What ONE critical piece of information made you decide to believe or disbelieve Jesus rose?

[firedragon]

Yes people believe all manner of things about the bible, even ' scholars ' . This is demonstrated on this Forum ,with many weird and wonderful opinions . The way in which people think and view the world demonstrates how strong the mind can be when its thinking a certain way . I can see a lot of people believe ' scholars know best ' . They give up their sense making. There are as many ' scholars ' as opinions . Of course certain ones lean in a certain way .

But we have a thing called reason. And prior to dismissing scholars we should use reason to analyse what they say rather than dismissing them generally based on just our personal attitude towards scholars. This is prevalent to anything and everyone.

 

[viole]

For myself, I could have said

* there were no eyewitnesses to the resurrection

* there is no empty tomb

* history doesn't record a single mention of ANY of the apostles, as if they never existed

* the 4 resurrection accounts are rife with inconsistencies

* the gospels were all written in Greek by anonymous writers 50 to 100 years after the fact

* the original gospels were never preserved

* the earliest full copies of the gospels date to 300 years after Christ's death

* if God had really wanted us to believe Jesus rose he would have given us irrefutable evidence that would completely eliminate all doubt, but he didn't

I could have said any of the above but the one critical piece of information that makes me doubt the resurrection is the fact that outside of a scant mention of "James, brother of Jesus who was called the Christ"--and that doesn't mention the resurrection at all--we have absolutely no mention of the name "Jesus Christ" ANYWHERE in the secular historical record until after Christianity was made the official religion of the Roman empire.

This is the one piece of information that convinces me Jesus never rose from the dead.

The real problem is that supernatural claims like those would require extraordinary evidence. Here we do not even have ordinary one.

ciao

- viole

 

[John1.12]

It is probable that the writers did believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, but scholars you mentioned also believe that the writers of the synoptic gospels were inspired by other documents they call QLM. It is in their own thoughts do they differ. So its not so easily conclusive that "they believed" as you say.

The fact remains none of the accounts were written by witnesses. And there were certain interpolations as well that existed about the resurrection or post crucifixion accounts.

I bel

It has never been debunked except by non-historian amateur apologists using google searches.

Richard Carrier details this in his peer-reviewed book and covers it briefly here:
Dying-and-Rising Gods: It's Pagan, Guys. Get Over It. • Richard Carrier

He includes the original source material to demonstrate they are before Jesus. There are 6 known pre-Christian dying/rising savior Gods.
We also know the Persian prophet predicted a virgin born world savior would come to save humanity, the dead would resurrect at the end of the world, God had an demonic enemy who was against mankind and this was around 1500BC. The Israelites mergered these ideas into their theology during the 2nd temple period when the Persians occupied them. This is detailed by Mary Boyce in her work on Zoroastrianism and OT Professor Fransesca Stravapopolou for start. This is all standard knowledge in academia.

There is excellent evidence that a Greek/Jewish scholar wrote the gospel, it's full of mythic literary devices has parallels to Homer, is full of parables and is written like fiction.
Christian scholarship now acknowledges Mark is the source gospel:
The Synoptic Problem | Bible.org

So Mark is the one to examine.
Scholar D. Macdonald has an entire book on the evidence that Mark was using Homer as a source.
Carrier has an article with dozens of examples and shows 5 other peer-reviewd papers from historians that write about Mark's use of Paul to create his story.:
Mark's Use of Paul's Epistles • Richard Carrier

There is a blog article using Carrier's work that goes over the mythic nature of Mark and his use of other books like Psalms in the OT. An example:

"Only a few verses later, we read about the rest of the crucifixion narrative and find a link (a literary source) with the Book of Psalms in the Old Testament (OT):

Mark 15.24: “They part his garments among them, casting lots upon them.”

Psalm 22:18: “They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon them.”

Mark 15.29-31: “And those who passed by blasphemed him, shaking their heads and saying, ‘…Save yourself…’ and mocked him, saying ‘He who saved others cannot save himself!’ ”

Psalm 22.7-8: “All those who see me mock me and give me lip, shaking their head, saying ‘He expected the lord to protect him, so let the lord save him if he likes.’ ”

Mark 15.34: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

Psalm 22.1: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

On top of these links, Mark also appears to have used Psalm 69, Amos 8.9, and some elements of Isaiah 53, Zechariah 9-14, and Wisdom 2 as sources for his narratives. So we can see yet a few more elements of myth in the latter part of this Gospel, with Mark using other scriptural sources as needed for his story, whether to “fulfill” what he believed to be prophecy or for some other reason."

The Gospels as Allegorical Myth, Part I of 4: Mark





So to say there is "no evidence" or that this has been "debunked" is completely wrong. What it has been is hand waved off by apologists.
What's weird is the 1st century apologists and church fathers admitted Jesus was like all other savior gods but said he was the real one. Now it's pure denial?

Christian apologist Justin Martyr:

When we say…Jesus Christ…was produced without sexual union, and was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended to heaven, we propound nothing new or different from what you believe regarding those whom you call Sons of God. [In fact]…if anybody objects that [Jesus] was crucified, this is in common with the sons of Zeus (as you call them) who suffered, as previously listed [he listed Dionysus, Hercules, and Asclepius]. Since their fatal sufferings are all narrated as not similar but different, so his unique passion should not seem to be any worse

Let's just pretend all these so called similarities exist . The bible warns that satan counterfeits .

 

[ElishaElijah]

Jesus also said those who come after him and claim to speak in his name are deceivers and false prophets.

Where did He say that?

 

[Clara Tea]

* history doesn't record a single mention of ANY of the apostles, as if they never existed

The multi-part question is too cumbersome to answer in one post, so I will restrict this answer to just proof of apostles.

Is there any evidence other than the Bible that shows that the twelve apostles existed? – Evidence for Christianity

Link: "Josephus who tells us about the martyrdom of James, the brother of Jesus, who was the leader of the Jerusalem church."

Link: "Eusebius, wrote in the early fourth century. He tells about all twelve of the apostles, plus Paul, relating where each ministered and how they died. Eusebius quotes his sources, such as second century historian Papias and Irenaeus and other Christian writers."

Link: "the Didache and the Letter of Clement to the Romans, both written around the turn of the first century, that there were twelve apostles was assumed."

Historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles - Wikipedia

Link: "Acts describes Paul differently from how Paul describes himself [in his letters], both factually and theologically"

Link: "Luke–Acts is a two-part historical account traditionally ascribed to Luke, who was believed to be a follower of Paul."

Link: "there are differences between the earliest surviving manuscripts of Acts"

Link: "Codex Bezae....written in Greek and Latin in the 5th century"

Link: "Alexandrian text....Modern scholars think that the Western text is the Alexandrian text with later insertions."

Link: "Byzantine text-type (5th century or later), is often considered to have developed after the Western and Alexandrian types"

 

[Clara Tea]

* the earliest full copies of the gospels date to 300 years after Christ's death

The bible was written with Extrasensory Perception (ESP) using psychic information from God (more than 300 years after the apostles were dead). But there are errors in the information, though it was written by divine psychic vision.

Modern psychics can now correct errors. There are churches that talk in tongues. They writhe on the floor, and the members of the church talk in God's language, incoherently "jlskjdflsjfdl."

That is the proof that you sought.

I spoke to my theist friend, who said that God sends us signs all the time. We hiked to a pile of rocks, and he found a rock. Surely, he said, this is a sign from God that God exists.

A man with a lisp and a lame woman were faith healed...until I heard that Mthth Smith fell on her asthhhh. Reverend Peter Popoff was investigated by illusionist James Randi and arrested for fraud.

We can feel God working through the good members of the church (living in a mansion like Reverend Jim and Tammy Fay Bakker, not like the sinners who are starving in Africa).

Religion makes people good and moral (Mafia, graffiti vandals, etc). Money from religion helps others (son of Reverend Schuller, of the Crystal Cathedral, photographed with booze in one arm, bare busty blonde in the other arm, pants down, penis out, in public--Crystal Cathedral (thought to be church property) was sold by Schuller, senior for $50 million...his own money).

Those who believe without proof also have faith in people without proving their worthiness. They make easy marks for scam artists and carnival hucksters.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Service

The bible was written with Extrasensory Perception (ESP) using psychic information from God (more than 300 years after the apostles were dead). But there are errors in the information, though it was written by divine psychic vision.

Modern psychics can now correct errors. There are churches that talk in tongues. They writhe on the floor, and the members of the church talk in God's language, incoherently "jlskjdflsjfdl."

That is the proof that you sought.

I spoke to my theist friend, who said that God sends us signs all the time. We hiked to a pile of rocks, and he found a rock. Surely, he said, this is a sign from God that God exists.

A man with a lisp and a lame woman were faith healed...until I heard that Mthth Smith fell on her asthhhh. Reverend Peter Popoff was investigated by illusionist James Randi and arrested for fraud.

We can feel God working through the good members of the church (living in a mansion like Reverend Jim and Tammy Fay Bakker, not like the sinners who are starving in Africa).

Religion makes people good and moral (Mafia, graffiti vandals, etc). Money from religion helps others (son of Reverend Schuller, of the Crystal Cathedral, photographed with booze in one arm, bare busty blonde in the other arm, pants down, penis out, in public--Crystal Cathedral (thought to be church property) was sold by Schuller, senior for $50 million...his own money).

Those who believe without proof also have faith in people without proving their worthiness. They make easy marks for scam artists and carnival hucksters.

Nice opinion piece with some truth and there have been hucksters through out history. If you’re looking for proof from science about an alternative view, you’ll find the same kind of people and no proof.
Jesus was nothing like the people you posted here, neither were the Apostles or any believers I know. Bible condemns the kind of behavior you shared here.

 

[John1.12]

But we have a thing called reason. And prior to dismissing scholars we should use reason to analyse what they say rather than dismissing them generally based on just our personal attitude towards scholars. This is prevalent to anything and everyone.

Yes its not reasonable to dismiss the narrative as being corrupted ..given the narrative.

 

[ElishaElijah]

But we have a thing called reason. And prior to dismissing scholars we should use reason to analyse what they say rather than dismissing them generally based on just our personal attitude towards scholars. This is prevalent to anything and everyone.

I found the “scholars” have been atheist scholars. And yes they should be dismissed, they don’t have the Spirit of God and by what they write, don’t understand Scripture.

 

[firedragon]

I found the “scholars” have been atheist scholars. And yes they should be dismissed, they don’t have the Spirit of God and by what they write, don’t understand Scripture.

Okay, so that's a genetic fallacy. Thats a bias.

Anyway, you will also have to dismiss many many Christian scholars. Because Christian scholars are the majority in the field. Atheists a very very few.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Okay, so that's a genetic fallacy. Thats a bias.

Anyway, you will also have to dismiss many many Christian scholars. Because Christian scholars are the majority in the field. Atheists a very very few.

I’m saying to look at atheist scholars for truth, you won’t find it concerning accurately interpreting the Scriptures. Too many people take a scholar or expert opinion as absolute truth without really testing the information themselves.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Okay, so that's a genetic fallacy. Thats a bias.

What do you mean by that? I found the merit of the “atheist scholar” to be filled with error and bias concerning the Scriptures, why? Because they seem to have the premise to prove the Scriptures false instead of, what is the author communicating.
They get it wrong, say the Bible means... and that’s not what is being communicated. In short, they twist Scripture and when cross -examined by other believing scholars they are exposed.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

Clara please correct your post No. 105. I did not provide all those responses you made.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

So there is Josephus's reference to Jesus outside of Christian writings?

Yes, 65 years after the fact and Josephus wasn't an eyewitness, he was just repeating hearsay he heard. At best it might prove he heard talk about somebody called Jesus.

 

[firedragon]

I’m saying to look at atheist scholars for truth, you won’t find it concerning accurately interpreting the Scriptures. Too many people take a scholar or expert opinion as absolute truth without really testing the information themselves.

I am saying that is a bias, and a logical fallacy. Its bigotry. Also, Christian scholars are far more in number than atheists. I think its just an excuse to dismiss anything that doesnt help your narrative. And maybe you take information without testing them so you think others are all like that. But that's all just an opinion you have about people.

This is a rhetorical exchange. So unless there is something specific, with "tested information" like you yourself urged for, I will not participate.

Cheers.

 

[firedragon]

What do you mean by that?

I mean that's a bias you have. It is your bias. You are also ignoring the fact that most scholars are Christian themselves and maybe you are not aware of what they do and what they say.

 

[John1.12]

I am saying that is a bias, and a logical fallacy. Its bigotry. Also, Christian scholars are far more in number than atheists. I think its just an excuse to dismiss anything that doesnt help your narrative. And maybe you take information without testing them so you think others are all like that. But that's all just an opinion you have about people.

This is a rhetorical exchange. So unless there is something specific, with "tested information" like you yourself urged for, I will not participate.

Cheers.

///I think its just an excuse to dismiss anything that doesnt help your narrative// Very rarely do i see the narrative taken into consideration. To Christians its rather embarrassing to hear ' scholars ' who do not believe the Bible is from God ,or that its true ,talk about the bible and its narrative . I cringe every time .Sometimes I laugh out loud now ,because its so woeful .

 

[ElishaElijah]

I am saying that is a bias, and a logical fallacy. Its bigotry. Also, Christian scholars are far more in number than atheists. I think its just an excuse to dismiss anything that doesnt help your narrative. And maybe you take information without testing them so you think others are all like that. But that's all just an opinion you have about people.

This is a rhetorical exchange. So unless there is something specific, with "tested information" like you yourself urged for, I will not participate.

Cheers.

Of course there are more believing scholars than atheist scholars. Believing scholars have a big advantage, they have the Spirit of God to assist in properly interpreting what God meant by what is said in the Scriptures. You’re assumption is that anything atheists say is automatically dismissed, that’s not correct. The false interpretation of Scripture is what is dismissed no matter who brings it. I don’t take anything as fact without testing anymore, at least try not to. Too much false information out there now to believe anything now days.
Cheers friend

 

[firedragon]

///I think its just an excuse to dismiss anything that doesnt help your narrative// Very rarely do i see the narrative taken into consideration. To Christians its rather embarrassing to hear ' scholars ' who do not believe the Bible is from God ,or that its true ,talk about the bible and its narrative . I cringe every time .Sometimes I laugh out loud now ,because its so woeful .

That too is a nice script.

But anything specific pertaining to the topic?

 

[stvdv]

This is the one piece of information that convinces me Jesus never rose from the dead.

What ONE critical piece of information made you decide to believe or disbelieve Jesus rose?

My Master, Sai Baba, told us that Jesus rose from the dead. Hence I believe that Jesus rose from the dead
@stvdvRF

Jesus was crucified on a Friday and He rose from the tomb on a Sunday. That is why Sunday is taken as a day of worship and service in churches.

Sathya Sai Baba, 25 December 1992