Why Don’t You Believe Jesus Rose From The Grave?

[muhammad_isa]

..in fact, law was there to show us that we could not keep it all..

That's absurd. No law .. no guidance .. it's as simple as that !

..the Spirit of God has been given so that we can learn to hear and be led by the Spirit rather than obey a set of rules.

I would agree that we have been given a conscience .. but no man is smart enough to
outsmart the devil without assistance (in the form of Scriptural wisdom).

The devil merely wishes to mislead .. ignoring Divine law and replacing it with our own Roman version
is a recipe for disaster .. going astray .. causes division .. subject to opinion etc. etc.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Is it?

People have all kinds of feelings and interpretations. Some ascribe the feeling of safety and calmness to the presence of fairies. No evidence --> unreliable.

 

[Sargonski]

Oh dear .. the Bible is not reliable as a 'Holy Scripture', in that case .. and hence we can presume
that Mark might not be accurate either.


You merely pick and choose what miracles you wish to believe in .. your prerogative.

I have the Qur'an as well as the Bible, of course. G-d remains as G-d.
"Surely, we belong to God .. and to Him we will return"

You can presume what every you like about the autheticity of scripture Brother Muhamu .. and pick and choose as you like but, that will not change the fact that you had absolutely no idea what scripture said to begin with ... and when you were informed of your error .. went into deflect and denial mode, rather than correction of the error .. and now expect us to believe that your assessment of Qur'an is uneffected by uncorrected error.

In any case .. what part of "in the original story - the one you did not know existed - picking and choosing the miracles in which to believe - there is no Zombie Jesus, did you not understand" ? and what does the Qur'an have to say on the issue since you brought it up.

 

[Sargonski]

Do these Christians believe Jesus was born from a virgin? And was the Son of God? How do they believe Jesus died, and at what age?

Not sure about "those christians" but I think we can say with good confidence that prior to the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem - and the writing of the Gospel of Matt ~ 10-20 years after .. at least among the Jewish Christian faction following the Church of Jerusalem .. The Church formed after the Death of Jesus headed by Brother James ... there was no "Virgin Birth" , there was no Physical Resurrection .. Jesus wandering around in the flesh after death .. and none of this is in the original story .. The Gospel of Mark. In the original story the reader is left to wonder what becomes of Jesus .. all we know is an empty tomb .. and from Paul we get a "Spiritual Resurrection" akin to is Vision on the road to Damascus .. 500 people saw an image of the virgin Mary in the Clouds Paul tells us .. so to speak .. Jesus is the image but this is a depiction of a spiritual resurrection as opposed to a physical .

Now .. the nature of the divinity of jesus to these Christians .. which now we can include the gentile christians as well . the nature of the divinity of Jesus is a wide open question .. every different faction has a different conception .. and we don't really know what the position of the Church of Jerusalem was .. sans that Jesus had some divine spark .. .. was some kind of "Logos" emissary between man and God ... a miracle and wonder worker as per contra Clesus.

After the destruction of the Temple the "judeo Christians" disappear .. the Original Church founded by the disciples is nowhere to be found .. all its founders martyred prior to the destruction of the Temple.

The author of Matt uses all of Mark .. and is a "Revised" version of the story of Jesus in Mark. .. leaving out only a few verses the author thought derogatory to Jesus or the diciples.. but adding a raft of new material Virgin Birth - prior to this we only know of a man in his 30's whom God Adopts at his baptism .. we are told this is "The anointed one of God" = "The Messiah" = "The Christos" Like David .. Solomon ... and the Persian King Cyrus.

He adds a geneaolgy back to David .. some extra parables and teachings .. a more detailed version of the sermon on the mount which we think may originate from some lost source Q .

The main thing this author adds however is "The Smoking Gun" --- Defacto Proof that promise of the resurrection is real .. something Jesus had promised but not delivered on in the original story .. the reader left to wonder what happened to the body of Jesus. I Matt we have Jesus wandering around in the flesh interacting with people .. as opposed to the spiritual resurrection that Paul describes .. Jesus appearing in a vision like his own vision on the road to Damascus - 500 people saw the virgin Mary in the clouds sort of thing -- a spiritual as opposed to a physical resurrection can only be presumed to have caught on after the destruction of the Temple .. and the verses in Matt at the end may have not been in the original version of Matt .. perhaps added later .. along with the production of Luke ~ 90-100AD .. prior to John 100-120AD

 

[paarsurrey]

Why Don’t You Believe Jesus Rose From The Grave?
paarsurrey wrote:
Because that will prove he did not fulfill the Sign of Jonah, which he promised to show to the "adulterous" Jews-Judaism people of his time, please, right?

Do you not see at all how silly it sounds to think a human was dead and then came back to life?

I said no to this question.

The clinical/literally/physically dead never come back to life, it is silly indeed to think that any of them ever came back to life, please, right?

Because extra-ordinary claims require extra-ordinary evidence.
And this particular extra-ordinary claim doesn't even have ordinary evidence. (Jesus rising from the dead)

Rightly said, he (Jesus),never rose from the dead, as he did not die on the Cross in the first place.

Does that mean that you think that it is impossible for God to ever resurrect the dead?

"And this particular extra-ordinary claim doesn't even have ordinary evidence. (Jesus rising from the dead) "
Right?

Regards

 

[Maninthemiddle]

There is evidence that the resurrection is true, but there is not proof of it. I believe it to be true and others believe other world views without proof.
There is no reason to think that the resurrection could not have taken place and did not take place.
If I had evidence that there were things in the Bible that were not true then I would consider the evidence and sometimes see that the evidence seems to be the truth and so I might end up seeing that a literal understanding of a passage in the Bible is not correct. So when I read in the Bible that the earth is immoveable, I realise that it was not meant to be a scientific statement about whether the earth moves or not.

Ok well here are a few more errors in a Book that is supposed to be the word of God.

A. River Gihon could not possibly flow from Mesopotamia and encompass Ethiopia (Gen 2:13)

B. The name Babel does not come from the Hebrew word 'balbal' or 'confuse' but from the babylonian 'babili' or 'gate of God' which is a translation of the original Sumerian name Ka-dimirra. (Gen 11:9)

C. Ur was not a Chaldean city until 1000 years after Abraham (Gen 11:28, 15:7)

D. Abraham pursued enemies to 'Dan' (Gen 14:14). That name was not used geographically until after the conquest (Judge 18:29)

E. Gen 36:31, telling of Jacob and Esau, lists kings of Edom "before there reigned any king over the children of Israel." This must have been written hundreds of years later, after Israel had kings.

F. Joseph tells Pharaoh he comes from the "land of the Hebrews" (Gen 40:15). There was no such land until after the conquest under Joshua.

G. The Egyptian princess names the baby she finds "Moses" because she "drew him out" of the water (Heb meshethi). Why would she make a pun in Hebrew (Ex 2:10)?

H. No Egyptian record exists mentioning Moses or his devastation of Egypt.

I. Moses refers to "Palestine" (Ex 15:14). No such name was in use then.

J. Law of Moses is the "statutes of God and his laws" (Ex 18:26), but it closely mirrors the Code of Hammurabi, which was penned 1800 BC, hundreds of years before Moses.

K. Priests are mentioned at Ex 19:22-24, but they are not provided for until Ex 28:1.

L. Moses mentions Rabbath, where Og's bedstead is located (Deut3:11). Moses could not have any knowledge of Rabbath,which was not captured by the Hebrews until David's time,500 years later (2 Sam 12:26).

M. Jericho and Ai (Josh 8) were both ancient ruins at the time of the conquest of Canaan, according to archaeologists. Jericho's walls were destroyed centuries before Joshua.

N. Kings are referred to at Deut 17:17-19, before Israel had kings.


O. The Wilderness is viewed as history at Num 15:32, showing that Numbers was written later.

P. The Sabbath law was unknown when the man gathered sticks at Num 15:32-34.

Q. Book of Joshua refers to Book of Jasher in the past, mentioned at 2 Sam 1:18, therefore Joshua must be post-David.

R. Captivity is mentioned at Judg 18:30, making it post-Exile.

S. David took Goliath's head to Jerusalem (1 Sam 17:54). But Jerusalem was not captured until 7 years after David became king (2 Sam 5).

T. David paid 600 shekels of gold for the threshing floor (1 Chron21:22-25). But shekels of gold were not yet used in business transactions (this is the only use of the term in the OT).

U. Psalm 18:6 mentions the temple, thus cannot be by David.

V. Defeat of Sennacherib did not happen at Jerusalem, but at Pelusium, near Egypt, and Jews were not involved, contrary to 2 Kings 19.

W. Ninevah was so large it took three days to cross, i.e. about 60 miles (Jonah 3:3-4). Yet it had only 120,000 inhabitants, making a population density of of about 42 people per square

mile for a city.

X. Daniel's account of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar is historically inaccurate; Nebuchadnezzar was never mad. Belshazzar, whom he says was king, was never king, but only regent. Belshazzar was not the son of Nebuchadnezzar, but of Nabo-nidus. Babylon was not conquered by Darius the Mede, but by Cyrus the Great, in 539 BC (Dan 5:31). Darius the Mede is unknown to history.

Y. Chronology of the empires of the Medes and Persians is historically incorrect in Isa 13:17, 21:2, Jer 51:11, 28

Z. Esther (and all the characters in the Book of Esther except Ahasuerus [= Xerxes]) is unknown to history, even though itclaims that its events are "written in the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia" (Est 10:2). The Book of Esther is not quoted by any pre-Christian writer, nor mentioned in


NT, nor quoted by early Christian fathers.

A1. Mordecai became prime minister to Xerxes (Ahasuerus), who reigned 485-465 BC. But Mordecai had come to Babylon in 596 BC with Jehoiachin (Esther 2:5-6).

B1. The office of "High priest" of Mark 2:26 did not exist in David's day.

C1. None of the Gospels are mentioned by early Christians, e.g. Paul, Pope Clement I (97 AD), Justin Martyr (140 AD). The first mention of any Gospel is by Irenaeus (185 AD).

D1. There is no mountain from which one can see all the kingdoms of the world (Matt 4:8, Luke 4:5).

E1. Jesus as a historical figure is not mentioned by any contemporary non-Christian writers.

F1. Matt 2:1 says Jesus was born in the reign of Herod, who died 4 BC. Luke 2:2 says he was born during Quirinus' governorship of Syria, which began 6 AD.

G1. Thieves were never punished by crucifixion (Matt 27:38, 44).

H1. No crucifixion would have been performed on the eve of Passover.

I1. There is no contemporary historical confirmation of darkness covering the earth at the crucifixion (Matt 27:35, Luke 23:44).

J1. There is no contemporary historical confirmation of the slaughter of the innocents by Herod (Matt 2:16-18). Josephus, whose history contains much criticism of Herod, does not mention it.

K1.There is no contemporary historical confirmation of the graves opening and the dead appearing to many at the crucifixion (Matt 27:52-53).

L1. in Mark 7, Jesus quotes the septuigant while arguing with the pharisees, in a portion of the old testament (Isaiah 29:13) that reads drastically differently from the Hebrew text. A Palestinian reading from a Greek text that contradicts the Hebrew to orthodox Jews is unusual to say the least.

M1. In Mark 10:12 Jesus tells Palestinian listeners that a wife who puts away her husband commits adultery, this would have been meaningless to Palestinian listeners where only men could divorce.

N1. In Mark 5:13 Jesus casts out devils and forces them into 2,000 swine who then run down into the sea and are drowned, this is said to have occured in Garasenes - 31 miles from the sea. In Matthew, which was written later, this is changed to Gadara which is much more feasible.

O1. The Tigris and Euphrates are reported in Genesis before and after the flood, apparently unaffected by the massive destruction.

P1. The use of the Tigris and Euphrates by Egyptian civilization pre and post-flood.

IV. Scientific Inaccuracy of the Bible

A. Earth is about 6000 years old, as calculated from the genealogies in Gen and Luke 3. (see the problem of a young earth later in the outline)

B. Birds were created before land animals (Gen 1:20, 24). - Fossil record shows exact opposite

C. Earth has four corners, and floats on water (Isa 11:12, Ps 24:2, 136:6, Rev 7:1).

D. Earth is a circular disk (Isa 40:22).

E. Earth is flat (these verses were used for centuries by the church to prove this: Ps 93:1, Jer 10:13, Dan 4:10-11, Zech 9:10, Matt 4:8, Rev 1:7)

F. Earth does not move (Ps 93:1, 96:10, 104:5, 1 Chr 16:30).

G. Death or illness is caused by sin (Gen 2:17, Lev 26:16, 21, 25, Deut 7:15, 28:21, 27, James 1:15).

H. God himself believes that a house or clothes can have leprosy and he details the remedy. Lev 13, 14.

I. Seed must "die" before it grows (John 12:24, 1 Cor 15:36).

J. Snakes eat dust (Gen 3:14, Isa 65:25).

K. Every beast shall fear man (Gen 9:2).

L. The ostrich abandons her eggs (Job 39:13-16).

M. A river divides into four rivers and they flow in different directions (Gen 2:10).

N. There was no rainbow before Noah's time (Gen 9:11-17).

O. Thunder is God's voice (Ps 77:18).

P. Earthquakes are caused by God's anger (Job 9:5, Ps 18:7, 77:18, 97:4, Isa 2:19, 24:20, 29:6, Jer 10:10, Ezek 38:20, Nah 1:5). Or by his voice (Heb 12:26). Or by Lucifer (Isa 14:16).

Q. Earthquakes can occur in heaven (Heb 12:26).

R. Rainwater does not return to the sky (Isa 55:10).

S. Blood is "life" (Deut 12:23). Breath is "life" (Gen 2:7).

T. Moon will turn to blood (Acts 2:20).

U. The moon has a light of its own (Isa 13:10, Matt 24:29).

V. The stars can be made to fall (Matt 24:29, Mark 13:25).

W. The bat is a bird (Lev 11:13,19, Deut 14:11, 18).

X. The whale is a fish (Jonah 1:17, Matt 12:40).

Y. Whales were created before insects (Gen 1:21-24).

Z. Jonah is able to survive three days and nights in the belly of the fish without oxygen and without being digested (Jonah1:17, 2:10).

A1. The hare chews the cud (Lev 11:5-6).

B1. Some fowl and insects have four legs (Lev 11:20-23).

C1. Levi existed as a person in the loins of his great-grandfather (Heb 7:9-10).

D1. Cattle will produce striped offspring if they see striped poles when breeding (Gen 30:37-41).

E1. Bees will build a hive in a dead carcass (Judg 14:8).

F1. Salt can lose its saltiness (Matt 5:13, Mark 9:50, Luke 14:34).

G1. Slugs / Snails melt as they move (Ps 58:8)

 

[paarsurrey]

Brian2 said:
There is evidence that the resurrection is true, but there is not proof of it. I believe it to be true and others believe other world views without proof.
There is no reason to think that the resurrection could not have taken place and did not take place.
If I had evidence that there were things in the Bible that were not true then I would consider the evidence and sometimes see that the evidence seems to be the truth and so I might end up seeing that a literal understanding of a passage in the Bible is not correct. So when I read in the Bible that the earth is immoveable, I realise that it was not meant to be a scientific statement about whether the earth moves or not.

Ok well here are a few more errors in a Book that is supposed to be the word of God.

A. River Gihon could not possibly flow from Mesopotamia and encompass Ethiopia (Gen 2:13)

B. The name Babel does not come from the Hebrew word 'balbal' or 'confuse' but from the babylonian 'babili' or 'gate of God' which is a translation of the original Sumerian name Ka-dimirra. (Gen 11:9)

C. Ur was not a Chaldean city until 1000 years after Abraham (Gen 11:28, 15:7)

D. Abraham pursued enemies to 'Dan' (Gen 14:14). That name was not used geographically until after the conquest (Judge 18:29)

E. Gen 36:31, telling of Jacob and Esau, lists kings of Edom "before there reigned any king over the children of Israel." This must have been written hundreds of years later, after Israel had kings.

F. Joseph tells Pharaoh he comes from the "land of the Hebrews" (Gen 40:15). There was no such land until after the conquest under Joshua.

G. The Egyptian princess names the baby she finds "Moses" because she "drew him out" of the water (Heb meshethi). Why would she make a pun in Hebrew (Ex 2:10)?

H. No Egyptian record exists mentioning Moses or his devastation of Egypt.

I. Moses refers to "Palestine" (Ex 15:14). No such name was in use then.

J. Law of Moses is the "statutes of God and his laws" (Ex 18:26), but it closely mirrors the Code of Hammurabi, which was penned 1800 BC, hundreds of years before Moses.

K. Priests are mentioned at Ex 19:22-24, but they are not provided for until Ex 28:1.

L. Moses mentions Rabbath, where Og's bedstead is located (Deut3:11). Moses could not have any knowledge of Rabbath,which was not captured by the Hebrews until David's time,500 years later (2 Sam 12:26).

M. Jericho and Ai (Josh 8) were both ancient ruins at the time of the conquest of Canaan, according to archaeologists. Jericho's walls were destroyed centuries before Joshua.

N. Kings are referred to at Deut 17:17-19, before Israel had kings.


O. The Wilderness is viewed as history at Num 15:32, showing that Numbers was written later.

P. The Sabbath law was unknown when the man gathered sticks at Num 15:32-34.

Q. Book of Joshua refers to Book of Jasher in the past, mentioned at 2 Sam 1:18, therefore Joshua must be post-David.

R. Captivity is mentioned at Judg 18:30, making it post-Exile.

S. David took Goliath's head to Jerusalem (1 Sam 17:54). But Jerusalem was not captured until 7 years after David became king (2 Sam 5).

T. David paid 600 shekels of gold for the threshing floor (1 Chron21:22-25). But shekels of gold were not yet used in business transactions (this is the only use of the term in the OT).

U. Psalm 18:6 mentions the temple, thus cannot be by David.

V. Defeat of Sennacherib did not happen at Jerusalem, but at Pelusium, near Egypt, and Jews were not involved, contrary to 2 Kings 19.

W. Ninevah was so large it took three days to cross, i.e. about 60 miles (Jonah 3:3-4). Yet it had only 120,000 inhabitants, making a population density of of about 42 people per square

mile for a city.

X. Daniel's account of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar is historically inaccurate; Nebuchadnezzar was never mad. Belshazzar, whom he says was king, was never king, but only regent. Belshazzar was not the son of Nebuchadnezzar, but of Nabo-nidus. Babylon was not conquered by Darius the Mede, but by Cyrus the Great, in 539 BC (Dan 5:31). Darius the Mede is unknown to history.

Y. Chronology of the empires of the Medes and Persians is historically incorrect in Isa 13:17, 21:2, Jer 51:11, 28

Z. Esther (and all the characters in the Book of Esther except Ahasuerus [= Xerxes]) is unknown to history, even though itclaims that its events are "written in the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia" (Est 10:2). The Book of Esther is not quoted by any pre-Christian writer, nor mentioned in


NT, nor quoted by early Christian fathers.

A1. Mordecai became prime minister to Xerxes (Ahasuerus), who reigned 485-465 BC. But Mordecai had come to Babylon in 596 BC with Jehoiachin (Esther 2:5-6).

B1. The office of "High priest" of Mark 2:26 did not exist in David's day.

C1. None of the Gospels are mentioned by early Christians, e.g. Paul, Pope Clement I (97 AD), Justin Martyr (140 AD). The first mention of any Gospel is by Irenaeus (185 AD).

D1. There is no mountain from which one can see all the kingdoms of the world (Matt 4:8, Luke 4:5).

E1. Jesus as a historical figure is not mentioned by any contemporary non-Christian writers.

F1. Matt 2:1 says Jesus was born in the reign of Herod, who died 4 BC. Luke 2:2 says he was born during Quirinus' governorship of Syria, which began 6 AD.

G1. Thieves were never punished by crucifixion (Matt 27:38, 44).

H1. No crucifixion would have been performed on the eve of Passover.

I1. There is no contemporary historical confirmation of darkness covering the earth at the crucifixion (Matt 27:35, Luke 23:44).

J1. There is no contemporary historical confirmation of the slaughter of the innocents by Herod (Matt 2:16-18). Josephus, whose history contains much criticism of Herod, does not mention it.

K1.There is no contemporary historical confirmation of the graves opening and the dead appearing to many at the crucifixion (Matt 27:52-53).

L1. in Mark 7, Jesus quotes the septuigant while arguing with the pharisees, in a portion of the old testament (Isaiah 29:13) that reads drastically differently from the Hebrew text. A Palestinian reading from a Greek text that contradicts the Hebrew to orthodox Jews is unusual to say the least.

M1. In Mark 10:12 Jesus tells Palestinian listeners that a wife who puts away her husband commits adultery, this would have been meaningless to Palestinian listeners where only men could divorce.

N1. In Mark 5:13 Jesus casts out devils and forces them into 2,000 swine who then run down into the sea and are drowned, this is said to have occured in Garasenes - 31 miles from the sea. In Matthew, which was written later, this is changed to Gadara which is much more feasible.

O1. The Tigris and Euphrates are reported in Genesis before and after the flood, apparently unaffected by the massive destruction.

P1. The use of the Tigris and Euphrates by Egyptian civilization pre and post-flood.

IV. Scientific Inaccuracy of the Bible

A. Earth is about 6000 years old, as calculated from the genealogies in Gen and Luke 3. (see the problem of a young earth later in the outline)

B. Birds were created before land animals (Gen 1:20, 24). - Fossil record shows exact opposite

C. Earth has four corners, and floats on water (Isa 11:12, Ps 24:2, 136:6, Rev 7:1).

D. Earth is a circular disk (Isa 40:22).

E. Earth is flat (these verses were used for centuries by the church to prove this: Ps 93:1, Jer 10:13, Dan 4:10-11, Zech 9:10, Matt 4:8, Rev 1:7)

F. Earth does not move (Ps 93:1, 96:10, 104:5, 1 Chr 16:30).

G. Death or illness is caused by sin (Gen 2:17, Lev 26:16, 21, 25, Deut 7:15, 28:21, 27, James 1:15).

H. God himself believes that a house or clothes can have leprosy and he details the remedy. Lev 13, 14.

I. Seed must "die" before it grows (John 12:24, 1 Cor 15:36).

J. Snakes eat dust (Gen 3:14, Isa 65:25).

K. Every beast shall fear man (Gen 9:2).

L. The ostrich abandons her eggs (Job 39:13-16).

M. A river divides into four rivers and they flow in different directions (Gen 2:10).

N. There was no rainbow before Noah's time (Gen 9:11-17).

O. Thunder is God's voice (Ps 77:18).

P. Earthquakes are caused by God's anger (Job 9:5, Ps 18:7, 77:18, 97:4, Isa 2:19, 24:20, 29:6, Jer 10:10, Ezek 38:20, Nah 1:5). Or by his voice (Heb 12:26). Or by Lucifer (Isa 14:16).

Q. Earthquakes can occur in heaven (Heb 12:26).

R. Rainwater does not return to the sky (Isa 55:10).

S. Blood is "life" (Deut 12:23). Breath is "life" (Gen 2:7).

T. Moon will turn to blood (Acts 2:20).

U. The moon has a light of its own (Isa 13:10, Matt 24:29).

V. The stars can be made to fall (Matt 24:29, Mark 13:25).

W. The bat is a bird (Lev 11:13,19, Deut 14:11, 18).

X. The whale is a fish (Jonah 1:17, Matt 12:40).

Y. Whales were created before insects (Gen 1:21-24).

Z. Jonah is able to survive three days and nights in the belly of the fish without oxygen and without being digested (Jonah1:17, 2:10).

A1. The hare chews the cud (Lev 11:5-6).

B1. Some fowl and insects have four legs (Lev 11:20-23).

C1. Levi existed as a person in the loins of his great-grandfather (Heb 7:9-10).

D1. Cattle will produce striped offspring if they see striped poles when breeding (Gen 30:37-41).

E1. Bees will build a hive in a dead carcass (Judg 14:8).

F1. Salt can lose its saltiness (Matt 5:13, Mark 9:50, Luke 14:34).

G1. Slugs / Snails melt as they move (Ps 58:8)

Friend @Brian2 to answer the above, one after one, just to remind him, please, right?

Regards

 

[PearlSeeker]

C1. None of the Gospels are mentioned by early Christians, e.g. Paul, Pope Clement I (97 AD), Justin Martyr (140 AD). The first mention of any Gospel is by Irenaeus (185 AD).

Early Church Fathers cited the gospels. Paul's writings were earlier than gospels.

 

[Maninthemiddle]

Early Church Fathers cited the gospels. Paul's writings were earlier than gospels.

And the other 40 or so points

 

[Maninthemiddle]

Early Church Fathers cited the gospels. Paul's writings were earlier than gospels.

That does not make the writings true, and the numerous errors would indicate it’s not

 

[PearlSeeker]

And the other 40 or so points

I just addressed one point.

 

[Sargonski]

There is evidence that the resurrection is true, but there is not proof of it. I believe it to be true and others believe other world views without proof.
There is no reason to think that the resurrection could not have taken place and did not take place.
If I had evidence that there were things in the Bible that were not true then I would consider the evidence and sometimes see that the evidence seems to be the truth and so I might end up seeing that a literal understanding of a passage in the Bible is not correct. So when I read in the Bible that the earth is immoveable, I realise that it was not meant to be a scientific statement about whether the earth moves or not.

Not so Brian - do not be fooled by the forked tongue sages that claim evidence for the truth of a resurrection of a person we can not even prove existed for sure .. although I would argue that the vast majority of experts agree that Jesus was a real person. The nature of the divinity of this Person .. is a whole other question .. of which we have little solid evidence .. allowing for the Bible to be entered in to some degree which is Cheating but .. let it go for the sake of hypothetical possibilities.

To claim "Evidence" for an actual resurrection of the physical variety is bona-fide preposterous nonsense. Evidence of the spiritual resurrection one could claim .. and not be giggled out of the room.

The first piece of evidence is the first and original story .. a story which argue's against a physical resurrection via its omission from the story. There is no Jesus wandering around in the flesh after death .. and we must assume that the Church of Jerusalem Christian Jews had no belief in any physical resurrection .. nor a "Virgin Birth" which is found nowhere in the original story

In the original story .. Jesus preaches about being able to enter the kingdom of Heaven .. a spiritual resurrection. in the original the story .. Jesus is a Man .. who dies - like a man - his God forsaken him .. his disciples all fled, one even betraying him to the authorities .. "Supposedly" very unlikely the Romans are going to give up the body so quickly .. the point of crucifixion was to set example .. . and so the body normally left to rot.. BUT -- OK .. The body of this man is put into a tomb .. but then disappears .. the reader left to wonder what happened to the Body and whether or not there was any kind of resurrection .. be it Zombie Jesus getting up and wandering out of the tomb ... a Spiritual Resurrection.

Evidence for a Spiritual Resurrection comes to us from Paul who likens appearences of Christ after death to his Vision on the Road to Demascus .. the 500 who saw the virgin mary in the clouds type of thing .. a spiritual resurrection.

Now .. after the destruction of the Temple ~ 70 Ad ... at which point all the leaders of the Church of jerusalem were martyred .. "including John" as tradition states. 10-20 years after the death of the reborn God of Judaism -- no trace of the Church of Jerusalem .. the Author of Matt writes an updated version of the Original story .. This fellow includes all of Mark except a few passages he finds derogatory towards Jesus and/or the Disciples. Go to the Catholic Encyclopedia (Matt) for the list of exatly which ones. .. an instance of "pious fraud" via the sin of ommission albeit a mild one and normally of no moment except we are talking credibility of the "Evidence" here.

So sometime no earlier than 80-100AD -- we have a new revised edition of "The story of Jesus" - Gospel of Mark - written .. we are now 50-70 years after the death of Jesus - the original Jewish Christians and the Church of Jerusalem has disappeared -- but this gentile version of Christianity is going strong .. and the stories of its inception are many .. and the man called Jesus who inspired these folks..

Now it is not certain that these Jesus wandering around in the flesh after death stories were in the original Matt .. and there is good reason to believe that they were not and added later Clement 1 "sometimes referred to as the first Pope -95-100AD" knows nothing of any stories of Jesus wandering around in the Flesh after death .. and this is hugely problematic in that Clement talks at length about the resurrection .. trying to convince one of the Churches of the reality of the resurrection .. using evidence from nature .. the cycle of death and rebirth over the seasons .. talks about a bird in Egypt called the Pheonix that is reborn .. not a word about "The Smoking Gun" .. defacto proof of the Resurrection .. Jesus wandering around in the flesh.

Ignatius who comes after Clement ~ 105-115 AD .. finally affirms the existence of a belief in Jesus wandering around in the flesh after death..

So 1) there is no physical resurrection in the original story .. this and clement constitute evidence against the claim of there being evidence of the physical resurrection. 2) we can not claim the author of Matts stories are evidence that those stories are true .. this is just plain old fallacy. 3) the next thing resembling what might be called Evidence is Ignatius - if this can be called evidence at all but letting that slide .. the fact that Clement knows nothing and we hear of this decades later from Matt being written .. argues for Matt either not being known by "The Pope" or the physical resurrection passages in Matt were added later .. .. which is no big deal .. incorporating more information into version 2 of the story except we can hardly call this "direct evidence" .. recognizing that "First Person" never existed to begin with - that the physical resurrection stories are true.

Let is also state unambiguously that .. as in the case of Matt .. Pious Fraud was general and accepted practice at various times along the timeline .. the long ending of Mark a prime example .. if not The Primary.. example given the relevance to the topic. Religious scribes and elders went to considerable trouble to purpetuate "The Lie" ~ 350-1000AD .. which is 200 years later I know .. but .. we have reports of other kinds of Pious Fraud throughout the early christian period .. just not as eggregious as the folks in 350 BC .. just after the Church God Power

 

[Maninthemiddle]

I just addressed one point.

Is the Bible the word of God yes or no

 

[PearlSeeker]

Is the Bible the word of God yes or no

IMO no. In opinion of the believers: the Bible is the inspired word of God. So it's also human word.

 

[Maninthemiddle]

IMO no. In opinion of the believers: the Bible is the inspired word of God. So it's also human word.

When you put it like that, the inspired word, it makes sense.
Thank you.

 

[Sargonski]

IMO no. In opinion of the believers: the Bible is the inspired word of God. So it's also human word.

When you put it like that, the inspired word, it makes sense.
Thank you.

While there may be some of the Bible that is "The inspired word of God" ... most of the Bible is not .. nor ever intended to be. In the Jewish Bible for example we have historical narrative Kings and Chronicles for example " here are the deeds of so and so". There is othing "inspired about these writings and nor did the author ever claim such. Some Religious zealots who are not even Jewish come 1000 years after the fact and claim "OH OH .. this writing was inspired by God" .. is complete nonsense .. no different from taking any historical writing and randomly assigning the text as "Inspired by God"

Look at the letters of Paul to the various churches ... Paul himself does not claim these letters were "Inspired"

 

[paarsurrey]

Why Don’t You Believe Jesus Rose From The Grave?

So 1) there is no physical resurrection in the original story .. this and clement constitute evidence against the claim of there being evidence of the physical resurrection. 2) we can not claim the author of Matts stories are evidence that those stories are true .. this is just plain old fallacy. 3) the next thing resembling what might be called Evidence is Ignatius - if this can be called evidence at all but letting that slide .. the fact that Clement knows nothing and we hear of this decades later from Matt being written .. argues for Matt either not being known by "The Pope" or the physical resurrection passages in Matt were added later .. .. which is no big deal .. incorporating more information into version 2 of the story except we can hardly call this "direct evidence" .. recognizing that "First Person" never existed to begin with - that the physical resurrection stories are true.

Let is also state unambiguously that .. as in the case of Matt .. Pious Fraud was general and accepted practice at various times along the timeline .. the long ending of Mark a prime example .. if not The Primary.. example given the relevance to the topic. Religious scribes and elders went to considerable trouble to purpetuate "The Lie" ~ 350-1000AD .. which is 200 years later I know .. but .. we have reports of other kinds of Pious Fraud throughout the early christian period ..

Rightly said.

Regards

 

[joelr]

2Peter 1:16 For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” 18 we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.

A witness compared to the modern opinion that the witnesses lied and were not really witnesses.
I believe the witness and you believe the modern opinion. That is fine, we disagree.

Every religion has similar passages.
" "My dear Lord, You are the only worshipable Lord, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and therefore I offer my humble obeisances and prayers just to please You". Brahma also describes Krishna's physical features, including his dark blue body, lightning-like garment, and peacock feather on his head. Brahma also praises Krishna as an undifferentiated entity whose potency is inseparable, and who is present in every atom of the universe at the same time. Brahma also says that men who are devoted to Krishna sing mantra-suktas told by the Vedas in his praise, and that these songs bring them beauty, greatness, and other rewards."


You believe based on wishful thinking because you bought into a story. The modern opinion has evidence.
Stories about demigods is fiction until it's demonstrated demigods exist. Same with Gods.

2Peter is an argument against people saying they were myths. So some people knew it was fiction.
People made up stories about their gods in every single mythology. 36 of the known Gospels are lies about things Jesus said. 1/2 of the Epistles are forged by church fathers.
So yes, even in Christianity, people were making things up for the religion.

The prophecies about the Messiah and what He would do came hundreds of years before the Greeks.

Messianic expectation came from the Persians, Hellenism is different.



Doctrines taken from Persia into Judiasm.



fundamental doctrines became disseminated throughout the region, from Egypt to the Black Sea: namely that there is a supreme God who is the Creator; that an evil power exists which is opposed to him, and not under his control; that he has emanated many lesser divinities to help combat this power; that he has created this world for a purpose, and that in its present state it will have an end; that this end will be heralded by the coming of a cosmic Saviour, who will help to bring it about; that meantime heaven and hell exist, with an individual judgment to decide the fate of each soul at death; that at the end of time there will be a resurrection of the dead and a Last Judgment, with annihilation of the wicked; and that thereafter the kingdom of God will come upon earth, and the righteous will enter into it as into a garden (a Persian word for which is 'paradise'), and be happy there in the presence of God for ever, immortal themselves in body as well as soul. These doctrines all came to be adopted by various Jewish schools in the post-Exilic period, for the Jews were one of the peoples, it seems, most open to Zoroastrian influences - a tiny minority, holding staunchly to their own beliefs, but evidently admiring their Persian benefactors, and finding congenial elements in their faith. Worship of the one supreme God, and belief in the coming of a Messiah or Saviour, together with adherence to a way of life which combined moral and spiritual aspirations with a strict code of behaviour (including purity laws) were all matters in which Judaism and Zoroastrianism were in harmony; and it was this harmony, it seems, reinforced by the respect of a subject people for a great protective power, which allowed Zoroastrian doctrines to exert their influence. The extent of this influence is best attested, however, by Jewish writings of the Parthian period, when Christianity and the Gnostic faiths, as well as northern Buddhism, all likewise bore witness to the profound effect: which Zoroaster's teachings had had throughout the lands of the Achaernenian empire.

Mary Boyce


John Collins is also a specialist in this subject.

So you believe your group of archaeologists are honest and those who disagree are dishonest. OK
But evidence can be interpreted in different ways and the way you do that can be about what presuppositions you are using.

I believe archaeologists who have evidence to back their claims. They all know no evidence proves any claims in the Bible.




The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts


Israel Finkelstein, director of Tel Aviv University's excavations at Megiddo (ancient Armageddon), and Silberman, author of a series of successful and intriguing books on the political and cultural dimensions of archeology, present for the first time to a general audience the results of recent research, which reveals more clearly that while the Bible may be the most important piece of Western literature--serving concrete political, cultural and religious purposes--many of the events recorded in the Old Testament are not historically accurate. Finkelstein and Silberman do not aim to undermine the Bible's import, but to demonstrate why it became the basic document for a distinct religious community under particular political circumstances. For example, they maintain that the Exodus was not a single dramatic event, as described in the second book of the Bible, but rather a series of occurrences over a long period of time. The Old Testament account is, according to the authors, neither historical truth nor literary fiction, but a powerful expression of memory and hope constructed to serve particular political purposes at the time it was composed.



It was made to give a cultural identity to the Hebrew people.

There are many specialists in Hellenism and Christianity who believe the gospel accounts are true and who interpret what Paul said in completely different ways to how James Tabor does.

Please give me a PhD historian who specializes in Hellenism and actually says this.
All of the nations occupied by Greek colonists had a local religion, similar to Judaism and underwent all the same changes, Christianity was the last.

J.Z. Smith:

-the seasonal drama was homologized to a soteriology (salvation concept) concerning the destiny, fortune, and salvation of the individual after death.

-his led to a change from concern for a religion of national prosperity to one for individual salvation, from focus on a particular ethnic group to concern for every human. The prophet or saviour replaced the priest and king as the chief religious figure.


-his process was carried further through the identification of the experiences of the soul that was to be saved with the vicissitudes of a divine but fallen soul, which had to be redeemed by cultic activity and divine intervention. This view is illustrated in the concept of the paradoxical figure of the saved saviour, salvator salvandus.

-Other deities, who had previously been associated with national destiny (e.g., Zeus, Yahweh, and Isis), were raised to the status of transcendent, supreme


-The temples and cult institutions of the various Hellenistic religions were repositories of the knowledge and techniques necessary for salvation and were the agents of the public worship of a particular deity. In addition, they served an important sociological role. In the new, cosmopolitan ideology that followed Alexander’s conquests, the old nationalistic and ethnic boundaries had broken down and the problem of religious and social identity had become acute.

-Most of these groups had regular meetings for a communal meal that served the dual role of sacramental participation (referring to the use of material elements believed to convey spiritual benefits among the members and with their deity)

-Hellenistic philosophy (Stoicism, Cynicism, Neo-Aristotelianism, Neo-Pythagoreanism, and Neoplatonism) provided key formulations for Jewish, Christian, and Muslim philosophy, theology, and mysticism through the 18th century

- The basic forms of worship of both the Jewish and Christian communities were heavily influenced in their formative period by Hellenistic practices, and this remains fundamentally unchanged to the present time. Finally, the central religious literature of both traditions—the Jewish Talmud (an authoritative compendium of law, lore, and interpretation), the New Testament, and the later patristic literature of the early Church Fathers—are characteristic Hellenistic documents both in form and content.

-Other traditions even more radically reinterpreted the ancient figures. The cosmic or seasonal drama was interiorized to refer to the divine soul within man that must be liberated.

-Each persisted in its native land with little perceptible change save for its becoming linked to nationalistic or messianic movements (centring on a deliverer figure)

-and apocalyptic traditions (referring to a belief in the dramatic intervention of a god in human and natural events)


- Particularly noticeable was the success of a variety of prophets, magicians, and healers—e.g., John the Baptist, Jesus, Simon Magus, Apollonius of Tyana, Alexander the Paphlagonian, and the cult of the healer Asclepius—whose preaching corresponded to the activities of various Greek and Roman philosophic missionaries



This describes the changes from Judaism to Christianity. A Jewish Mystery religion. All mythology.

Neither Judaism not Christianity is the Gnosticism you/he is describing.

That describes Christianity and all the Mystery religions.
James goes into detail, that is just one list from a longer video.

Death & Afterlife: Do Christians Follow Plato rather than Jesus or Paul?


Dr James Tabor

He is familiar with the Greek Gospels and the borrowings, he is also an expert on the NT.
It's funny when amateurs claim they know more about scholars who specialize in these fields.

That sounds more like Judaism and Christianity. God created us to be physical beings who also are spiritual.
All this comes from the first pages of the Bible and is what Judaism and Christianity teach these days.

That list is the Genesis theology. It is not taught by the NT.
The dead do not "rest in Sheol", Heaven is not just Yahweh's home, people have a soul that needs personal salvation, not in th eOT, in the NT. Which is a Greek Hellenistic borrowing. Personal salvation.

same video:

13:35 In the Hellenistic period the common perception is not the Hebrew view, it’s the idea that the soul belongs in Heaven.


14:15 The basic Hellenistic idea is taken into the Hebrew tradition. Salvation in the Hellenistic world is how do you save your soul and get to Heaven. How to transcend the physical body.

Greek tomb “I am a child of earth and starry heaven but heaven alone is my home”


15:46 Does this sound familiar, Christian hymns - “this world is not my home, I’m a pilgrim passing through, Jesus will come and take you home”.


Common theme that comes from the Hellenistic religions. Immortal souls trapped in a human body etc…

 

[joelr]

So what is the Hellenistic part, considering that Genesis came hundreds of years before Hellenism?

Genesis is Jewish, nothing to do with Hellenism as presented above in the list by J.Z. Smith.



Petra Pakkanen also identified the trends in Hellenism, which all were borrowed by the NT.

Petra Pakkanen, Interpreting Early Hellenistic Religion (1996)


- Four big trends in religion in the centuries leading up to Christianity

- Christianity conforms to all four



Four Trends

- Syncretism: combining a foreign cult deity with Hellenistic elements. Christianity is a Jewish mystery religion.


- Henotheism: transforming / reinterpreting polytheism into monotheism. Judaism introduced monolatric concepts.


- Individualism: agricultural salvation cults retooled as personal salvation cults. Salvation of community changed into personal individual salvation in afterlife. All original agricultural salvation cults were retooled by the time Christianity arose.


- Cosmopolitianism: all races, cultures, classes admitted as equals, with fictive kinship (members are all brothers) you now “join” a religion rather than being born into it



Savior deities, dying/rising, pre-Christian, Osiris, Adonis, Romulus, Zalmoxis, Inanna (oldest 1700 B.C., female deity resurrected in 3 days)


All Mystery religions have personal savior deities


- All saviors

- all son/daughter, never the supreme God (including Mithriasm)

- all undergo a passion (struggle) patheon


- all obtain victory over death which they share with followers


- all have stories set on earth

- none actually existed

- Is Jesus the exception and based on a real Jewish teacher or is it all made up?

You can and no doubt do believe what modern archaeologists say about Judaism and when the Torah was written and you are entitled to do that but you also say that the opinions of your archaeologists and historians are the only true and unbiased ones and so that what you present is proof. But that is naive at the least.

Please present a historian who disagrees.

It is just your faith and what you call the evidence that proves your faith, but it proves nothing.

I don't use faith, I follow evidence.

It demonstrates good evidence that the NT is a syncretic borrowing of Hellenism, not just all historians say this, even good Christian scholarship admits it.


Encyclopaedia Biblica : a critical dictionary of the literary, political, and religious history, the archaeology, geography, and natural history of the Bible




by Cheyne, T. K. (Thomas Kelly), 1841-1915; Black, J. Sutherland (John Sutherland), 1846-1923



We must conclude with the following guarded thesis. There is in the circle of ideas in the NT, in addition to what is new, and what is taken over from Judaism, much that is Greek ; but whether this is adopted directly from the Greek or borrowed from the Alexandrians, who indeed aimed at a complete fusion of Hellenism and Judaism, is, in the most important cases, not to be determined ; and primitive Christianity as a whole stands considerably nearer to the Hebrew world than to the Greek.

 

[joelr]

That does not make sense for a start.

Hellenistic religion


The apotheosis of rulers also brought the idea of divinity down to earth.


Hellenistic Judaism was a form of Judaism in the ancient world that combined Jewish religious tradition with elements of Greek culture.


The decline of Hellenistic Judaism started in the 2nd century AD, and its causes are still not fully understood. It may be that it was eventually marginalized by, partially absorbed into or became progressively the Koiné-speaking core of Early Christianity centered on Antioch and its traditions, such as the Melkite Catholic Church, and the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch.


Antioch on the Orontes


The city was also the main center of Hellenistic Judaism at the end of the Second Temple period. Antioch was part of the pentarchy and was called "the cradle of Christianity" as a result of its longevity and the pivotal role that it played in the emergence of early Christianity.[5] The Christian New Testament asserts that the name "Christian" first emerged in Antioch.[6]


[5] "The mixture of Roman, Greek, and Jewish elements admirably adapted Antioch for the great part it played in the early history of Christianity. The city was the cradle of the church." — "Antioch," Encyclopaedia Biblica, Vol. I, p. 186

• [6] "Acts 11:26 and when he found him, he brought him back to Antioch. So for a full year they met together with the church and taught large numbers of people. The disciples were first called Christians at Antioch". biblehub.com.

Christianity[edit]


Antioch was a chief center of early Christianity during Roman times.[26] The city had a large population of Jewish origin in a quarter called the Kerateion, and so attracted the earliest missionaries.[27] Evangelized by, among others, Peter himself, according to the tradition upon which the Patriarchate of Antioch[28] still rests its claim for primacy,[29] and later (according to the Acts of the Apostles) by Barnabas and Paul[30][clarification needed], its converts were the first to be called Christians.

What do you want me to do, argue against your cut and past quotes of modern historians that you assume to be correct?

The specialists in Hellenism and the borrowings by the NT, James Tabor, J.Z. Smith, Klauck, all say the same.

The apologist work I quoted, which is by believers, also admits it's true.
David Litwa teaches courses in the Mystery religions, another expert, and shows the evidence of borrowings by Christianity which is the last Mystery religion. A Jewish version.
Carrier has also done extensive research on the topic:


Richard Carrier, Origins of Christianity.

10:04

I have done extensive research into the origins of Christianity. The appropriation of Isis and Horus statues as Mary and Jesus statues totally happened, but that was centuries later, this was not part of the origin.


Most of what we mean by Christianity is Jewish, it comes from Judaism. If we go back many centuries we can talk about the surrounding cultures that influenced Judaism and Egypt would be one of them, among several others. Christians probably were not even aware of this as it was centuries old by then.


Most of it is borrowing this package of ideas called the Mystery cults, which was a Hellenized version of local tribal cults. We have a Syrian version, we have a Persian version, an Egyptian version, it’s the same package that spreads from the Greek colonists. It’s very Greek but borrows from local cultures.


For example, Osirus Mysteries was different from the Osirus religion. It was a merger between Greek ideas and local native Egyptian ideas. We see the same in the other mysteries.


When Judaism did the same thing and created Christianity, it borrowed the same package, it’s borrowing a generic package that all the cultures bought. Not just Egypt.



There are other influences as well. The ending of Mark and the ending of Luke both borrow from the Romulus story in different ways, which is a Roman myth. So they are picking from various things, little pieces of different myth.


Primarily it’s Judaism, then Hellenism, then small pieces of different nations. Egypt, Persia, Syria and even European cults.



The Egyptians did the same thing, they took the same package of ideas and blended it with their local Egyptian religion, all the Mystery cults did the same.


This is what all the scholarship and evidence supports.



Mystery cults come from the era of Alexander the Great.


The Hellenized version of baptism meant into the death and resurrection of the savior figure. The savior figure is generic, you can plug anyone in there, any deity.


(Goes over examples)


There is borrowing from all cultures in all directions.

In the 4th gospel John is writing to Gentiles mainly and uses concepts familiar in Greek philosophy I guess, but with the centre being Jesus.
In John's gospels he fights against the concepts of gnosticism.

The gospels are Hellenized writings.

whttps://www.worldhistory.org/article/94/the-hellenistic-world-the-world-of-alexander-the-g/

Hellenistic thought is evident in the narratives which make up the books of the Bible as the Hebrew Scriptures were revised and canonized during the Second Temple Period (c.515 BCE-70 CE), the latter part of which was during the Hellenic Period of the region. The gospels and epistles of the Christian New Testament were written in Greek and draw on Greek philosophy and religion as, for example, in the first chapter of the Gospel of John in which the word becomes flesh, a Platonic concept.