The Resurrection of Christ

[outhouse]

However, since people cannot rise from the dead, Jesus didn't. At least not physically. If we look through myth we find Jesus was more of a mystic, and perhaps his "resurrection" was simply reaching enlightenment. Such a line of thought could horrifically lead to individuality however.

exactly

many people claim this was strictly spiritually, later confused and written in as a miracle

 

[fallingblood]

A vast minority does not make it so.

We know some hebrews thought it so but most after yeshuas death after oral tradition set in

The Jesus movement was accepted as a form of Judaism. Some Jews may have disagreed, but it was accepted as being part of Judaism. Your statement was false.

 

[outhouse]

it has nothing to do with taxes.

thats your personal opinion even the scripture finds wrong as complaints of roman taxes are backed up by scripture

 

[fallingblood]

[


fact is, historically they are not as stated.

Historically for yeshua, we know most of his miracles were attributed after death by people who never knew or met him.

People turned him into a deity and even that took hundreds of years to stick

Historically, we can't be for certain. Did he do things that people thought were miracles? Yes. There really is no arguing against that as it is so attached to the tradition, and is so from an early time. Were those miracles actual miracles? Historically speaking, it is possible, but not probable.

Historically, we can't rule them out for sure. We can just say that they are not probable.

 

[outhouse]

The Jesus movement was accepted as a form of Judaism. Some Jews may have disagreed, but it was accepted as being part of Judaism. Your statement was false.

Um no

hebrews in general have never followed that yeshus was the messiah. a small group that branched off of hebrews did however.

those that did became identified as christians

 

[outhouse]

Historically, we can't be for certain. Did he do things that people thought were miracles? Yes. There really is no arguing against that as it is so attached to the tradition, and is so from an early time. Were those miracles actual miracles? Historically speaking, it is possible, but not probable.

Historically, we can't rule them out for sure. We can just say that they are not probable.

correct in the fact history cannot disprove myth

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

beating a dead horse here,

How do you discount the ressurection,if you don't believe/support it if you do.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

However, I've never even seen good evidence of an "ordinary" standard in support of the resurrection.

I've never read of any of the other first century messiahs being linked to a ressurection, the apostlesn who were cowardly during their lives were able to hop on boats and risk their lives for the gospels, people high in the Jewish society abandoned their beliefs to follow Christ, through all this persuection we have the witnesses of the martyrs, so my question really is, what more do you want?

Probably whatever it is you want as evidence for the truth of the Guru Granth Sahib, which you reject despite the martyrdom of all those gurus and ordinary Sikhs.

I'm sure you can understand the approach when we're looking at a religion that you're not already invested in personally.

 

[outhouse]

As for Caiaphas and the Romans being in bed, that is also debatable. Yes, Caiaphas did appease the Romans. Any High Priest would have had to do just that. One of their big responsibilities was to keep peace in Jerusalem. That meant that they had to walk a fine line. On one hand, they had to keep the Romans happy. On the other, they had to keep the citizens happy. However, when the Romans took money from the Temple, there was quite a bit of problem there. As we see in other instances in which doing so, the Romans faced some pretty serious revolts and consequences.

agreed

More so, this had nothing to do with Roman taxes. Jesus tipping over the tables had nothing to do with Roman taxes. It had to do with him having a problem with how the Temple was being ran. It wasn't with taxes.

there were many reasons that could tick Yeshua off, double and triple taxation would tick him off more then anything. the fact hebrews had to pay extra taxes to worship would have infuriated him. No??

 

[outhouse]

The movement was already going by the time that these prophecies were attributed to Jesus. The movement continued because something happened that made the disciples and followers of Jesus believe that he had risen from the dead in some form.

Only a few of those prophecies existed at that time, but we dont know to what extent.

a missing body would have done everything you stating

 

[fallingblood]

yeshus never rode in for peace. The most violent things yeshus ever did in the canon was during his stay in the temple.

outside of the canon he murdered people as a child.

His stay in the temple was hardly violent though. And really, that was an extremely small part. The rest of his stay was non-violent. Including his arrest, where he rebuked his men for attacking the soldiers who arrested him.

As for outside the canon, it is ridiculous to suggest he murdered people as a child. That is just low, and should not be brought up in a rational thread, as no scholar believes that story to be true.

last time I checked christ never wrote a word or said anything.

One does not have to say something in order for them to have said it. The autobiography of Malcolm X was written by someone else, but it was taken from what Malcolm was saying. Because he didn't write it himself, that doesn't mean he didn't say it.

fact is we know roman occupation taxed the heck out of everyone in the area. they were masters of this. They would squeeze the economy hard hitting the poor very hard. Their goal was to squeeze as much as possible without crippling the economy.

And Jesus also stated, give to Caesar what is Caesar. He didn't oppose, at least openly, the taxation.

the temple and the holiday were big buisiness.

Maybe for the Temple, but even that you are exaggerating the extent.

If I was you I would be going after the angle of this "the silver coins being used during that time had a pagan deity on one side and a eagle on the other and having these coins in a hebrew temple would have made yeshua furious" but fact is even that would not really insite enough anger to equal that of having to pay double or triple duty taxes just to worship and make sacrifices. Much livestock was sold in the temple for the holiday, all these transdactions were heavily taxed.

What taxes? They weren't Roman taxes. They were temple taxes. Jews were fine with paying Temple taxes, not Roman taxes.

More so, there wasn't Pagan coins being used in the temple. That was what the money exchangers were for. In fact, even the livestock was for the ease of the Jewish travelers.

fact is Paul is guilty of giving Yeshsua divinity. he never met Yeshua and I look at his claims as blatant lies.

Where does Paul give Jesus divinity? As for not meeting him, why does that matter? He met the brother of Jesus, and spent a considerable time with Peter, the head disciple of Jesus. He seems to be in a great position.

You need to remember the text in the canon were those picked for content that matched each other and assembled at a much later date. There were other text. its a shame we dont have them.

But even paul never met or knew yeshua

You are over simplifying the process. They were chosen for their assumed authority, as well as for being older, among other things. Paul is the earliest we have. As for the Gospels, are canonical Gospels are the earliest that we know of, and probably are the oldest.

The other text really didn't add anything of importance to the life of Jesus, at least not from what we can see. They only tell us what Christianity became quite after the fact.

 

[outhouse]

John's teachings weren't really radical. There were dozens of other religious leaders who were preaching nearly the same thing. Most of them are unknown, or mentioned only briefly (such in Josephus), but there were quite a few of them from what we can tell. And their messages were quite similar.

So there wasn't really a creation of any new ideas. They worked with ideas that already were there, and that were already accepted by a number of Jews. Jesus was just one more leader preaching this same basic message.

As for his teachings taking off so fast; they didn't. In fact, it grew quite slowly.

the message no, I agree. the way john taught them though was however. enough to get his head chopped off for mouthing off to the guy in charge.


yeshuas theology was a slow starting movement but it did snowball, the messages however did move on faster then the man himself. enough so to be recorded by scribes years after his death means it was fast enough to build enough word tobe remembered

 

[outhouse]

did you tivo any of the historical jesus shows on the natgeo channel ???

I have 6-7 hours lol great vague education. It does have great scholars though and their views. Even had Bart E and few other name brands



might add the one labeled "jesus arrested" deals with the tax's in a 1 hour special. im sure its on youtube

 

[1137]

the gospels were all written by people who never knew or met Yeshua, they are all making claims they did not know nor witnessed.

How do you know claims were not denied???

Well, the people could have known Jesus. However, that is the point. They saw a chance at power and grabbed it when the opportunity arose.

The Jesus movement was accepted as a form of Judaism. Some Jews may have disagreed, but it was accepted as being part of Judaism. Your statement was false.

Jesus was Jewish. Which is why he never said he was the son of god or anything else. The Pharisees were all about Jewish law, and Jesus was revolutionary. However, this has nothing to do with Christianity. Christianity took a dead revolutionary's ideas, perverted them, and have used them for control. It was origianlly a sect of Judaism, which is why the Romans left them alone. However, once Christianity became its own religion they were persecuted, as old religions were allowed in the empire but new ones were not allowed to form.

 

[fallingblood]

thats your personal opinion even the scripture finds wrong as complaints of roman taxes are backed up by scripture

You mean where Jesus says, give to Caesar what is Caesar's? Or where Paul supports the ruling government, and tells his readers to obey them?

Um no

hebrews in general have never followed that yeshus was the messiah. a small group that branched off of hebrews did however.

those that did became identified as christians

Actually yes. Christianity formed after the Temple was destroyed, and when Rabbinical Judaism appeared and pushed out all other forms of Judaism. Before that, the Jesus movement was an accepted form of Judaism. In fact, James, the head of the movement after the death of Jesus, was seen as a very respectable Jew.

Again though, you stated Hebrews never followed it. You were wrong. The earliest movement was compromised of Jews. It was a Jewish message for Jews.

correct in the fact history cannot disprove myth

Miracles are not impossible from a historical perspective. They just aren't verifiable.

there were many reasons that could tick Yeshua off, double and triple taxation would tick him off more then anything. the fact hebrews had to pay extra taxes to worship would have infuriated him. No??

They didn't have to pay extra taxes. They had a choice to buy their animals for sacrifice at the temple, or bring their own. If they bought them there, they paid a fee. Where are you getting the idea that they were heavily taxed?

There was a Temple tax, but that wouldn't have infuriated Jesus, as it was an accepted part of Judaism. The taxes they paid were Temple taxes, that went to the Temple, not to the Romans.

Only a few of those prophecies existed at that time, but we dont know to what extent.

a missing body would have done everything you stating

No. Paul never mentions a missing body, and for him, it didn't matter. What mattered was that he believed he witnessed the risen Jesus. That is what mattered to him. The missing body didn't. Especially when we consider that for Paul, it was most likely a spiritual resurrection and not a physical resurrection.

A missing body would have done very very little.

the message no, I agree. the way john taught them though was however. enough to get his head chopped off for mouthing off to the guy in charge.

John wasn't unique in that. Reading Josephus, we see dozens of other religious leaders who faced the same thing.

yeshuas theology was a slow starting movement but it did snowball, the messages however did move on faster then the man himself. enough so to be recorded by scribes years after his death means it was fast enough to build enough word tobe remembered

By all accounts, the movement grew very slowly. It being written down later on by his followers only show that it reached literate people who wanted to write it down.

Most likely they wrote it down as they realized that the movement was there for the long haul, and not just a short period as others had believed, like Paul.

 

[outhouse]

Actually yes. Christianity formed after the Temple was destroyed, and when Rabbinical Judaism appeared and pushed out all other forms of Judaism. Before that, the Jesus movement was an accepted form of Judaism. In fact, James, the head of the movement after the death of Jesus, was seen as a very respectable Jew.

understood, the major change came with the gospel of j

BUT it was never common knowledge that jesus fulfiled the OT prophecies, this was added much later only in scripture. we dont know what oral tradition carried.

even then we do know it was never mainstream or accepted by the majority

 

[outhouse]

They didn't have to pay extra taxes. They had a choice to buy their animals for sacrifice at the temple, or bring their own. If they bought them there, they paid a fee. Where are you getting the idea that they were heavily taxed?

wrong

most traveled long distances to get there, animals were inspected and had to be free of blemishes and as being such, Most were sold in the temple. Scripture even backs this

 

[outhouse]

With all that said there is still a huge grey road in which all this plays into

As modern scholarships learns more, new images of the real life of yeshua are emerging that have never been known before.


even so the grey area is still rather large

 

[fallingblood]

wrong

most traveled long distances to get there, animals were inspected and had to be free of blemishes and as being such, Most were sold in the temple. Scripture even backs this

Reread what I said. And this had nothing to do with Roman taxes.

 

[outhouse]

the idea that they were heavily taxed?

what did Romans do to cities they took over???????

 

[fallingblood]

what did Romans do to cities they took over???????

And this has to do with the Temple and Passover how?