What was the motive for this fairy tale?

[Spiderman]

And God man would use a miracle to actually remove the agony while still giving the impression of suffering from it. i would.

Ciao

- viole

Me too

 

[Ouroboros]

Yeah...Aristotle and Socrates had such a following of so many people that would die for being their followers.

So did Muslims following Mohammad. Numbers of followers and their dedication and martyrdom can't speak for the truth of a story. Mohammad went to heaven and saw God; that's what they fought for, so it must be true.

Besides, the followers of Aristotle and Socrates are called philosophers today. There are some hundred thousands of them, or more, out there.

And when it comes to followers of Jesus, there are 30,000 versions currently. Every single one with some little tweak to what they believe and how the interpret the stories. Some take it very literal. Some take it very allegorical.

 

[Ouroboros]

What would an alien abductee gain by telling a lie?

Not lying does not equal telling the truth. Delusional people, for instance, are not conscious liars.

Ciao

- viole

Agree. I think it's basically wrong to assume it's either "they're telling 100% absolute truth" or "they intentionally lied to create a hoax and fool us all." Most of us are normal people who hear stories, believe things, and tell stories to other people and sometime with some changes or mistakes embedded. We might embellish one part and downplay another. And if we come from a previous religion or faith, we're even more likely to adjust the stories we hear to fit some of our earlier beliefs.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

I think the distinction when it comes for dying for one's faith comes down to what it is that's actually being died for.

The Apostles died for their witness that they had seen Jesus rise from the dead. That's multiple eye-witnesses all claiming the same thing, and dying for it.

A random follower of a religion who dies for it is dying for what has been told to them, and they believe it. The Apostles saw it with their own eyes, the resurrected Jesus.

 

[Ouroboros]

I think if an Alien Abductee would be taken before a court and whipped, and wear a crown of thorns, and be nailed to a cross, he would deny it for the purpose of relieving some of the agony~!

Except this particular alien could turn of the agony emotion with a simple switch. He didn't have to feel anything. And his gain was to test how gullible humanity was. They're coming back soon to check on our religions and see if their little alien hoax played out.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

And A God man would use a miracolous pain killer to actually remove the agony while still giving the impression of suffering from it. i would.

Ciao

- viole

Well of course, because you and I are fallen selfish human beings. God is far beyond our imperfections, and humbled Himself to take the punishment for our sin and suffering. If He faked it then He didn't really take our punishment.

 

[viole]

Well of course, because you and I are fallen selfish human beings. God is far beyond our imperfections, and humbled Himself to take the punishment for our sin and suffering. If He faked it then He didn't really take our punishment.

Could be. But He did not stay dead long, did He?

So, what sort of sacrifice are you talking about? Just a bit of wipping?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Ouroboros]

I think the distinction when it comes for dying for one's faith comes down to what it is that's actually being died for.

Agree.

The Apostles died for their witness that they had seen Jesus rise from the dead. That's multiple eye-witnesses all claiming the same thing, and dying for it.

That's what the story says, but are you sure that you know for a fact that this is exactly the reason why they died? There were some hundred different sects of Christianity within the first 100 years. Some of them didn't even believe Jesus ever was a physical person. Some believe he was but was resurrected only in spirit. These people also died for their beliefs. Just because the story tells us that these apostles died for believing X-Y-Z, how can we be sure?

A random follower of a religion who dies for it is dying for what has been told to them, and they believe it. The Apostles saw it with their own eyes, the resurrected Jesus.

Then why did people die for their beliefs after the apostles? People who didn't see. They just believed the previous believers? And that was enough? How can we know the apostles didn't do the same thing, or if they believed something slightly different than we assume?

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Could be. But He did not stay deda long, did He?

So, what

The horrible death by crucifixion was still very much real. All that pain still happened. He didn't have to stay dead for it to be any more agonising. With that death the debt was paid, and then Jesus was victorious over death by rising from the grave.

 

[viole]

The horrible death by crucifixion was still very much real. All that pain still happened. He didn't have to stay dead for it to be any more agonising. With that death the debt was paid, and then Jesus was victorious over death by rising from the grave.

Honestly. If I had a death expectancy of three days, knowing that I would coma back as the ruler of the Universe, I would do anything.

Big deal.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Spiderman]

Early Muslims got to share in the loot of the cities that they conquered and also got to have servants, glory, spoils of war and many wives and enjoy a lot of pleasure

So did Muslims following Mohammad. Numbers of followers and their dedication and martyrdom can't speak for the truth of a story. Mohammad went to heaven and saw God; that's what they fought for, so it must be true.

Besides, the followers of Aristotle and Socrates are called philosophers today. There are some hundred thousands of them, or more, out there.

And when it comes to followers of Jesus, there are 30,000 versions currently. Every single one with some little tweak to what they believe and how the interpret the stories. Some take it very literal. Some take it very allegorical.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

Agree.


That's what the story says, but are you sure that you know for a fact that this is exactly the reason why they died? There were some hundred different sects of Christianity within the first 100 years. Some of them didn't even believe Jesus ever was a physical person. Some believe he was but was resurrected only in spirit. These people also died for their beliefs. Just because the story tells us that these apostles died for believing X-Y-Z, how can we be sure?

In the beginning of 1 Corinthians 15 is a creed that affirms Jesus' resurrection. The majority view of biblical scholars is that this dates back to no more than 5 years after Jesus' death. We seem to have a pretty universal confession that all of the first believers shared, that Jesus appeared to the Apostles and was raised from the dead.

Further than that, Paul's letters reveal quite clearly the belief in a physical resurrection of Jesus. Paul also refers to the Apostle Peter in his letters, and it would be extremely odd if they disagreed on a matter as important as the Resurrection and Paul never mentioned it. Paul was not afraid of being odds with Peter, and made known his disagreements with Peter in his letter to the Galatians, where he stood up to Peter face to face for his hypocrisy, and so he'd have no trouble pointing out something as major as a disagreement on the Resurrection.

We can be pretty certain Peter then died for the faith from Clement's letter to the Corinthians, written near the end of the first century.

Then why did people die for their beliefs after the apostles? People who didn't see. They just believed the previous believers? And that was enough? How can we know the apostles didn't do the same thing, or if they believed something slightly different than we assume?

Because those Apostles claim to have seen the risen Christ. Paul affirms this in his letter that Apostles like Peter had seen the risen Christ (1 Corinthians 15 again).

I haven't mentioned 1 Peter either, if that is brought to the table then there is a wealth of evidence of Peter's belief in Jesus' resurrection. Due to many modern scholars doubting Petrine authorship nowadays, however, I won't go there. I haven't appealed to the Gospels either, or the Acts of the Apostles. I've appealed to what is agreed on by modern scholarship, rather than getting bogged down in an authorship debate. However, if we were to dig a little deeper and go into the more contested texts we'd find even more evidence.

 

[Nakosis]

I've been a follower of a modern day "Perfect Master". I've seen people take ordinary events and embellish them to miraculous proportions humbling themselves in the process.

Gives some credibility to the telling to to claim participation in the event while also relaying your personal human flaws. Obviously works right? Most see themselves as having some flaws. Hard to identify with the perfect character.

So Jesus is the perfect individual no body can identify themselves with. Need to have imperfect followers so people can invest with the story. A lot of Christians identify themselves as the follower right? Few identify themselves as the Christ.

 

[Deidre]

First of all, the authorship of the gospels is unknown. But most likely none of them were eyewitnesses. And if I remember correctly, at least one or two of the gospels was a compilation from other sources.
So, perhaps, a better question would be: What would the authors have gained from telling a lie?

This.

 

[Nietzsche]

And they taught people to live in poverty and overcome desire for wealth and fame and sensual pleasure, and love the unlovable, love enemies, turn the other cheek, and care for the sick.

It seems a bit more unique than the superheroes. He was just a carpenter born in a smelly stable.

What does that have to do with my example of someone equally devout and certain of his Gods dying for his beliefs?

 

[goodhunter819]

MMMMM yes, this is a common problem I have encountered many times, because of your dislike of the Christian doctrine & teachings you are unable to see a truth regardless of the fact that it is a truth and No I do not follow the christian doctrine, at least not at the moment, I cannot deal with the hypocrites however as I was saying a truth is a truth regardless of who said it, if I said to you that the writer of a book regarding social struggles says that the reasons that men often take to drink leading to domestic violence on their wives is because of unemployment, poor housing, and rival immigrant pressure and that same point of view is in an opposing politics of a parliamentary paper would you believe it? I should think most people would and if I told you that one of the men concerned with non white liberation in countries like the Americas had that same point of view and is not a believer in Christ, would you accept it? I think maybe you would, and if I also told you that in a Black Book anti Christian and anti monotheist views speaks of compassion to those who need it , you you believe it? I think again maybe you would , well that is what I am talking about, a truth is a truth regardless of what book it comes from so why should it be denied it being the truth, I am speaking in this instance regrading the joining of man and woman as mentioned by Paul the Apostle which in matter of fact he was not talking about Jesus Christ but about our social status, for many single people conjugal rights is essential fact and you cannot withdraw it without dire consequences as Paul the Apostle pointed out, so to put yourself in the same category of that need if you don't have that need is no more than a tempting of evil or torture as Paul the Apostle calls it , it is worth remembering that Paul the Apostle was a celibate man who pointed that fact out, saying he would not advise celibacy though he was celibate, this is a established fact , the story was meant as a analogy where my comment is concerned, dealing with heterosexual needs within religious rights which cannot be truly changed only prolonged.

 

[allfoak]

The gospels are not mythology they are allegory.
They are not history because anyone who does what Jesus did can become a Christ.
The Gospels are the map of how it is done.

So they are not history because it could have been any human being.
Jesus was simply the first of the human race to return to the Father.
The gospels were written because of this accomplishment.
It opened the door for the rest of humanity.

 

[outhouse]

So why did the Apostles and Disciples make up this lie about Jesus?

Who do you think you are with no real education on the topic to call someone a liar.

 

[Spiderman]

Who do you think you are with no real education on the topic to call someone a liar.

I was quoting those who call it a "lie".

Meaning...many say it was a lie...so what were the reasons for the "lie".

What does that have to do with my example of someone equally devout and certain of his Gods dying for his beliefs?

Because of how radical the altruism is and the need for sacrifice and how the person who follows those instructions will suffer and have little to gain and love those who are ungrateful and who cause you grief and the renunciation of pleasure, fame, and wealth.

 

[Twilight Hue]

The horrible death by crucifixion was still very much real. All that pain still happened. He didn't have to stay dead for it to be any more agonising. With that death the debt was paid, and then Jesus was victorious over death by rising from the grave.

Only valid for 3 days