Did Jesus die and rise from the dead?

[Prince Mthembu]

Please supply a reliable source. That is an extremely dubious claim. Do you realize that there was a dishonest scientist on the panel that studied the shroud? The one denier out there claimed to have saved some samples himself. But since this was a highly respected religious relic going in all of the scientists promised to first work together and that there would be no private samples. If they all took snippets home they would have decimated the shroud. Claims from that one scientist are not worth much. You need to find something done by the group to be of any value at all. A person that went back on his word when the findings disagreed with him can't be trusted.

From all that I have seen it clearly is a fake. I have always thought that people whose faith relies upon a fraud was rather weak. Why tell us that you have a weak faith? Why not accept the fact that this was a fake? A fake for a belief does not refute that belief. In fact it can harm it. For example the Piltdown Man was a fake. It appeared to support evolution but not really. Just as the shroud appears to support the resurrection story, but not really. It in fact goes against what was written in the Bible if one read the accounts. Creationists still try to incorrectly use the Piltdown man fraud against the theory of evolution, even though it never relied upon it. At least atheists are brighter in this regard. They recognize the obvious fact that the Shroud of Turin is a fraud, but they do not use that fraud as evidence against Christianity.

Please check out the following sources if you can't trust in those I really suggest you make it your own research to find one which is satisfactory to you. I just wish that you don't base any fact on anyone's opinion but your own logic and judgement because without the resurrection I would right now denounce Jesus that He is not the Messiah

A brief history of the Shroud of Turin
PURSUING HISTORY: The Shroud of Turin: Real or Fake? - A look at past articles
Shroud of Turin - Wikipedia
The Shroud of Turin: Shroud of Turin News - November 2015
Could ancient earthquake explain Shroud of Turin?
The Origins of the Shroud of Turin, Part I
Centuries-old debate over Shroud of Turin authenticity persists
DNA tests open more Shroud of Turin mysteries


tip: "Don't look for the living among the dead" Luke 24:5 - He is risen!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please check out the following sources if you can't trust in those I really suggest you make it your own research to find one which is satisfactory to you. I just wish that you don't base any fact on anyone's opinion but your own logic and judgement because without the resurrection I would right now denounce Jesus that He is not the Messiah

A brief history of the Shroud of Turin
PURSUING HISTORY: The Shroud of Turin: Real or Fake? - A look at past articles
Shroud of Turin - Wikipedia
The Shroud of Turin: Shroud of Turin News - November 2015
Could ancient earthquake explain Shroud of Turin?
The Origins of the Shroud of Turin, Part I
Centuries-old debate over Shroud of Turin authenticity persists
DNA tests open more Shroud of Turin mysteries


tip: "Don't look for the living among the dead" Luke 24:5 - He is risen!

Sorry, but it was shown to be fake by a panel of scientists that studied it and dated it. The cloth is far too young to be anything but a 13th or 14th century work. That was shown to be the case by STURP.

Tell me, why put your faith in a known hoax? It does not match the Bible description or a historical version of how bodes were wrapped. It was shown to be fake by a panel of scientists. I do not know of any Vatican approved investigation since then and since the members of STURP agreed that there would be no independent sampling or testing anything that supposedly came from a STURP member is worthless since the man went back on his own word. It is forgivable to be wrong in the sciences, but lying is death to one's career.

 

[Prince Mthembu]

My faith isn't on the cloth but rather the proof it might contain to point out to the resurrection. If Jesus really rose from the dead then it's worthwhile to help unbelievers know that it's real but If not I wouldn't even bother and if you really checked the sites then you'll see that all are in agreement over the fact that the shroud remains mysterious to date because even those who say they can explain it really can't reproduce anything like it. And given the golden age of tech that we are in I really think it total stupidity for 1 to argue that 14th century can be considered a comparable for this generation to fail remaking what they claim is a fraud. *logically*.

 

[Subduction Zone]

My faith isn't on the cloth but rather the proof it might contain to point out to the resurrection. If Jesus really rose from the dead then it's worthwhile to help unbelievers know that it's real but If not I wouldn't even bother and if you really checked the sites then you'll see that all are in agreement over the fact that the shroud remains mysterious to date because even those who say they can explain it really can't reproduce anything like it. And given the golden age of tech that we are in I really think it total stupidity for 1 to argue that 14th century can be considered a comparable for this generation to fail remaking what they claim is a fraud. *logically*.

Yes, but if it is a lie, and that is what it appears to be, it can only harm your faith.

 

[Prince Mthembu]

Yes, but if it is a lie, and that is what it appears to be, it can only harm your faith.

Take my word for it my faith is fixed eternally and sealed in a Rock that'll never break but your intuition is the concern for my efforts. Imagine if you find out Jesus really died and rose again would you then convert?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Take my word for it my faith is fixed eternally and sealed in a Rock that'll never break but your intuition is the concern for my efforts. Imagine if you find out Jesus really died and rose again would you then convert?

How would you prove that he really died? And believing is one thing. Why would one worship Jesus?

Lastly, what evidence would convince you that your beliefs were wrong?

 

[Prince Mthembu]

How would you prove that he really died? And believing is one thing. Why would one worship Jesus?

Lastly, what evidence would convince you that your beliefs were wrong?

History proves He died - Josephus for 1. His worship magnifies my being because I can't exist apart from Him therefore by so doing it's like I'm fixing/admiring/adorning my true self in the mirror(that's me personally I don't know about others). If there were no evidence that He walked the earth, DIED AND ROSE AGAIN, then my knowledge in God comes down trembling to misbelief. You on the other hand what then if you're proven wrong by your limited knowledge and to our vindication?

 

[Subduction Zone]

History proves He died - Josephus for 1. His worship magnifies my being because I can't exist apart from Him therefore by so doing it's like I'm fixing/admiring/adorning my true self in the mirror(that's me personally I don't know about others). If there were no evidence that He walked the earth, DIED AND ROSE AGAIN, then my knowledge in God comes down trembling to misbelief. You on the other hand what then if you're proven wrong by your limited knowledge and to our vindication?

No, history only proves that some people believed n him. Josephus only states that people believed in him, not that he actually existed. There is no reliable evidence for his resurrection. And the evidence for his existence is rather poor.

And once again, what evidence would convince you that your beliefs are wrong?

 

[Prince Mthembu]

No, history only proves that some people believed n him. Josephus only states that people believed in him, not that he actually existed. There is no reliable evidence for his resurrection. And the evidence for his existence is rather poor.

And once again, what evidence would convince you that your beliefs are wrong?

Sir all 3 contradictory Abrahamic beliefs contain His existence in some of their manuscript, there are many external sources apart from religion which has His history, even archaeologically is proven, to an extent that some labs still experiment and tests His blood - as I've told you make it your own research if you really care.

And bring to my conviction that He never was, then I will proclaim to the whole world that God is a lie - that's how you can convince me but by logic(a failure) which can not even reduce global warming or worst yet feed/clothe a homeless stranger who is poverty stricken nothing can be solved to your gain because what you call a solution causes more problems as proven scientifically that every action results in an opposing reaction(the results of the Adamic curse)..

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sir all 3 contradictory Abrahamic beliefs contain His existence in some of their manuscript, there are many external sources apart from religion which has His history, even archaeologically is proven, to an extent that some labs still experiment and tests His blood - as I've told you make it your own research if you really care.

And bring to my conviction that He never was, then I will proclaim to the whole world that God is a lie - that's how you can convince me but by logic(a failure) which can not even reduce global warming or worst yet feed/clothe a homeless stranger who is poverty stricken nothing can be solved to your gain because what you call a solution causes more problems as proven scientifically that every action results in an opposing reaction(the results of the Adamic curse)..

Where does a Jewish text have any record of his existence? And I am sorry, but there is no such evidence that I know of archaeologically. And of course we all know that Adam was mythical. How can there be an "Adamic curse"?

By the way, the burden of proof is not upon me. It is upon you. Shifting the burden of proof is what one does when what one believes in is not real.

 

[lukethethird]

Sir all 3 contradictory Abrahamic beliefs contain His existence in some of their manuscript, there are many external sources apart from religion which has His history, even archaeologically is proven, to an extent that some labs still experiment and tests His blood - as I've told you make it your own research if you really care.

And bring to my conviction that He never was, then I will proclaim to the whole world that God is a lie - that's how you can convince me but by logic(a failure) which can not even reduce global warming or worst yet feed/clothe a homeless stranger who is poverty stricken nothing can be solved to your gain because what you call a solution causes more problems as proven scientifically that every action results in an opposing reaction(the results of the Adamic curse)..

How can we be so certain, and why claim to be certain, what's wrong with not knowing what happened two thousand years ago?

 

[KelseyR]

We can only be sure that if he existed he died. Whether or not he arose is a matter of belief- completely devoid of reliable proof.

 

[Prince Mthembu]

Where does a Jewish text have any record of his existence? And I am sorry, but there is no such evidence that I know of archaeologically. And of course we all know that Adam was mythical. How can there be an "Adamic curse"?

By the way, the burden of proof is not upon me. It is upon you. Shifting the burden of proof is what one does when what one believes in is not real.

Judaism's view of Jesus - Wikipedia

If this doesn't convince you, I don't know. I have been supplying you with proofs which you debunk over speculation and you never even attempted to make an effort towards verifying the truth. And I never shifted the burden I just thought it would concern you if something was as heavy as a choice between eternal life or contempt for you to make your own research outside of our conversation.

 

[Prince Mthembu]

How can we be so certain, and why claim to be certain, what's wrong with not knowing what happened two thousand years ago?

The wrong in that is people perish for lack of knowledge(ignorance). Hosea 4:6.

 

[Prince Mthembu]

We can only be sure that if he existed he died. Whether or not he arose is a matter of belief- completely devoid of reliable proof.

So can you proof that He existed and died the way portrayed by biblical scripts? Because if you can then we have a start but if you can't then there was no purpose in publishing His existence to begin with.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Judaism's view of Jesus - Wikipedia

If this doesn't convince you, I don't know. I have been supplying you with proofs which you debunk over speculation and you never even attempted to make an effort towards verifying the truth. And I never shifted the burden I just thought it would concern you if something was as heavy as a choice between eternal life or contempt for you to make your own research outside of our conversation.

That does not answer the question that I asked. Wikipedia is not a Jewish text.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So can you proof that He existed and died the way portrayed by biblical scripts? Because if you can then we have a start but if you can't then there was no purpose in publishing His existence to begin with.

Wow! You might be getting somewhere. You appear to realize that the evidence for Jesus even existing as a person is rather weak.

 

[Prince Mthembu]

That does not answer the question that I asked. Wikipedia is not a Jewish text.

Lol! Come on, didn't you see references to the Talmud in that site as much as other reliable sources(including non-Jewish). I'm starting to think you look over all the exhibits I provide and head back at me with the same info you previously depended on to be convinced that all points I make aren't there. 1stly if you would've checked the Turin shroud articles I sent, you would now realise there's much more to that story than you've learnt about the dishonest and compromised scientist. Secondly you just replied to the wiki link without actually going through its details. We can't progress if you don't value my efforts --- please try only going through each one of those links thoroughly then draw a conclusion based on that information unless, of course, you deem all off the sources untrustworthy. Which would be impossible because all those don't relate, some not even with any Christ Church.

 

[Prince Mthembu]

Wow! You might be getting somewhere. You appear to realize that the evidence for Jesus even existing as a person is rather weak.

That would be like you realizing that you can breathe without air - My point these remarks is that he should be able to support his claims when his dealing with requirement of truth. My other concern though is - is evidence a prerequisite for(your) faith Mr Sub?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Lol! Come on, didn't you see references to the Talmud in that site as much as other reliable sources(including non-Jewish). I'm starting to think you look over all the exhibits I provide and head back at me with the same info you previously depended on to be convinced that all points I make aren't there. 1stly if you would've checked the Turin shroud articles I sent, you would now realise there's much more to that story than you've learnt about the dishonest and compromised scientist. Secondly you just replied to the wiki link without actually going through its details. We can't progress if you don't value my efforts --- please try only going through each one of those links thoroughly then draw a conclusion based on that information unless, of course, you deem all off the sources untrustworthy. Which would be impossible because all those don't relate, some not even with any Christ Church.

I see that you cannot remember what you wrote. Earlier you posted this:

"Sir all 3 contradictory Abrahamic beliefs contain His existence in some of their manuscript,"

That is why I asked where Jesus was mentioned in a Jewish text. He was not. He did not fulfill the messianic prophecies which is why early Christian writers had to invent their own prophecies. For example the Virgin Birth prophecy. That failed on several levels. First in the original if did not say "virgin" it was based upon a Greek mistranslation". Second it was not a prophecy, but history. An event that had already happened. And it failed since Jesus was never known as Emmanuel. He was only called that by Christians that went "oops" more than a hundred years after the fact.