Did Jesus die and rise from the dead?

[JJ50]

I believe this is lesson one. God is a spirit but Jesus is God in a body.

I believe the body is made holy by the presence of God just as the Temple was made holy by God's presence. However I do agree worshiping the body without recognizing God inside would be sinful.

I believe there is no basis for that belief.

I believe they thought they were killing a man.

I believe He is in heaven building the New Jerusalem.

I believe they saw the reality of a physically risen Jesus. That is what the Bible says.

I believe in order to believe you must keep His words. He said "You must be born again."

Sadly I believed all that to be true when I was a kid I thank my lucky stars I soon realised none of it was credible and I lost my faith. I am now 69 and haven't missed it. I do challenge those who claim it is true when they cannot provide evidence to back it up.

 

[Muffled]

Yes. The earliest extant piece of Christian artwork is a stone bas relief panel scene. It is an obvious ripoff of an earlier bas relief of a scene of Augustus-as-savior. The artist merely substituted Jesus for Augustus.

What I’m saying is that the resurrection accounts are highly mythic. Just as mythic, in fact, as the accounts of Augustus.

I believe the reports are factual nd the Holy Spirit confirms them. Myths have no backing by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Muffled]

Sadly I believed all that to be true when I was a kid I thank my lucky stars I soon realised none of it was credible and I lost my faith. I am now 69 and haven't missed it. I do challenge those who claim it is true when they cannot provide evidence to back it up.

I believe I am enough evidence for anyone who wishes but the truth is that some would wish me to never exist.

 

[JJ50]

I believe the reports are factual nd the Holy Spirit confirms them. Myths have no backing by the Holy Spirit.

The hs is another myth, imo. I have met people claiming to be 'spirit filled' who were highly unpleasant and very untrustworthy.

 

[sojourner]

I believe the reports are factual nd the Holy Spirit confirms them. Myths have no backing by the Holy Spirit.

You’re misunderstanding what is meant by “mythic.” “Mythic” doesn’t mean “a fake story.” Mythic stories speak truth in a way that is larger-than-life. Augustus was presented as larger-than-life. So was Jesus. Both were deified, Augustus by being proclaimed a state deity, and Jesus by virtue of resurrection.

 

[Kilk1]

That's quite a website.....

Lol, would you have preferred me just to quote the book?

 

[Kilk1]

Yes. The earliest extant piece of Christian artwork is a stone bas relief panel scene. It is an obvious ripoff of an earlier bas relief of a scene of Augustus-as-savior. The artist merely substituted Jesus for Augustus.

What I’m saying is that the resurrection accounts are highly mythic. Just as mythic, in fact, as the accounts of Augustus.

You didn't answer "Yes" or "No," but I'm guessing that by calling the accounts "highly mythic" (and thus not real), you're extending that to the two mainstream statements I've mentioned. Is this correct?

 

[sojourner]

You didn't answer "Yes" or "No," but I'm guessing that by calling the accounts "highly mythic" (and thus not real), you're extending that to the two mainstream statements I've mentioned. Is this correct?

“Mythic” =/= “not real.” “Mythic” = “larger-than-life.” Doesn’t mean they did or didn’t happen. It just means that the stories point to a wider perspective of meaning.

 

[Prince Mthembu]

That looks like it fails. For some strange reason they seem to think that the Gospels are eyewitness testimonies. None of them are.

They support the gospels with many Other documents within the 1st century at least 50 years within the post resurrection era. Had you had gone through the whole note thoroughly as you should have with all other links I've been supplying, you would've noticed it said there are more than 36k letters of the 1st century in agreement with the gospels.

These references have more mention of Jesus than any other name including Augustas. I can provide evidence but it's your responsibility to make an effort of how genuine it is. Is possible that the Roman world could have easily mentioned a hoax more than any other real stories during those days? it doesn't make any sense at all.

Did Jesus Rise From the Dead? - Page 10 of 10 - Y-Jesus.com

 

[Prince Mthembu]

Another failure. It makes the unsupported claim that DNA indicates intelligence. That has never been shown to be the case. They also think that the fact that the universe as we know it is evidence for God. It isn't. It only shows that the universe began.

In fact those people do not understand the nature of scientific evidence. There is no scientific evidence for God and you can support that claim. Tell me, what reasonable test could refute the existence of God?

A test that proves the Bible to be a lie would do.

Let's focus on the evidence for Jesus otherwise this one is a whole new topic by itself

 

[Prince Mthembu]

By not accepting other religions with the same sort of evidence. Did you not understand his point?

I've accepted everyone, it'd be silly of me not to. In the very same note - only one can be true and to me that's Jesus

 

[Subduction Zone]

They support the gospels with many Other documents within the 1st century at least 50 years within the post resurrection era. Had you had gone through the whole note thoroughly as you should have with all other links I've been supplying, you would've noticed it said there are more than 36k letters of the 1st century in agreement with the gospels.

These references have more mention of Jesus than any other name including Augustas. I can provide evidence but it's your responsibility to make an effort of how genuine it is. Is possible that the Roman world could have easily mentioned a hoax more than any other real stories during those days? it doesn't make any sense at all.

Did Jesus Rise From the Dead? - Page 10 of 10 - Y-Jesus.com

Please give specific examples. I am not going to an apologist source. Since apologists tend to be liars for the Bible I find no value at all in their articles.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I've accepted everyone, it'd be silly of me not to. In the very same note - only one can be true and to me that's Jesus

And you just contradicted yourself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

A test that proves the Bible to be a lie would do.

Let's focus on the evidence for Jesus otherwise this one is a whole new topic by itself

What do you mean by "a lie"? If you mean a test that would show that parts of the Bible are false then that has already happened.

Your test is poorly defined and therefore fails as written. If you try to claim that parts of the Bible have not been shown to be wrong then you fail by not understanding either the Bible or reality.

 

[Kilk1]

“Mythic” =/= “not real.” “Mythic” = “larger-than-life.” Doesn’t mean they did or didn’t happen. It just means that the stories point to a wider perspective of meaning.

There can be truth in mythical stories, yes. However, when a story is said to be a myth, it's usually implied that many events therein didn't actually happen in reality. Since your answer to my question was that the stories are myths, it seemed you were suggesting they're false.

Therefore, I'd prefer a straightforward "Yes" or "No" to the following question I've asked: Do you grant the mainstream positions 1) that Jesus was crucified and 2) "that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’s death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ" (Gerd Lüdemann, What Really Happened to Jesus, pg. 80)?

 

[sojourner]

There can be truth in mythical stories, yes. However, when a story is said to be a myth, it's usually implied that many events therein didn't actually happen in reality. Since your answer to my question was that the stories are myths, it seemed you were suggesting they're false.

Therefore, I'd prefer a straightforward "Yes" or "No" to the following question I've asked: Do you grant the mainstream positions 1) that Jesus was crucified and 2) "that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’s death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ" (Gerd Lüdemann, What Really Happened to Jesus, pg. 80)?

As mythic stories? Yes. As historic fact? Not enough verifiable fact to arrive at a conclusion.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

"The most obvious is that the followers of Jesus did not recognize him, except for the context. In the story of the Road to Emmaus, the followers talked to the man for an extended period of time and did not recognize him. It was not until he broke bread that they suddenly believed he was Jesus"

What could have happened to Jesus or what did Jesus do under the circumstances, please? Any clues to that effect, please.
Also please reflect on ancient Jews burial custom , anointing the dead and embalming the dead, please.

Regards

Clearly it wasn't Jesus.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I believe that is the case which is why you know about it.

Sorry, but the majority of people on this earth don't believe it. Certainly Jews don't, which is the community in which this supposedly happened. You would think if it were real, that the very people for whom the messiah was prophecies, who *looked* for the messiah, would believe. But no, we see through this false messiah, just as we see through all the other false messiahs.

 

[lukethethird]

I believe you have no valid concepts on this matter. The scriptures tell the truth but without spiritual eyes you will not be able to see it.

I know, I have spiritual eyes so scripture becomes plain to see, as in crystal clear.

 

[Prince Mthembu]

And you just contradicted yourself.

By acceptance do you mean I must refer to all others religion as true? If so, how can that be possible?