So only Greeks wrote Greek lol ?Because all we have are Greek manuscripts. It's pretty obvious.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
So only Greeks wrote Greek lol ?Because all we have are Greek manuscripts. It's pretty obvious.
What your completely missing, is the bible is written to believers. Its not desperately trying to prove itself to anyone. It doesn't care about your ' reasoning ' and demands for ' proof ' .
I trust wikipedia on it.
So only Greeks wrote Greek lol ?
You have a Bible. Have you read it? Do so. It's there.
You have the online encyclopedias. Google it.
I'll help.
Christianity in the 1st century - Wikipedia
See here.
Any of what?
There is secular proof for Jesus, his followers, amd Christianity.
Were you asking for anything else?
What your completely missing, is the bible is written to believers. Its not desperately trying to prove itself to anyone. It doesn't care about your ' reasoning ' and demands for ' proof ' .
That's not what I would call a rebuttal. Jesus said many will come after him claiming to be him and claiming to speak it is the end but not to believe them or be led astray. He also said the law doesn't get changed or lessened. And I even gave evidence where Paul contradicts Jesus.Your misquote more like it
Could you give an example? I'm certain it will prove my point .A tacit admission that the Bible is unreasonable and irrational. Welcome to the party!
Doesn't change the fact.I looked at it and couldn't take it seriously.
//Then take it all on faith// It takes more faith to believe what you keep putting forward ,that we should believe.Then take it all on faith. That's what I heartily recommend. Because without documented proof that's all you've got.
He meant the letters to the Christians, not the Bible as a whole.A tacit admission that the Bible is unreasonable and irrational. Welcome to the party!
Funny how those arguments never come up in any serious debate . Ever ! .Doesn't change the fact.
Could you give an example? I'm certain it will prove my point .
//documented proof // Given the narrative, and please try to include this , what documented prove ? ( let's pretend that what we have isn't such a thing ,for a crazy moment )Then take it all on faith. That's what I heartily recommend. Because without documented proof that's all you've got.
He meant the letters to the Christians, not the Bible as a whole.
The Bible as a whole was written by men of faith, for people of faith - that is, people seeking God.
What do you find interesting about that? How is it unreasonable?
Which ones? All of them? Prove that. Then afterwards, tell us why that is significant.The gospels are not regarded by secular scholars as a reliable historical document
I think you're making it overly difficult.the four Gospels circulated anonymously for decades after they were written. To some modern readers that seems surprising. Why wouldn’t the authors name themselves? Surely they named themselves. Didn’t’ they? The clear answer is, no, they did not.
Why Are the Gospels Anonymous? | The Bart Ehrman Blog
It’s ok with me if you clarify your original comment because what you originally said wasn’t correct, so I asked you to prove it.That's not what I would call a rebuttal. Jesus said many will come after him claiming to be him and claiming to speak it is the end but not to believe them or be led astray. He also said the law doesn't get changed or lessened. And I even gave evidence where Paul contradicts Jesus.
You, on the other hand, have offered nothing but empty words.
True. Maybe he meant for people to know God, and I am jumping to conclusion. Either case, would you mind responding to my question.He said 'the bible.'
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.