, should also have produced large-scale effects spread throughout the entire world. Erosion should be evenly distributed, yet the levels of erosion in, for example, the Appalachians and the Rocky Mountains differ significantly
Geochronology
Geochronology is the science of determining the absolute age of rocks, fossils, and sediments by a variety of techniques. These methods indicate that the Earth as a whole is about 4.54 billion years old, and that the strata that, according to flood geology, were laid down during the Flood some 6,000 years ago, were actually deposited gradually over many millions of years.
Sedimentary rock features
Phil Senter's 2011 article, "The Defeat of Flood Geology by Flood Geology", in the journal Reports of the National Center for Science Education, discusses "sedimentologic and other geologic features that Flood geologists have identified as evidence that particular strata cannot have been deposited during a time when the entire planet was under water ... and distribution of strata that predate the existence of the Ararat mountain chain." These include continental basalts, terrestrial tracks of animals, and marine communities preserving multiple in-situ generations included in the rocks of most or all Phanerozoic periods, and the basalt even in the younger Precambrian rocks. Others, occurring in rocks of several geologic periods, include lake deposits and eolian (wind) deposits. Using their own words, Flood geologists find evidence in every Paleozoic and Mesozoic period, and in every epoch of the Cenozoic period, indicating that a global flood could not have occurred during that interval.[118] A single flood could also not account for such features as angular unconformities, in which lower rock layers are tilted while higher rock layers were laid down horizontally on top.
Physics
The engineer Jane Albright notes several scientific failings of the canopy theory, reasoning from first principles in physics. Among these are that enough water to create a flood of even 5 centimetres (2.0 in) of rain would form a vapor blanket thick enough to make the earth too hot for life, since water vapor is a greenhouse gas; the same blanket would have an optical depth sufficient to effectively obscure all incoming starlight.
- Isaak, M (1998). "Problems with a Global Flood". TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 29 March 2007.
- Sandberg, P.A. (1983). "An oscillating trend in Phanerozoic non-skeletal carbonate mineralogy". Nature. 305 (5929): 19–22.
- Wilson, Mark A. (5 April 2001). "Are hardgrounds really a challenge to the global Flood?". answersingenesis.org. Archived from the original on 4 October 2001. Retrieved 25 September 2022.
Rice, Stanley (July–August 2020). "Creationist Funhouse, Episode Four: God Plays In The Mud". Skeptical Inquirer. Amherst, New York: Center for Inquiry. Archived from the original on 4 March 2021. Retrieved 4 March 2021.
Albright, Jane (22 July 2016). "Vapor Canopy and the Hydroplate Theory (Albright's Flood Models Controversy Series) (text and audio)". Real Science Radio
Lutgens, FK; Tarbuck, EJ; Tasa, D (2005). Essentials of Geology. Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0-13-149749-8.
Tarbuck, EJ; Lutgens, FK (2006). Earth Science. Pearson Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0-13-125852-5.
Young, Davis A. (1995). The Biblical Flood: a case study of the Church's response to extrabiblical evidence. Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans. p. 340. ISBN 978-0-8028-0719-9. – History of the Collapse of Flood Geology and a Young Earth, adapted from the book. Retrieved 2008-09-16
Isaak, Mark (5 November 2006). "Index to Creationist Claims, Geology". TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 2 November 2010.
Morton, Glenn (17 February 2001). "The Geologic Column and its Implications for the Flood". TalkOrigins Archive
No Genesis doesn't say that. Show me where Genesis says that list and says a soul goes to heaven. Heaven was only the home of Yahweh in Judaism so don't try too hard because it isn't there.
joelr
Well-Known Member
Yes, I understand it's word salad. Provide evidence that "stilling your mind" provides you with truths about a reality beyond what we know and isn't just a concept you decided is real.
joelr
Well-Known Member
Yes exactly, it looks like the writers wanted to make Jesus the new and updated Moses. More relevant to the times and Hellenism was very popular. Reworking OT narratives gives a Jewish context for Jesus stories
Which obviously means they understood it is the same matter.
It seems to me that you have very low standard for evidence.
That is not true. Claims are not the same as evidence.
Genesis tells that there is a paradise and possibility to eternal life, which is essentially the same as heaven, and that people were expelled (fallen) from there.
Yahweh God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil. Now, lest he put forth his hand, and also take of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever..." Therefore Yahweh God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed Cherubs at the east of the garden of Eden, and the flame of a sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.
Gen. 3:22-24
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Ok, so you don't understand, don't feel bad, most people are not prepared to give up their present conceptual understanding of reality for the actual realization of it.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
You can't do that, because then you actual don't exist according to your own belief. So you can't even speak about it, because when you speak about it, it is not the actual realization of it.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
I don't have beliefs, beliefs imply duality, a separation of the believer and the belief, The same applies to the seeker of reality, as long as they seek, they will remain separate from that sought. Religion is about union, yoga, the father and I are one, oneness. Once one has realized what and who they really are, there is no duality and speaking about it to those that seek does not imply duality on the part of the speaker, but only in the mind of the seeker who judges according to their present dualistic understanding.
InChrist
Free4ever
True, yet the disciples of Jesus who remained faithful to Him didn’t end up with much in the way of power or influence in a worldly sense; more like suffering and persecution was their end.
joelr
Well-Known Member
Yes, they did, fictional tales about supernatural beings.
That's possibly because you think ancient stories (clearly borrowed from nearby nations) with ZERO evidence is good evidence.
You also seem to think any belief sold to you at some point in your life MUST be true and is therefore "good evidence".
But please, explain to me, with counterexamples, how John Collins pointing out the evidence of Persian influence in the OT would be considered a "low standard" for evidence.
I'll repost his lectures with timestamps. Please provide historical sources.
The Apocalyptic Imagination - An Introduction To Jewish Apocalyptic Literature by Dr John J. Collins
John J. Collins is Holmes Professor of Old Testament Criticism and Interpretation at Yale Divinity School
apocalypse is a mediated revelation usually from an angel (vision or actual) or transportation to heaven or hell mediated by angel. Uses symbolic language as well.
40:43 Persian influence - Dr Collins finds example in Dead Sea Scrolls
1:01:02 one origin of afterlife in Judaism. Big uptake in belief of afterlife after the persecution of the Jews by Antiochus Epiphanes. In the Hebrew Bible you were told if you keep the law you will live long in the land and see your children and your grandchildren. Now a situation arose where if you keep the law you are killed. One solution to this was there must be another life. 4th Ezra, God made not one world but two.
Old Testament Interpretation
Professor John J. Collins
12:10 a possible inspiration for Ezekiel treatment of dead (valley of bones) was Persian myth
14:20 resurrection of dead in Ezekiel, incidentally resurrection of the dead is also attested in Zoroastrianism, the Persians had it before the Israelites. There was no precent for bodily resurrection in Israel before this time. No tradition of bodies getting up from the grave. The idea of borrowing can be suggested.
In Ezekiel this is metaphorical.
The only book that clearly refers to bodily resurrection is Daniel.
17:30 resurrection of individual and judgment in Daniel, 164 BC. Prior to this the afterlife was Sheol, now heaven/hell is introduced. Persian period. Resurrection and hell existed in the Persian religion.
Resurrection of spirit. Some people are raised up to heaven, some to hell. New to the OT.
Then maybe you can explain how the World History encyclopedia is incorrect, with sources.
Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text
The Enuma Elish (also known as The Seven Tablets of Creation) is the Babylonian creation myth whose title is derived from the opening lines of the piece,
Genesis/Enuma Elish
The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis. Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.
Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer, translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.
You have about 400 years of critical history on the Bible to explain why it's "bad evidence". Even though it uses the Bible in many cases?
Please tell me where Professor Meyers is wrong, with sources, about the Mesopotamian influence and the serpent being a common motif in the Eden myth. It's a fable.
Seams and Sources: Genesis 5-11 and the Historical-Critical Method
10:45 snake in Eden is a standard literary device seen in fables of this era
(10:25 - snake not Satan, no Satan in Hebrew Bible)
14:05 acceptance of mortality theme in Eden and Gilamesh story
25:15 Gilgamesh flood story, Sumerian flood story comparisons
26:21 - there are significant contrasts as well between the Mesopotamian flood story and it’s Israelite ADAPTATION. Israelite story is purposely rejecting certain motifs and giving the opposite or an improved version (nicer deity…)
36:20 2 flood stories in Genesis, or contradictions and doublets.
Yahweh/Elohim, rain/cosmic waters flowing,
40:05 two creation stories, very different. Genesis 1 formalized, highly structured
Genesis 2 dramatic. Genesis 1 serious writing style, Genesis 2 uses Hebrew word puns.
Genesis 1/2 use different terms for gender
Genesis 1/2 use different names, description and style for God
Both stories have distinctive styles, vocabulary, themes, placed side by side. Flood stories are interwoven.
Genesis to 2nd Kings entire historical saga is repeated again in Chronicles.
joelr
Well-Known Member
Thank you, you have just proven all my post are completely true and you have nothing to stand on. Your supernatural claims are not evidence.
Your claims that I don't have evidence are claims, delusional claims being that there is physical evidence I am presenting. I can continue to present evidence but you haven't tried to debunk any evidence because you are likely ignoring it. So you are just hiding your eyes and eras and shouting "my beliefs are true". You cannot seem to even handle a basic discussion without telling lies about what I've presented. Pretty bad.
Geology, does have evidence. I provided the peer-reviewed works to find the experiments. But a troll is going to troll so, I'll just repost it.
So please explain the experiments that proved all these findings are incorrect. For example, explain why we see geological formations such as angular unconformities despite a global flood. As well as the endless other evidence.
Modern geology and flood geology
Modern geology, its sub-disciplines and other scientific disciplines use the scientific method to analyze the geology of the earth. The key tenets of flood geology are refuted by scientific analysis and do not have any standing in the scientific community.[5][6][7][8][9] Modern geology relies on a number of established principles, one of the most important of which is Charles Lyell's principle of uniformitarianism. In relation to geological forces it states that the shaping of the Earth has occurred by means of mostly slow-acting forces that can be seen in operation today. By applying these principles, geologists have determined that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. They study the lithosphere of the Earth to gain information on the history of the planet. Geologists divide Earth's history into eons, eras, periods, epochs, and faunal stages characterized by well-defined breaks in the fossil record (see Geologic time scale).[111][112] In general, there is a lack of any evidence for any of the above effects proposed by flood geologists and their claims of fossil layering are not taken seriously by scientists.
Erosion
The global flood cannot explain geological formations such as angular unconformities, where sedimentary rocks have been tilted and eroded then more sedimentary layers deposited on top, needing long periods of time for these processes. There is also the time needed for the erosion of valleys in sedimentary rock mountains. In another example, the flood, had it occurred, should also have produced large-scale effects spread throughout the entire world. Erosion should be evenly distributed, yet the levels of erosion in, for example, the Appalachians and the Rocky Mountains differ significantly
Geochronology
Geochronology is the science of determining the absolute age of rocks, fossils, and sediments by a variety of techniques. These methods indicate that the Earth as a whole is about 4.54 billion years old, and that the strata that, according to flood geology, were laid down during the Flood some 6,000 years ago, were actually deposited gradually over many millions of years.
Sedimentary rock features
Phil Senter's 2011 article, "The Defeat of Flood Geology by Flood Geology", in the journal Reports of the National Center for Science Education, discusses "sedimentologic and other geologic features that Flood geologists have identified as evidence that particular strata cannot have been deposited during a time when the entire planet was under water ... and distribution of strata that predate the existence of the Ararat mountain chain." These include continental basalts, terrestrial tracks of animals, and marine communities preserving multiple in-situ generations included in the rocks of most or all Phanerozoic periods, and the basalt even in the younger Precambrian rocks. Others, occurring in rocks of several geologic periods, include lake deposits and eolian (wind) deposits. Using their own words, Flood geologists find evidence in every Paleozoic and Mesozoic period, and in every epoch of the Cenozoic period, indicating that a global flood could not have occurred during that interval.[118] A single flood could also not account for such features as angular unconformities, in which lower rock layers are tilted while higher rock layers were laid down horizontally on top.[119]
Physics
The engineer Jane Albright notes several scientific failings of the canopy theory, reasoning from first principles in physics. Among these are that enough water to create a flood of even 5 centimetres (2.0 in) of rain would form a vapor blanket thick enough to make the earth too hot for life, since water vapor is a greenhouse gas; the same blanket would have an optical depth sufficient to effectively obscure all incoming starlight.[120]
- Isaak, M (1998). "Problems with a Global Flood". TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 29 March 2007.
- Sandberg, P.A. (1983). "An oscillating trend in Phanerozoic non-skeletal carbonate mineralogy". Nature. 305 (5929): 19–22.
- Wilson, Mark A. (5 April 2001). "Are hardgrounds really a challenge to the global Flood?". answersingenesis.org. Archived from the original on 4 October 2001. Retrieved 25 September 2022.
Phil Senter (2011). "The Defeat of Flood Geology by Flood Geology". Reports of the National Center for Science Education. 31 (3).
- Rice, Stanley (July–August 2020). "Creationist Funhouse, Episode Four: God Plays In The Mud". Skeptical Inquirer. Amherst, New York: Center for Inquiry. Archived from the original on 4 March 2021. Retrieved 4 March 2021.
- Lutgens, FK; Tarbuck, EJ; Tasa, D (2005). Essentials of Geology. Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0-13-149749-8.
- Tarbuck, EJ; Lutgens, FK (2006). Earth Science. Pearson Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0-13-125852-5.
Eerdmans. p. 340. ISBN 978-0-8028-0719-9. – History of the Collapse of Flood Geology and a Young Earth, adapted from the book. Retrieved 2008-09-16
Isaak, Mark (5 November 2006). "Index to Creationist Claims, Geology". TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 2 November 2010
Morton, Glenn (17 February 2001). "The Geologic Column and its Implications for the Flood". TalkOrigins Archive
joelr
Well-Known Member
"possibly"??????? LOL.
I don't see anything about souls, heaven or any Hellenistic thing because it hadn't been invented yet. Living forever was a concept all religions had in some form. Hellenism is very specific. Not one aspect is in the OT. They didn't borrow it until the NT.
Souls that return to it's eternal home away from the fallen earth. Savior demigods. Not in Genesis.
Genesis view, not yet borrowed from Greek myths but has borrowed from Mesopotamian myths. And look the example you gave, ETERNAL LIFE, was ALREADY PART OF THE GENESIS VIEW, and it's not at all like the borrowings from the Greek religions.
"Salvation is eternal life in the perfected world of the new creation"
joelr
Well-Known Member
So that's a "no" you cannot provide evidence.
People have been making this claim since Hinduism, they always come to the conclusions that their religion teaches. Which shows it's all in your mind.
Provide evidence you have an actual realization of reality that is a better understanding than anyone else and isn't just a bunch of word salad.
Look, I can do it too.....don't feel bad, most people don't know and are not prepared to give up their understanding and realize that the rapture is coming and only JW will be lifted away to heaven. The JW know this through personal experience, everyone else goes to hell!
Trust me, I don't "feel bad" I'm not making these ridiculous claims, be it JW or meditation masters.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
The mind state of someone that wants evidence of the non-dual mind state imagines that the non-dual state of mind can be made subject to the dualistic mind state. That is ignorance of what constitutes the non-dual mind state. Non-dual means just that, no seer and seen, hearer and heard, thinker and thought, believer and belief, etc.. However there is a way for you to learn.
If you want to know what the non-dual mind state is, you must learn to cease thinking, a mind free from thought is in a state of non-duality. Then when your mind returns to the dualistic state, you will have memory of the non-dual state.
TLK Valentine
Read the books that others would burn.
I'm inclined to believe Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure, for the simple reason that he's known as Jesus of Nazareth.
Consider: Either Jesus was a real person or a figure of legend, made up from whole cloth.
The Jewish Messiah was prophecized to be born in Bethlehem, and both Matthew and Luke moved heaven and earth (figuratively speaking) to get Joseph and Mary there, and then back to Nazareth, in order to fulfill that prophecy - using two farfetched, historically suspect, and mutually exclusive (without twisting your mind into a pretzel) stories to do it.
But why? If Jesus was a literary creation, why not just put him in Bethlehem from the get-go? Why create a problem that later writers are going to have to solve... poorly?
And why write the stories to send Jesus back to Nazareth? Galilee was the "nowhere" of ancient Israel, and by all accounts, Nazareth was in the middle of it.
Because the problem wasn't a created one, but a real one. That Jesus was from Nazareth was well-known enough to the people of the time that the Gospel writers couldn't make their readers forget - so they had to explain it away.
That means Jesus being from Nazareth was a historical fact; ergo, Jesus was a historical person.
Whether he did and say the things credited to him is another matter.
Consider: Either Jesus was a real person or a figure of legend, made up from whole cloth.
The Jewish Messiah was prophecized to be born in Bethlehem, and both Matthew and Luke moved heaven and earth (figuratively speaking) to get Joseph and Mary there, and then back to Nazareth, in order to fulfill that prophecy - using two farfetched, historically suspect, and mutually exclusive (without twisting your mind into a pretzel) stories to do it.
But why? If Jesus was a literary creation, why not just put him in Bethlehem from the get-go? Why create a problem that later writers are going to have to solve... poorly?
And why write the stories to send Jesus back to Nazareth? Galilee was the "nowhere" of ancient Israel, and by all accounts, Nazareth was in the middle of it.
Because the problem wasn't a created one, but a real one. That Jesus was from Nazareth was well-known enough to the people of the time that the Gospel writers couldn't make their readers forget - so they had to explain it away.
That means Jesus being from Nazareth was a historical fact; ergo, Jesus was a historical person.
Whether he did and say the things credited to him is another matter.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
That is simply not true.
joelr
Well-Known Member
No philosophy of dualism provides evidence for anything supernatural. It doesn't demonstrate the divine. It's just evidence for a state of mind.