Did Jesus die and rise from the dead?

[Spartan]

You are the antichrist as your posts put people off the faith.

Control yourself.

 

[JJ50]

Control yourself.

It is you who needs to control your sick bigoted posts. Most other forums would have banned you long since!

 

[paarsurrey]

Who is the liar and the antichrist according to scripture?

"Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son." - 1 John 2:22

"Christ"

There is no concept of a Christ in the religion of Moses that Jesus believed in. Christ is a Pagan concept. The Jews believed in the coming of a Messiah, not of a Pagan-Christ, this concept was imported by Saul of Tarsus aka Paul, as I understand, who was an enemy of Jesus and his true believers, he himself admitted. Right, please?

Regards

 

[Spartan]

"Christ"

There is no concept of a Christ in the religion of Moses that Jesus believed in. Christ is a Pagan concept. The Jews believed in the coming of a Messiah, not of a Pagan-Christ, this concept was imported by Saul of Tarsus aka Paul, as I understand, who was an enemy of Jesus and his true believers, he himself admitted. Right, please?

Regards

Sorry, the "Messiah" has been a considerable belief in Judaism and Christianity for ages. There's even the two faces of the Messiah in Jewish lore - "Messiah ben David" (the conquering king, and "Messiah ben Joseph" (the suffering Messiah).

 

[paarsurrey]

Sorry, the "Messiah" has been a considerable belief in Judaism and Christianity for ages. There's even the two faces of the Messiah in Jewish lore - "Messiah ben David" (the conquering king, and "Messiah ben Joseph" (the suffering Messiah).

But there is no mention in Torah of Christ which is an altogether Pagan concept, nothing to do with Jewish Messiah/Mashiach*, please.
Jesus never died on the Cross but he survived a cursed death on Cross so there is no question of his resurrection from the dead and, as I understand, becoming god or son of god. It is a mythical Pagan concept. Right, please?

Regards
___________
*The Mashiach
(Jeremiah 23,5) (Isaiah 11,2-5) (Jeremiah 33,15).
https://www.mechon-mamre.org/jewfaq/mashiach.htm

 

[sojourner]

Why do you use the word "proof"? That's a scientific term, and science cannot prove an ancient event such as a resurrection. It cannot disprove it happened either.

But there is a great deal of evidence FOR the resurrection, if you will educate yourself on it. You can start with this:

"The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by Dr. Gary Habermas.

That’s all you got? Habermas is a professor of apologetics, not NT. His degrees are in theology, not scriptural exegesis. He teaches at a HIGHLY biased institution. He cannot provide evidence, because he’s too biased.

 

[samtonga43]

That’s all you got? Habermas is a professor of apologetics, not NT. His degrees are in theology, not scriptural exegesis. He teaches at a HIGHLY biased institution. He cannot provide evidence, because he’s too biased.

Sometimes even people who are biased can produce evidence. Note, not proof

 

[sojourner]

Sometimes even people who are biased can produce evidence. Note, not proof

That evidence isn’t trustworthy. Biased evidence is never trustworthy. Habermas has an apologetic ax to grind. It diminishes his credibility.

 

[Riders]

Why do you use the word "proof"? That's a scientific term, and science cannot prove an ancient event such as a resurrection. It cannot disprove it happened either.

But there is a great deal of evidence FOR the resurrection, if you will educate yourself on it. You can start with this:

"The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by Dr. Gary Habermas.

What evidence? I have not seen any here, the bible is not evidence.

 

[Riders]

Who is the liar and the antichrist according to scripture?

"Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son." - 1 John 2:22

Sense you believe that of the bible,I take it your not Christian Father means Father God is God, the Son is the son,were all sons and daughters of God. I believe in the Father God do you? I believe Christians have replaced the Father with Jesus.

 

[Riders]

Who is the liar and the antichrist according to scripture?

"Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son." - 1 John 2:22

The word Christ means Messiah. There were many Messiahs then.

 

[samtonga43]

That evidence isn’t trustworthy. Biased evidence is never trustworthy. Habermas has an apologetic ax to grind. It diminishes his credibility.

Is it possible that some may find his books and articles credible?

 

[Spartan]

The word Christ means Messiah. There were many Messiahs then.

But there's the real thing too. The time of the Bible's true Messiah was foretold in Genesis 49 and Daniel 9. Both forecast the 1st century.

 

[Spartan]

What evidence? I have not seen any here, the bible is not evidence.

Why don't you do some reading for a change?

"The Historical Jesus," by scholar Dr. Gary Habermas;
"The Historical Jesus of the Gospels, by Dr. Craig Keener
"New Evidence that Demands a Verdict," by former skeptic Josh McDowell;
"Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics," by Dr. Norman Geisler;
"The Case for Christ," by Lee Strobel," and
"The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by Dr. Gary Habermas.
“The Case for Miracles,” by Lee Strobel

 

[sojourner]

Is it possible that some may find his books and articles credible?

Not until they’re peer-reviewed by experts in exegetical scholarship.
His work may serve to bolster faith — which is the aim of apologetics — but it does not provide evidence of historic fact.

 

[Riders]

Why don't you do some reading for a change?

"The Historical Jesus," by scholar Dr. Gary Habermas;
"The Historical Jesus of the Gospels, by Dr. Craig Keener
"New Evidence that Demands a Verdict," by former skeptic Josh McDowell;
"Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics," by Dr. Norman Geisler;
"The Case for Christ," by Lee Strobel," and
"The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by Dr. Gary Habermas.
“The Case for Miracles,” by Lee Strobel

Josh Mcdowel is an uber conservative Evangelical I know about these authors they are not reliable.

 

[Kilk1]

Yes, but the nuance of expectation is still about wanting. It's not like the expectation that a hammer will fall when dropped. It's more the expectation that the hammer won't land on your bare pinky toe. The Greek goddess of hope was Elpis. When Pandora opened the box, all the spirits escaped, except for Elpis -- Hope -- who stayed behind to comfort humanity. That's the essence of the Greek form of hope. Therefore, the passage is about the expectation that our faith will serve us well.

Yes, the term usually includes expectation in the sense of anticipating something good. But that's not always the case. Though not common, elpis can even be used "rarely in a bad sense, expectation of evil, fear." So that certainly isn't what's inherent in the word. The word means "properly, expectation of what is sure (certain)." Giving a reason for your "expectation of what is sure (certain)" involves giving evidence.

Even if you'd translate it what you said, "the expectation that our faith will serve us well," what would your defense of that be? How do you give a defense that your faith (Christianity) will serve you better than will, say, Judaism, Buddhism, or Islam? As far as I can tell, the reason Christianity will serve you best is because it's true, that you really will be saved eternally; such isn't the case with other religions. But how would you defend this distinction without evidence?

Regardless, elpis doesn't denote "the expectation that our faith will serve us well" but "properly, expectation of what is sure (certain)." A reasoned defense of your "expectation of what is sure (certain)" requires evidence. As GOD’S WORD Translation (GW) renders part of this verse, "Always be ready to defend your confidence in God when anyone asks you to explain it" (emphasis mine).

How do you give a reasoned defense of your "expectation of what is sure (certain)" without giving any reason for such?

 

[Kilk1]

There is none, theres just as much proof for Spiderman as for Jesus, thats the point. There's no proof any group saw jesus rise from the dead.

When you claim there isn't "proof any group saw jesus rise from the dead," are you denying 1) "that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’s death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ" (What Really Happened to Jesus, Gerd Lüdemann, pg. 80), or 2) that Jesus was really there to be seen? If you're just denying the latter, we can have a discussion about Jesus while staying in the mainstream sphere, the historical bedrock virtually everyone grants. If you're denying the former, however, you're pitting yourself against even atheists like Gerd Lüdemann.

 

[sojourner]

Even if you'd translate it what you said, "the expectation that our faith will serve us well," what would your defense of that be? How do you give a defense that your faith (Christianity) will serve you better than will, say, Judaism, Buddhism, or Islam? As far as I can tell, the reason Christianity will serve you best is because it's true, that you really will be saved eternally; such isn't the case with other religions. But how would you defend this distinction without evidence?

I don’t make such a defense. All religions serve, or they wouldn’t exist. Christianity is one holder of truth for me. The question of salvation really isn’t on my radar.

 

[Riders]

When you claim there isn't "proof any group saw jesus rise from the dead," are you denying 1) "that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’s death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ" (What Really Happened to Jesus, Gerd Lüdemann, pg. 80), or 2) that Jesus was really there to be seen? If you're just denying the latter, we can have a discussion about Jesus while staying in the mainstream sphere, the historical bedrock virtually everyone grants. If you're denying the former, however, you're pitting yourself against even atheists like Gerd Lüdemann.

I think they thought they saw him. There are other scriptures saying there were others who thought they saw him but it turned out to be the gardner. If you grieve hard enough youll end up seeing what you want.