What the heck is this post even supposed to mean?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Resurrection of Jesus Christ
- Thread starter Spartan
- Start date
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
It says on that link:
“This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses” (Acts 2:32).
Who were all the witnesses to Jesus rising from the grave?
Goodness, dear Spartan!
You're a distinguished theologian with two degrees in theology. You started this thread for the express purpose of examining criticism of the historicity of Jesus' resurrection. People have responded to your invitation. Is it really the case that you can only answer reasoned criticism with insubstantial dismissive remarks?
This is your thread. You're the host here. Hostmanship includes proper consideration of the responses you invited, and a thoughtful and informed reply in each case, surely? Indeed, having regard to your credentials, it's very much a case of noblesse oblige.
Are you for real?
I have none but my theology is superior to his. And it contains rocket launchers & bacon, unlike his.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
He makes that claim, but as you may have noticed he does not have the best understanding of the Bible or its history.
Thanks for the kind words. Please help yourself.AWESOME post..... Can I post the link to your post on my forum? There is a Christian I am posting to there who I have been posting to for about five years now. We are friends but we vehemently disagree on religious beliefs. He is convinced that Baha'is have "trashed" the Bible when really all we do is interpret it differently.
Of course, we disagree on the "bodily" resurrection because Baha'is do not believe Jesus ever came back to life, that which would have been impossible had He really been dead for three days. One problem I have is that I do not know the Bible very well at all and obviously you do, so your arguments would shed some new light on the subject.
One point I might have made more clearly is that if the choice is between a possible natural explanation ─ for example, that Jesus wasn't really dead, he got up and left, or was rescued; or that the searchers went to the wrong tomb; or even something highly unlikely such as an earth tremor opening a crevasse into which the body fell, then closing it again, are all vastly more probable than any supernatural explanation.
Uh huh.
He has two degrees in the same area of study? Guess his first degree just wasn't good enough or something...
I can totally see how it went down:
"Grats on your bible study degree! Now, do it again, study that bible some more!"
Spartan
Well-Known Member
If you knew the scriptures you'd be a born-again Christian, as opposed to a theological wannabe.
Spartan
Well-Known Member
A partial list is found in 1 Corinthians 15 -
"For I handed on to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures; After that, he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at once, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. After that he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.Last of all, as to one born abnormally, he appeared to me (Paul)."
No, if you knew the scriptures, you'd be an atheist like me.
Not to mention these "born again" Christians tend to be the worst people of all time. They go around telling other Christians that they aren't true Christians, with very little care for the well-being of others.
ALL you do is go around spreading your fundamentalist cult dogma.
Spartan
Well-Known Member
It means liberal theologians are largely suspect in their theology. They cast colored beads (Jesus Seminar) for their beliefs; they late date scripture (Daniel) to cancel out his prophetic writings because they can't stand the supernatural; they often favor moral relativism to legitimize sodomy, and they deny Jesus as a Savior for the remission of sins (Bishop Spong) and deny the deity of Jesus and the Trinity. Not all of them, but a good sampling of them. Beware of liberal theologians.
Called it. You go around telling other people that their faith is incorrect.
I say your theology is suspect if it's contingent on making falsehoods of other people.
Spartan
Well-Known Member
You're funny.
Spartan
Well-Known Member
Just the Biblically-challenged and the Christ mockers. I give kudos to those who abide by the traditional Gospel truths.
I was being serious. I've read the Bible.
Now you're going to say i didn't understand it. Go ahead. I'm saying you don't understand it.
"Born again" - Christians are NOT a traditionalist sect.
I thought you said you have a degree in theology? I'm starting to think your claims of having a degree were in fact lies.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Or maybe those were just stories people wrote. How can anyone know if any of that ever happened unless there was independent verification. Anyone can write anything they want to write but a story does not prove a story is true. That is circular reasoning.
Spartan
Well-Known Member
What's the meaning of the resurrection? Here's part of it:
"And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!" - 1 Corinthians 15:17
Theologians don't just quote Bible passages: They also explain them. You're not a theologian. You're a proselytizer.
Which happens to be against the rules of this forum. Desist, now.
What's the historicity of the resurrection?
At the furthest extreme of improbable.
As a metaphor, though, it can be put to work. For what, and how well, are concerns of the user of the metaphor, of course.