Lets discuss problems with the "resurrection" story

[IVS]

LMAO! This is almost as silly as the church patriarchs debating the divine and human nature of Jesus. Its a bunch of philosophical babble and sophistry. Any rational person knows damn well that if Jesus was subjected to the punishment mentioned in NT gospels, that he did not walk out of that tomb and his disciples are clearly fabricating a story. For Jesus was just a man, and not god incarnate which is another fabrication put forth by his disciples. Jesus fashioned himself as shepherd, not a lamb for slaughter and Jesus never put forth the idea about dying for the sins of man. The idea of Jesus as the lamb of god is introduced solely by the Gospel of John and it is thru this that Jesus is transformed into the sin offering. Then later in Romans 4:25 where Saul the Pharisee (Hellenized Jew) promoting the idea of Jesus as the sin offering.

Now I will not deny the possibility that a rebel (because Jesus was crucified with 2 other rebels) rabbi was crucified for his teachings and interrupting commerce by lashing out at moneychangers. There is no mention of the resurrection of Jesus in any sources outside the bible.

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

I never quite understood the dying for sins approach, specifically as literally as people take it.

To me, it makes more sense that "dying for peoples sins" is symbolic of the fact that he was executed for free speech/thought...things that everyone want.

I dont hate on those who believe in it literally though.

 

[Thsnnor]

Jesus had no sin. Was found innocent by Pilate and Herod but still crucified. His dying for our sins were for us to believe in him to have a place in Heaven with Him and God.

People have their own beliefs about things and that is cool but some who deny Jesus mainly uses talking points since there is more evidence for Jesus than anyone who lived during that time. Jews, pagans, Christians and other groups wrote about him. Over 40 sources but only around 10 for Tiberus Caesar who was emperor.

One of my points is if the Bible were false the information contained would have been put out a long time ago. We know when cities names were changed, we know distance between cities and other various things. Even the Bible correctly list the order of the Herods.

Take a look at the evidence (not some YouTube video). Even those who agree with the disciples taking the bodies that would have been impossible since the Roman soldiers would have been tried for treason (the only way for a Roman to get crucified). They made sure the tomb was sealed and they didn't fall asleep (if you are asleep how would you know what happened) that would have been treason also.

 

[Type Username Here]

Jesus had no sin. Was found innocent by Pilate and Herod but still crucified. His dying for our sins were for us to believe in him to have a place in Heaven with Him and God.

People have their own beliefs about things and that is cool but some who deny Jesus mainly uses talking points since there is more evidence for Jesus than anyone who lived during that time. Jews, pagans, Christians and other groups wrote about him. Over 40 sources but only around 10 for Tiberus Caesar who was emperor.

One of my points is if the Bible were false the information contained would have been put out a long time ago. We know when cities names were changed, we know distance between cities and other various things. Even the Bible correctly list the order of the Herods.

Take a look at the evidence (not some YouTube video). Even those who agree with the disciples taking the bodies that would have been impossible since the Roman soldiers would have been tried for treason (the only way for a Roman to get crucified). They made sure the tomb was sealed and they didn't fall asleep (if you are asleep how would you know what happened) that would have been treason also.

This entire post is funny but this part right here:

One of my points is if the Bible were false the information contained would have been put out a long time ago.

We have religions today that are far older than the NT and are practiced in the present. We have 1000s of religious texts, religions and beliefs. If we use the same criteria you used, many of them should be as legitimate as Christianity in your eyes but something tells me that isn't the case. Islam, which actively dismisses most fundamental Christian claims, is far better documented (yes, even with supposed eye witness accounts). Why aren't you a Muslim?

 

[Thsnnor]

This entire post is funny but this part right here:



We have religions today that are far older than the NT and are practiced in the present. We have 1000s of religious texts, religions and beliefs. If we use the same criteria you used, many of them should be as legitimate as Christianity in your eyes but something tells me that isn't the case. Islam, which actively dismisses most fundamental Christian claims, is far better documented (yes, even with supposed eye witness accounts). Why aren't you a Muslim?

In Christianity God is searching for you. In other religions you are searching for god.
Christianity is the only one that offers redemption. Am I to think that a person can do enough works to please a god? If you say yes you are arrogant and will not be accepted. If you say no well....... I'm sure you can guess.

 

[Type Username Here]

In Christianity God is searching for you. In other religions you are searching for god.
Christianity is the only one that offers redemption. Am I to think that a person can do enough works to please a god? If you say yes you are arrogant and will not be accepted. If you say no well....... I'm sure you can guess.

I'm sure other religions don't feel that way. Just admit that you follow it because you have faith or it makes you feel good emotionally. There is nothing wrong with that. But don't come in here peddling pseudo-History, pseudo-science and cognitive dissonance as objective truth because you're going to be called out on it.

If you don't want to be challenged on your claims and beliefs, just stick to one of thousands of Christian forums and churches.

Your lies and fairy tales won't fly unchallenged here my friend.

 

[Thsnnor]

I'm sure other religions don't feel that way. Just admit that you follow it because you have faith or it makes you feel good emotionally. There is nothing wrong with that. But don't come in here peddling pseudo-History, pseudo-science and cognitive dissonance as objective truth because you're going to be called out on it.

If you don't want to be challenged on your claims and beliefs, just stick to one of thousands of Christian forums and churches.

Your lies and fairy tales won't fly unchallenged here my friend.

My faith does not make Christianity or the Bible true. Personally, I have had prayers answered. Nothing like money or health, so emotions are out of the question.

The objective truth is what you will find when investigation will lead you to. If truth is subjective then the difference between mother Theresa and hitler is a matter of people's opinion.

Getting challenged is fine. I'm not happy with these false TV prosperity preachers anyways. The Bible did not say sow a seed and it will get returned seven fold anyways.

I know this is the coli, been here for a few years. I'm not going to throw something up and run. I'll talk and defend and dap for the good conversation.

 

[Type Username Here]

My faith does not make Christianity or the Bible true. Personally, I have had prayers answered. Nothing like money or health, so emotions are out of the question.

I'm sure you have had prayers answered. So have many followers of many different religions. We can read countless examples where people praise god or gods for answering prayers. We can also read countless examples of voodoo working, people healing others with chi energy, and so on. What occurred was most likely confirmation bias or what we call the religious win/win. When you have your prayers "answered", you take that as a sign that there is a God. When you don't have it answered, you either forget, get over it or attribute it to God's plans. Your testimony is not objective and cannot be quantified. Thus, it is all based on faith.

The objective truth is what you will find when investigation will lead you to. If truth is subjective then the difference between mother Theresa and hitler is a matter of people's opinion.

First, I grew up Christian. I was indoctrinated into religion. Investigation led me away from it.

Second, your example is heavily flawed. Didn't people follow Hitler? Aren't there many criticisms of Mother Theresa out there, including very valid ones? Seems very subjective to me.

Getting challenged is fine. I'm not happy with these false TV prosperity preachers anyways. The Bible did not say sow a seed and it will get returned seven fold anyways.

The people who created your religion are very much like those TV prosperity preachers, more so than you would care to admit.

 

[Thsnnor]

First, I grew up Christian. I was indoctrinated into religion. Investigation led me away from it.

Second, your example is heavily flawed. Didn't people follow Hitler? Aren't there many criticisms of Mother Theresa out there, including very valid ones? Seems very subjective to me.



The people who created your religion are very much like those TV prosperity preachers, more so than you would care to admit.

1st point: What did you look at that made you walk away?

2nd point: You missed my point. It's not about following. It is about making the moral judgement between good and evil. If morality is subjective good and evil lies with individuals rather then one central point. Btw. You prove the point by stating people criticized mother Theresa and we know people out there who think hitler was the best thing since sliced bread.

3rd point: You are right. The difference is I know what they are saying is wrong. The TBN which shows all those shows was founded by an atheist.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

LMAO! This is almost as silly as the church patriarchs debating the divine and human nature of Jesus. Its a bunch of philosophical babble and sophistry. Any rational person knows damn well that if Jesus was subjected to the punishment mentioned in NT gospels, that he did not walk out of that tomb and his disciples are clearly fabricating a story.

People lie in order to secure material gain, sexual gratification, or power. None of these apply to the apostles/disciples so the question is: What motive did they have for fabricating the story?

Keep in-mind I do not think the text is in any way 'inspired', 'inerrant', or 'infallible'.​

 

[noon]

People lie in order to secure material gain, sexual gratification, or power. None of these apply to the apostles/disciples so the question is: What motive did they have for fabricating the story?​

​

Therefore: resurrection?

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Therefore: resurrection?

Re-read post #28.

​

 

[noon]

Yeah, I seen it. Here is your statement from post #28:

All I'm saying is, based purely on the data, something very odd happened to Jesus.​

​

Which brings us once again to post #166.

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Yeah, I seen it. Here is your statement from post #28:

That ain't it.

​

 

[noon]

But apparently all you're saying is that something very odd happened to Jesus.