Jesus Resurrection

[Riders]

Look at this chart of historical documents compared to the New Testament.

Can we trust the New Testament as a historical document? | CARM.org

Yikes there could be 100 years between the time of it written and the copy that we know was used for the bible wow that's quite a long time a century???To me it just says the bible is not reliable at all.

 

[Riders]

Yikes there could be 100 years between the time of it written and the copy that we know was used for the bible wow that's quite a long time a century???To me it just says the bible is not reliable at all.

What proof does this sight offer that the bible is 99 percent accurate? None.

 

[Jollybear]

Yikes there could be 100 years between the time of it written and the copy that we know was used for the bible wow that's quite a long time a century???To me it just says the bible is not reliable at all.

The whole point is, if the bible is not reliable as a historical record, then NO ancient document is reliable as a historical record. And does that seam reasonable?

You understand?

 

[Jollybear]

What proof does this sight offer that the bible is 99 percent accurate? None.

Did you read everything on the sight?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Jesus himself said in one of his resurrected appearences "touch me and see, a GHOST does not have flesh and bones as you see i have"

Yeah, but I bet you could tell the ghost of Jesus from the ghost of Moses or Elijah. His apostles couldn't even determine it was him and they were around him nearly all the time.

ounds like he was correcting a ghost like interpretation. A non literal resurrection.

It's more like the authors were "correcting" gnosticism, which was a thing by the time the books were written.

There is an Empty tomb and there are post mortem appearances testified multiple people that we clearly not lying.

Where are the testimonies? The books weren't written by any of the women who supposedly saw him. Most important, the resurrected Jesus has crucifixion marks but none of the torture stuff. Why is that? Why couldn't they recognize someone they've been with for days?

Because they where willing suffer and die in the name of the resurrection .

They run from the cops a LOT for people who were willing to die. Even Jesus ran from angry mobs because, let's face it, HE didn't want to die either.

Nobody would die in the name of a lie that they themselves invented.

They could if they were executed by a government that simply didn't CARE.

It is a fact that people like peter, James, Paul etc honestly and sincerely belived in the resurrection.

It is an honest fact those three fought for leadership points with the congregation. They didn't get the fame they wanted while Jesus was alive because he derided them for not understanding him and screwing up even simple miracle missions, so they waited until he was dead to capitalize on their newfound attention.

There is no viable naturalistic explanation for the data, whatever happened 2000 years ago was something extraordinary (ether a miracle or something natural) but something extraordinary did happened

I'm an RN and can think of a few possibilities.

The resurrection was atested in 4 gospels acts and in Paul's letters we have multiple indepebdind sources that testify in favor of the resurrection.

But none of them were witnesses.

Without using the bible as a source, the existence of a man named Jesus (called the Christ and king of the jews) was crucified by Pontius Pilate a little over 2000 years ago. Just using contemporary historians who were not Christian, Jesus is mentioned more often Caesar. He is thus the most mentioned person in the Quran by reference; 25 times by the name Isa, third-person 48 times, first-person 35 times, and the rest as titles and attributes. Muhammad is mentioned 4 times in the whole. Of the Quran.

Who cares what the Quran said of it? Muhammad wasn't a witness either. And the contemporary sources note what Christians believed, not what actually happened.

There is no proof Jesus lived. Where are the writings about Jesus written back then

Or an image? Sure, Judaism said you couldn't paint his picture, but Romans could. Where's the wanted poster?

Just the NT alone is 27 books written by 8 different authors.

With varying biases and goals and experience levels with the character in question.

nero

We can see Nero's palace and other stuff he did. Got anything for biblical characters like Jesus or the apostles?

If the apostles wer the ones who made these claims (first hand testimony, not second hand) and they died for it, that shows there not lying.

No, it shows the legal system was made up of supporters of capital punishment for religious terrorists, which is how Rome saw all of them.

How do you understand the resurrection then?

Possibly an interesting medical bit, but most likely an attempt to extend the 15 minutes of fame that were up.

So is the bible a fictional novel then?

Yes. The Old Testament is from a set of writers trying to argue temple vs state and forming a national creation story as mandated by the monarchy, unfortunate enough to be selected to govern over a bunch of backstabbing tribes that didn't like each other. The New Testament is from a set of writers trying to argue Jews vs Gentiles and who should get top billing now that Jesus was gone. Both suffer from Michael Bay Syndrome, which says that if you can't figure out how to further the plot, just add explosions.

Paul wrote about Jesus within 15 years after the crusifixtion. So even by your strict and unrealistic standards you should accept the historicity of jesus.

Harry Potter was written before the US and other countries were overrun by evil xenophobic hypocrites. Should we accept its prophetic nature?

This sight says he wrote the new testament books between 55 and 67 AD at least 25 years difference between that and Jesus life, the ones written in 67 AD was about 32 years difference. Thats way too long to be reliable.

Even if it happened on the same day, it isn't automatically reliable. The Bible is the Fox News of the ancient Middle Eastern world.

 

[lukethethird]

When reading the bible, what do you look for then? You seam a bit elusive to me.

I read for the allegorical meaning rather than the literal.

 

[Jollybear]

I read for the allegorical meaning rather than the literal.

So, the resurrection is allegory?

 

[Jollybear]

Yeah, but I bet you could tell the ghost of Jesus from the ghost of Moses or Elijah. His apostles couldn't even determine it was him and they were around him nearly all the time.


It's more like the authors were "correcting" gnosticism, which was a thing by the time the books were written.


Where are the testimonies? The books weren't written by any of the women who supposedly saw him. Most important, the resurrected Jesus has crucifixion marks but none of the torture stuff. Why is that? Why couldn't they recognize someone they've been with for days?


They run from the cops a LOT for people who were willing to die. Even Jesus ran from angry mobs because, let's face it, HE didn't want to die either.


They could if they were executed by a government that simply didn't CARE.


It is an honest fact those three fought for leadership points with the congregation. They didn't get the fame they wanted while Jesus was alive because he derided them for not understanding him and screwing up even simple miracle missions, so they waited until he was dead to capitalize on their newfound attention.


I'm an RN and can think of a few possibilities.


But none of them were witnesses.


Who cares what the Quran said of it? Muhammad wasn't a witness either. And the contemporary sources note what Christians believed, not what actually happened.


Or an image? Sure, Judaism said you couldn't paint his picture, but Romans could. Where's the wanted poster?


With varying biases and goals and experience levels with the character in question.


We can see Nero's palace and other stuff he did. Got anything for biblical characters like Jesus or the apostles?


No, it shows the legal system was made up of supporters of capital punishment for religious terrorists, which is how Rome saw all of them.


Possibly an interesting medical bit, but most likely an attempt to extend the 15 minutes of fame that were up.


Yes. The Old Testament is from a set of writers trying to argue temple vs state and forming a national creation story as mandated by the monarchy, unfortunate enough to be selected to govern over a bunch of backstabbing tribes that didn't like each other. The New Testament is from a set of writers trying to argue Jews vs Gentiles and who should get top billing now that Jesus was gone. Both suffer from Michael Bay Syndrome, which says that if you can't figure out how to further the plot, just add explosions.


Harry Potter was written before the US and other countries were overrun by evil xenophobic hypocrites. Should we accept its prophetic nature?


Even if it happened on the same day, it isn't automatically reliable. The Bible is the Fox News of the ancient Middle Eastern world.

Bla, bla, bla.

Answer one simple question . Why would these people die for something they supposidly made up?

 

[lukethethird]

So, the resurrection is allegory?

By golly, I think you've got it.

 

[leroy]

Sense this is proof for Jesus being raised from the dead yes.

Ok so one should only apply a higher standard of evidence if the claim has theological implications that you personally don't like ?

 

[Jollybear]

By golly, I think you've got it.

If its allegory, why does the context look like its literal?

 

[lukethethird]

If its allegory, why does the context look like its literal?

I don't know that it does, but you seem to think so.

 

[Jollybear]

I don't know that it does, but you seem to think so.

You dont think it looks literal?

Gospel mathew for instence, geneologies, places, events.

Those allegories too?

 

[lukethethird]

You dont think it looks literal?

Gospel mathew for instence, geneologies, places, events.

Those allegories too?

Did you read that genealogy?

 

[Jollybear]

Did you read that genealogy?

Yes

 

[lukethethird]

Yes

That sure is some genealogy, especially for a guy born in a manger.

 

[Riders]

Josephus was a historical writer of the time. He wrote all sorts of stiff about John The Baptist none of which connected John to Jesus, he wrote about Ceasor the Esseens
Pha roah's of that time King Herod's off spring and only 2 sentences about Jesus and 1 pf those is questionable. Had Jesus been raised from the dead there would have been a ton of writing. Wiki says the 2 sentences from Josephus are questionable not reliant either. so there's actually little to nothing said about Jesus compared to John The Baptist and other leaders of bible times.

 

[Riders]

That sure is some genealogy, especially for a guy born in a manger.

which genealogy ,there are 2 different genealogy's on Jesus which contradict each other.

 

[lukethethird]

which genealogy ,there are 2 different genealogy's on Jesus which contradict each other.

Read post #113

 

[The Anointed]

which genealogy ,there are 2 different genealogy's on Jesus which contradict each other.

The genealogy in Matthew is not that of Jesus, but the genealogy of Joseph ben Jacob, who married the already pregnant Mary, but did not consummate their union until after she had given birth to Jesus the biological son of Joseph ben Heli, who is in fact, Joseph the son of Alexander Helios III.