Jesus Resurrection

[Subduction Zone]

Paul claimed to have had a vision of the risen Christ, and claimed that what he learned about Christ came from reading ancient scriptures, what we now call the Old Testament. He claimed that Cephas, James, and 500 brothers also experienced what he experienced.

Correct, he never saw Jesus. And he made claims that were not supported by evidence. Why believe him?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Visions are not another name for halucinations.

Why is none of the real points and issues not being accounted for?

They pretty much are.

What are the "real points and issues"?

 

[lukethethird]

Correct, he never saw Jesus. And he made claims that were not supported by evidence. Why believe him?

If a religious fanatic tells me he had a vision of a risen Christ, whatever that means, I'll take his word for it that he experienced something.

 

[leroy]

And Paul is the one that we have no reason to believe. You keep relying on one unreliable source. We already know that Paul was a few fries short of a happy meal. Why pay him any heed at all?

Care to answer to my question?

 

[Jollybear]

So what? Again, his writings indicate a man not of sound mind. The one that I quoted and you complained about comes to mind.



It appears that you were twisting Paul's words to make them appear to be less insane. His reasoning was poor. He thought "the end is near" it wasn't. That is a repeating theme that he spouted. People now try to claim it referred to how short life is or other unsupported beliefs. Sometime a person means what he says. No additional interpretation needed.

So what? Lol.....oh boy.....this is what it comes to, this is the best they got, that there liers or insane or halucinations.

All three of those DO NOT account for all the data.

 

[leroy]

I disagree I think a lot don't believe he existed at all. i am finding a lot of scholar names on the net of scholars who do not believe he existed. You can not give me any reason for that.

Again I can make the same argument in support of young earth creationism. I can also provide a list of scholars that accept YEC

You have provided lots of Jesus myth theories, of all those theories which one do you support ?

 

[The Bible Alone]

The death and resurrection of Jesus in roughly 28 or 29 CE assertedby the Bible (many times) and by almost every living Christian. Yet there is not only no evidence that said resurrection ever occurred, but there is essentially no way to prove that somebody that died and came back to life over 2000 hrs ago.

The Bible is not one book, but 66 books. The four gospels were each by a different eyewitness who was willing to die for what he believed in. In a court of law the testimony of multiple witnesses is accepted as proof. And while people will lie to gain something I don't know of anyone willing to suffer and die for their own lies.

 

[Jollybear]

They pretty much are.

What are the "real points and issues"?

If you say paul is lying, then you MUST account for his persecutions and death.

If you say he halucinated, you must account for the extra sensory knowledge that went with those experiences.

If you say hes insane, then you must account for HOW someone can sincerely believe a false statement they speak with the intent to decieve.

You have a HARD JOB on your hands.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So what? Lol.....oh boy.....this is what it comes to, this is the best they got, that there liers or insane or halucinations.

All three of those DO NOT account for all the data.

What "data"? And my explanation appears to do quite fine.

By the way, it is Christians that ironically demand that they must be liars, not those that realize that like David Koresh and Jim Jones and their ilk that they may just be delusional.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you say paul is lying, then you MUST account for his persecutions and death.

If you say he halucinated, you must account for the extra sensory knowledge that went with those experiences.

If you say hes insane, then you must account for HOW someone can sincerely believe a false statement they speak with the intent to decieve.

You have a HARD JOB on your hands.

You appear to be the one that says that he is lying. I am more in the insane camp. He had no "extra sensory knowledge" that I know of. Where do you get these claims from?


It also appears that you have no idea what it means to be insane. Crazy people have all sorts of false beliefs at times.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Bible is not one book, but 66 books. The four gospels were each by a different eyewitness who was willing to die for what he believed in. In a court of law the testimony of multiple witnesses is accepted as proof. And while people will lie to gain something I don't know of anyone willing to suffer and die for their own lies.

Actually it is not. A one page letter does not qualify as a "book". Some of the so called books are extremely short. And very few of them would qualify as "books" on their own.

And no, none of the Gospels are thought to be written by eyewitnesses. The earliest was Mark and even that was written over a generation after Jesus's death.

 

[Riders]

Ok so pauls experience was a hallucination.

The 500 where a lie invented by Paul (or a tall tale

What about James the brother of Jesus? Paul reported that he saw the risen Jesus. ....did James had an hallucination, did Paul lied? Was it tall tale?

He exaggerated and made a legendary story .There were tales the exact same out int he mystery cults of Helena they told the same exact stories about Greek Gods and mixed jewish Messiah belief with theirs and wrote the legend of Jesus. Paul did not write the new testament, it was copies of copies he didn't even write it.

 

[Jollybear]

You appear to be the one that says that he is lying. I am more in the insane camp. He had no "extra sensory knowledge" that I know of. Where do you get these claims from?


It also appears that you have no idea what it means to be insane. Crazy people have all sorts of false beliefs at times.

Ok, so, he wasnt lying then....ok, we dont have to deal with that then.

So, he was insane AND halucinated then.

Ok, now you have to account for the extra sensory knowledge that went with those experiences. Like, his companions saw the light and heard the voice too. And the Lord spoke to ananias at same time, telling him to go to paul and told him where he was located.

And yea, insane people BELIEVE crazy things. Weve been over this ad infinitum now. But your not accounting for why paul, or anyone for that matter would make up false things and then how they could truly believe those things they made up?

You said a lie is a false statement with the intent to decieve. Paul did not do that then, because you said hes not in that camp, but in the insane one. Ok, account for how he would make all these things up and truly believe them? If there not lies, then how could he believe the MADE UP stuff?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok, so, he wasnt lying then....ok, we dont have to deal with that then.

So, he was insane AND halucinated then.

Ok, now you have to account for the extra sensory knowledge that went with those experiences. Like, his companions saw the light and heard the voice too. And the Lord spoke to ananias at same time, telling him to go to paul and told him where he was located.

And yea, insane people BELIEVE crazy things. Weve been over this ad infinitum now. But your not accounting for why paul, or anyone for that matter would make up false things and then how they could truly believe those things they made up?

You said a lie is a false statement with the intent to decieve. Paul did not do that then, because you said hes not in that camp, but in the insane one. Ok, account for how he would make all these things up and truly believe them? If there not lies, then how could he believe the MADE UP stuff?

once again, what so called extra sensory knowledge?

You do realize that you are relying on Paul's account for the Ananias claimclaim, don't you? You are using circular logic. To claim that Paul had such knowledge You would need an outside source.

 

[lukethethird]

once again, what so called extra sensory knowledge?

You do realize that you are relying on Paul's account for the Ananias claimclaim, don't you? You are using circular logic. To claim that Paul had such knowledge You would need an outside source.

That's from Acts of the Apostles, not Paul.

 

[leroy]

You appear to be the one that says that he is lying. I am more in the insane camp. He had no "extra sensory knowledge" that I know of. Where do you get these claims from?]

What about all the other alleged witnesses of the resurrection, where they also insane crazy people with hallucinations?

Where the apostoles like peter, the woman or James where also insane, or would you consider those testimonies lies (or legends)

 

[Subduction Zone]

What about all the other alleged witnesses of the resurrection, where they also insane crazy people with hallucinations?

Where the apostoles like peter, the woman or James where also insane, or would you consider those testimonies lies (or legends)

What other alleged witnesses? You keep making the error of assuming that the tales you read in the Bible are from eyewitnesses. That does not appear to be the case.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's from Acts of the Apostles, not Paul.

That is right, so the tale is slightly better than unsupported claims. Of course what Paul got wrong and is later reinterpreted is the worst witness against him. His repeated belief that the end was near tells us that he was not who he believed himself to be.

 

[Riders]

Ok, so, he wasnt lying then....ok, we dont have to deal with that then.

So, he was insane AND halucinated then.

Ok, now you have to account for the extra sensory knowledge that went with those experiences. Like, his companions saw the light and heard the voice too. And the Lord spoke to ananias at same time, telling him to go to paul and told him where he was located.

And yea, insane people BELIEVE crazy things. Weve been over this ad infinitum now. But your not accounting for why paul, or anyone for that matter would make up false things and then how they could truly believe those things they made up?

You said a lie is a false statement with the intent to decieve. Paul did not do that then, because you said hes not in that camp, but in the insane one. Ok, account for how he would make all these things up and truly believe them? If there not lies, then how could he believe the MADE UP stuff?

What proof do you have that any of that happened?You guys have not answered any of my questions and I say its just a legend made up.

Paul did not write the new testament, sense everything was taken from copies of copies of copies of copies of copies etc what proof do you have that it was even copied right and that that story is even the correct story?

Wat proof so you have that any of that happened none?????

 

[Riders]

What about all the other alleged witnesses of the resurrection, where they also insane crazy people with hallucinations?

Where the apostoles like peter, the woman or James where also insane, or would you consider those testimonies lies (or legends)

legends