Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No, the concept of Hell need not exist. Along with the false idea of being "lost in sin".
-
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!
What ONE critical piece of information made you decide to believe or disbelieve Jesus rose?
- Thread starter SeekingAllTruth
- Start date
-
- Tags
- resurrection
No one seriously debates these wacky things . There is no such debate at any scholarly level . This is fringe radicals stuff.
That's not what the bible says though.
Science proves that there was not a physical resurrection as physical bodies do not rise after death but decompose. As to the Body of Jesus it was hidden from the Jews but it never ascended. The reality of the resurrection, I believe was spiritual, as the Bible is a spiritual book concerning spiritual topics.
They were not willing to have the body of His Holiness Jesus Christ put in the Jews' cemetery. The Apostles went and bought a piece of land and interred him. Then the Jews took their refuse there. Later men came and built a great church over it. This was built by the mother of one of the Caesars, after three hundred years. Even up to this time in certain parts it is known as the Church of Refuse. This is really the Tomb of Christ. It was the place where all the refuse of the city was gathered in the day of Christ. For three hundred years it continued in this manner. You can go now and see what wonderful change there is, see what a wonderful church is built, how many jewels and precious stones are collected there. The statue of Christ is bejewelled with all kinds of precious stones, so are the statues of Mary and others. How different the attitude of the people in the days of Manifestations. They persecute, deride and ridicule them, put a crown of thorns upon their heads, beat them in the street, spit in their faces and finally crucify them. But later on they worship their images, kiss the ground upon which they walked, or the stone upon which they sat. - Abdul- Baha
They were not willing to have the body of His Holiness Jesus Christ put in the Jews' cemetery. The Apostles went and bought a piece of land and interred him. Then the Jews took their refuse there. Later men came and built a great church over it. This was built by the mother of one of the Caesars, after three hundred years. Even up to this time in certain parts it is known as the Church of Refuse. This is really the Tomb of Christ. It was the place where all the refuse of the city was gathered in the day of Christ. For three hundred years it continued in this manner. You can go now and see what wonderful change there is, see what a wonderful church is built, how many jewels and precious stones are collected there. The statue of Christ is bejewelled with all kinds of precious stones, so are the statues of Mary and others. How different the attitude of the people in the days of Manifestations. They persecute, deride and ridicule them, put a crown of thorns upon their heads, beat them in the street, spit in their faces and finally crucify them. But later on they worship their images, kiss the ground upon which they walked, or the stone upon which they sat. - Abdul- Baha
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
So what? The Bible is wrong about lots of things.
Last edited:
Or your wrong and the bible is correct.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No, the Bible can be demonstrated to be wrong time after time. Especially if one makes the error of reading it literally.
nPeace
Veteran Member
Are we discussing historical jesus, or supernatural jesus?
Tacitus is widely regarded as one of the greatest Roman historians by modern scholars.
The Annals is one of the earliest secular historical records to mention Christ, which Tacitus does in connection with Nero's persecution of the Christians.
Tacitus on Christ - Wikipedia
The Roman historian and senator Tacitus referred to Christ, his execution by Pontius Pilate, and the existence of early Christians in Rome in his final work, Annals (written ca. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44.
The Historical Jesus is based on historical evidence.
...essentially all scholars in the relevant fields agree that the mere historical existence of Jesus can be established using documentary and other evidence.
The lines of evidence used to establish Jesus' historical existence include the New Testament documents, theoretical source documents that may lie behind the New Testament, statements from the early Church Fathers, brief references in histories produced decades or centuries later by pagan and Jewish sources, gnostic documents, and early Christian creeds.
It seems like your conclusions are arrived at ,because you don't take the bible literally, or believe it . Yes this radically effects the way you interpret.
I don’t think that answers to my question. But don’t worry, I didn’t expect any reasonable answer. However, it is interesting idea, if there was about 50 other Gospels, are they extra Biblical evidence for Jesus? Many atheists say that there should be more than 4 testimonies about Jesus and what you say seem to indicate that there was actually lot of testimonies/evidence.
Also, for me more meaningful thing is when the Gospels were written or told, not when they were collected into one book.
SeekingAllTruth
Well-Known Member
1213, I suggest you do some reading on how 4--and just 4 gospels, not 3, not 5 not 6 were chosen for the canon. The reason is so ridiculous that even you might be surprised.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
Yep, I don't see much difference between the fundamental concepts behind the story of Jesus' sacrifice and the stereotype of chucking virgins into volcanoes to appease the gods.
SeekingAllTruth
Well-Known Member
1213 wasn't interested in knowing something that might be embarrassing to early Christianity, not surprisingly so I'll tell you all anyway:
The reason only 4--not 3, not 5,not 6, not 7--only four was decided by irenaeus didn't have anything to do with Jesus or God or the inspiration of the HS or anything sensible. No, the silly reason he chose four was a total superstition on his part.
Irenaeus declared that the four he espoused were the four pillars of the Church: ‘it is not possible that there can be either more or fewer than four’ he stated, presenting as logic the analogy of the four corners of the earth and the four winds (1.11.8). His image, taken from Ezekial 1, of God’s throne borne by four creatures with four faces—‘the four had the face of a man, and the face of a lion, on the right side: and the four had the face of an ox on the left side; they four also had the face of an eagle’— equivalent to the ‘four-formed’ gospel, is the origin of the conventional symbols of the Evangelists: lion, bull, eagle, man.
Irenaeus of Lyon Insists on Only Four Gospels : History of Information
That's it. Just because at the time this fool believed the earth had four corners (The Holy Spirit apparently was too lazy to inform him that the earth was spherical) so there should be four gospels. Another sterling example of state of the art Christianity peddling sound sensible theology.
SeekingAllTruth
Well-Known Member
But if you don't believe he rose--based on absolutely no evidence he did--God will condemn you to eternal torture in the flames of hell. That's the Christian god that loves you with an unmeasurable love, lol
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Nope, believing in the bodily resurrection is not even a requirement for Christians, and not all Christians believe that Jesus rose. It is the belief in the cross sacrifice that is supposed to get you saved, but actually that was not what Jesus taught, because Jesus knew nothing about salvation. That was a latter invention of Christianity. Jesus only said that we have to believe in Him and be righteous in order to gain eternal life.
John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
1 John 5:13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.
Matthew 25:45-46 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I can agree we need to stop pushing the mythical Jesus who allegedly rose from the dead but that does not mean we need to discount Jesus altogether.
What data?
SeekingAllTruth
Well-Known Member
But then there's Paul
Romans 10:9
9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
But I agree the Christian doctrine is confusing as hell, being man-made.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
There's always Paul, but he does not override what Jesus said. Paul also said that Jesus created the universe but we all know that is wrong, so what else is wrong?
Also, what did Paul means by raised Him for the dead? Did Paul ever say that God raised the BODY of Jesus from the dead?
Isn't the line about James being the brother of Jesus the Christ acknowledged as authentic?