Who is right? I give up

[Subduction Zone]

He was raised from the dead and took back the authority that Satan had robbed.

That is a claim. It is not even evidence, much less proof. What if the historians are right?? That Jesus, if he existed would have been left up to rot as other Roman victims of crucifixion did and then was buried in a common grave. The resurrection story is just that. No more believable than Elvis Presley cooking hamburgers at a fast food joint after his death.

 

[Muffled]

Can someone tell me plainly if their religion is the actual correct one? You see, I’m trying to figure it out, but I’m just about burnt out investigating. thanks!
This thread is intended to be an exercise in futility as there is no way of knowing who is right. My family has a tradition of dying Christian so that’s what I’ve decided to do, and not worry about if we are right or not.

I believe on may find something wrong in every religion. I believe only God is right.

 

[Muffled]

The goal isn't what it right for Me, or any other.

What is right and True for you? Make that work, and be good.

I believe a person who finds what is good for them is lost.

 

[Muffled]

Judaism really, really resonated with me. I had undying faith in HaShem.

My test is, if you thought you are about to die, which God would you cry to?

What if the answer is that He will only answer to the name of Jesus?

Acts 19:14 Seven sons of a Jewish high priest named Sceva were doing this. 15 But the evil spirit answered them, “Jesus I know, and Paul I recognize, but who are you?”

 

[Rival]

What if the answer is that He will only answer to the name of Jesus?

Not my experience.

 

[Kenny]

That is a claim. It is not even evidence, much less proof. What if the historians are right?? That Jesus, if he existed would have been left up to rot as other Roman victims of crucifixion did and then was buried in a common grave. The resurrection story is just that. No more believable than Elvis Presley cooking hamburgers at a fast food joint after his death.

Unfortunately, history stands on my side. All Rome had to doe was "look, here is the tomb". For that matter, anyone could say, "look, here is the tomb". As history says, some 500 people saw him alive.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Unfortunately, history stands on my side. All Rome had to doe was "look, here is the tomb". For that matter, anyone could say, "look, here is the tomb". As history says, some 500 people saw him alive.

No, It does not. You seem to not understand that there was almost certainly no tomb. So of course any claimed tomb would be empty. You are using flawed reasoning.

And no, history does not say that 500 people saw him alive. You are conflating a bogus claim of Paul's. He claimed that there were 500 people, In a town over 1,500 miles away from where he was at a time when most people never went further away from home than 100 miles. That is not exactly reliable evidence and it is not history at all.

 

[Kenny]

No, It does not. You seem to not understand that there was almost certainly no tomb. So of course any claimed tomb would be empty. You are using flawed reasoning.

And no, history does not say that 500 people saw him alive. You are conflating a bogus claim of Paul's. He claimed that there were 500 people, In a town over 1,500 miles away from where he was at a time when most people never went further away from home than 100 miles. That is not exactly reliable evidence and it is not history at all.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why the face palm? You are misusing that again. Your post was the one that begged for one. Please, when you make a post that looks as if you are making a bad joke you should not object to corrections.

Was Paul's claim "history". No. Was it believable? Not at all.

Did you know that my girlfriend won a beauty pageant? Oh, you would have to go to Canada to find the records.

Now are you going to believe a ludicrous claim simply because you refuse to take a trip that would be an incredible inconvenience? Seriously what Christians think qualifies as "evidence" boggles the mind.

 

[Kenny]

Why the face palm? You are misusing that again. Your post was the one that begged for one. Please, when you make a post that looks as if you are making a bad joke you should not object to corrections.

Was Paul's claim "history". No. Was it believable? Not at all.

Did you know that my girlfriend won a beauty pageant? Oh, you would have to go to Canada to find the records.

Now are you going to believe a ludicrous claim simply because you refuse to take a trip that would be an incredible inconvenience? Seriously what Christians think qualifies as "evidence" boggles the mind.

You made the claim "most certainly there was no tomb".... i guess there was no crucifixion, there was no ruling struggles, no miracles... and no christianity after he resurrected.

BUAHAHAHAHAHA!

You put a smile on my face.. .Your reasoning is amazing!

 

[Subduction Zone]

You made the claim "most certainly there was no tomb".... i guess there was no crucifixion, there was no ruling struggles, no miracles... and no christianity after he resurrected.

BUAHAHAHAHAHA!

You put a smile on my face.. .Your reasoning is amazing!

Are you totally without any education abut this topic? Do you know why Bible scholars have made this claim?

This was a Roman crucifixion. As part of their punishment the bodies were left up for others to see. The ghastly remains were a constant reminder not to mess with Rome. They did not care about the religious sensibilities of the countries that they conquered. The Hebrews had a history of crucifixion too. Now if they had tried Jesus and put him on the cross that story of being taken down would have quite a bit of credibility. But when they say that the Romans crucified him then you take on an enormous burden of proof when you want to claim that he was taken down early.

 

[Subduction Zone]

@KenS you might want to check out this video of well respected historian Bart Ehrman. He does have peer reviewed articles published about that time. In other words, more learned than your average apologists:

 

[The Hammer]

I believe a person who finds what is good for them is lost.

Well we differ in that manner then

 

[Kenny]

Are you totally without any education abut this topic? Do you know why Bible scholars have made this claim?

Are you lacking such basic information and history?

Next you will be saying there was no Muhammad and no Siddhartha Gautama

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are you lacking such basic information and history?

Next you will be saying there was no Muhammad and no Siddhartha Gautama

Did I say that there was no Jesus? Thought there is far better evidence for Muhammad and probably worse evidence for Siddhartha Guatama. There probably was no tomb. Again you do not know how to use facepalms since those tend to apply to your posts.

You made some seriously failed arguments. You should just acknowledge that and move on.

 

[Kenny]

Did I say that there was no Jesus? Thought there is far better evidence for Muhammad and probably worse evidence for Siddhartha Guatama. There probably was no tomb. Again you do not know how to use facepalms since those tend to apply to your posts.

You made some seriously failed arguments. You should just acknowledge that and move on.

you are such a great troller

 

[Subduction Zone]

you are such a great troller

Name calling is against the rules here. And your failure should be obvious to you. You were the one that tried to claim "history". There probably was a real Jesus, but the evidence for him is far weaker than you seem to think.

 

[Alex22]

He was raised from the dead and took back the authority that Satan had robbed.

As SZ mentioned, that is just a claim and it isn't good enough and neither are the claims in your Bible.

 

[Kenny]

As SZ mentioned, that is just a claim and it isn't good enough and neither are the claims in your Bible.

And yet it was promulgated throughout the world of that time in just three years. And starting in the very place where he was crucified... there would be no better evidence than the fact that the very place where he died is where they also said he was raised from the dead. If anyone could have evidence contrary to that fact, they would be the first to be able to prove it.

Maybe there is more to it that what you believe?

 

[Alex22]

And yet it was promulgated throughout the world of that time in just three years. And starting in the very place where he was crucified... there would be no better evidence than the fact that the very place where he died is where they also said he was raised from the dead. If anyone could have evidence contrary to that fact, they would be the first to be able to prove it.

Maybe there is more to it that what you believe?

None of that is evidence.