Doktormartini
å°è
How come Jesus has pretty much the exact same life as some of the saviors of pagan religions that were worshipped long before Jesus (Osiris, Dionysis, Mithra..etc)?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Because if one factual statement is correct, then all statements which conflict with that statement are incorrcet (it's rather the definition conflict)How do ya figure one at most?
Even there are all of these "conflicts," there are three things in all 4 accounts that do not conflict: Jesus was the son of God, he was crucified, and he was ressurected.
Their neck rots under the stress before their abdomen bursts. Typically, a successful self-hanging results in decapitation, as it's rare for an ameture to successfully manage the line btween "doesn't break the neck" and "takes off the head".Judas did hang himself and his bowels did gush out. What do you think happens to bloated corpses of people that are left out in the sun too long?
Someone might see it incorrectly indeed. Someone might also remember it incorrectly. In either case, it would be incorrect.Different shade of red and purple can look like either or.
Does anything conflict with the main focus of the Gospels? Jesus's identidty, death and resurrection?JerryL said:Because if one factual statement is correct, then all statements which conflict with that statement are incorrcet (it's rather the definition conflict)
Hung, fell, burst, died. His bloated body was decapitated from the noose and fell. Thus the gushing bowels.JerryL said:Their neck rots under the stress before their abdomen bursts. Typically, a successful self-hanging results in decapitation, as it's rare for an ameture to successfully manage the line btween "doesn't break the neck" and "takes off the head".
Though that's not the order of events"Now this man [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.Fell, burst, died.
You say toe-may-toe I say toe-mot-toe. Does that mean it's not a tomatoe? Of course not.JerryL said:Someone might see it incorrectly indeed. Someone might also remember it incorrectly. In either case, it would be incorrect.
If the robe was purple, then the person who said red was wrong.
If the robe was red, then the person who said purple was wrong.
You are mostly apologizing for *why* they are wrong; but they are still wrong.
That question seems to be around a different assertion, the assertion that there is a consistant core message. My support for the problems there is entirely different from my (rather trivial to establish) support for the claim that the Bible is not entierly factually correct.Does anything conflict with the main focus of the Gospels? Jesus's identidty, death and resurrection?
Riight. What color was that robe again?Hung, fell, burst, died. His bloated body was decapitated from the noose and fell. Thus the gushing bowels.
No it's really not. Purple and red are two different colors. At least one person is wrong. Color is not subjective, it is objective. Shall I point you at some color charts so you can see the objective standards?It's a matter of perspective. Neither is wrong.
wanderer085 said:The many conflicts of the gospels show convincingly that the gospels(written by unknow authors) were made up - generally from pre-existent religious tales or pagan beliefs, or to fulfill some OT prophecy. Each gospel writer embellished on the stories according to their own bias or background.
I don't want to hijack Jerell's thread anymore than I already have. We can take this elsewhere if you'd like.JerryL said:That question seems to be around a different assertion, the assertion that there is a consistant core message. My support for the problems there is entirely different from my (rather trivial to establish) support for the claim that the Bible is not entierly factually correct.
I'm concerned that your change of scope is propping up a straw-man parody of what I actually said.
Riight. What color was that robe again?
No it's really not. Purple and red are two different colors. At least one person is wrong. Color is not subjective, it is objective. Shall I point you at some color charts so you can see the objective standards?
If the robe was red, it could not have been purple as red!=purple, and vice versa.
If you percieve something objectively red to be purple, your perception is factually wrong.
No, Jerrell, ignorance is ignorance, as your post so clearly demonstrates. Start here.Jerrell said:Ignorance is Bliss. The Authors are not unknown, Luke escribed his name on his Gospel, and the others were found out through the version of the story and the dating of it.
uumckk16 said:That's a good point. However, isn't the Bible supposed to be God's Word? In that case, either the accounts should match up - because I'd assume God would give the same story to the various authors - or it must be admitted that the Bible is riddled with human perspective, in which case it loses its status as the Word and becomes merely a book of human experience. I see nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't seem to fit into the context of Christian faith.
This is something I've always been confused about. Can someone please explain the Christian perspective on this?
Jay said:That is a baseless and, therefore worthless, assertion, and your subsequent pedagogy is no better. All you manage to demonstrate is an irresponsible ignorance of current scolarship or an arrogant willingness to discount it. You have every right to believe whatever you wish, but it suggests remarkable hubris that you would presume to instruct others.
Jay said:No, Jerrell, ignorance is ignorance, as you so clearly demonstrate. Start here.
JerryL said:But, of course, you cannot prove this claim.
John certainly lived quite a long time and in the circles of power, eventually moving to the capitol IIRC. Paul ruled the religion after Peter, having underlings like Luke and John Mark. There's no real evidence that the apostles were any more ridiculed than any public figure of today; in fact I'm not sure we can historically account that the bulk of them even existed.
JerryL said:Further, two of the gospels, by your own admission, were writen by people who never saw any of the events... so what's your assertation? That they really didn't see what they claim to have not seen?I agree with that.
JerryL said:You mean like what color Robe Jesus wore, or whether Judas evecierated or hung himself, or the two differing liniages of Adam-Joseph. There are plenty of specific details, and often they don't match (which is odd if we assume at least that last two authors had the writings of the first two).
JerryL said:So the Earlies Gospel is written when Jesus's contemporaries would have been in their 80s during a time where average life expectancy was less than half that? And that's the earliest gospel? That's not very reassuring.
JerryL said:Well Paul wasn't there for any of the events. And I'm not sure what 80+ year old witnesses who lived in a different subcontinent could offer (IIRC, Paul lived in Rome). You can't substantiate their sources either way; but create a timeline where most potential witnesses would be dead.
JerryL said:Just as the creationists don't believe the truths of geology, physics, and biology, just as the Christians don't believe the Zeus killed Chronos, just as you deny that Aliens retrieved the Heaven's Gate group; so we can always find a reason to doubt something.
JerryL said:Of course, that reason is much easier to find when there are so many valid ones floating around. I'm curious why you believe the Bible and not the Illiad.
Jerrell, I am truly sorry, but you are pathetically and irresponsibly ignorant about the very topic you presume to teach. The opportunity to change that condition is readily available to you ...Jerrell said:Don't presume to be God, or act as if you are, cause you are not.
Doktormartini said:How come Jesus has pretty much the exact same life as some of the saviors of pagan religions that were worshipped long before Jesus (Osiris, Dionysis, Mithra..etc)?
Jay said:Jerrell, I am truly sorry, but you are pathetically and irresponsibly ignorant about the very topic you presume to teach. The opportunity to change that condition is readily available to you ...
JerryL said:No it's really not. Purple and red are two different colors. At least one person is wrong. Color is not subjective, it is objective. Shall I point you at some color charts so you can see the objective standards?
Thank you, Jerrell.Jerrell said:So, all i know is that God is my Savior, and that I serve him, I wish you well Jay, ...
And people accuse the Gnostics of reading things into those texts.Jerrell said:...Jesus said Peter would be crucified (John 21:18-19), this is what happened...
If that is a description of crucifixion, then i'm a marshmellow.Jesus said, "Feed my sheep. I tell you the truth, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go." Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, "Follow me!"
Another case of selective reading?Jerrell said:...and also the Bible states that Judas hung himself, never anything about being evecierated.
Which books do you have in mind?No proof? It is a fact in the written history books that these men existed.
A couple of the apostles are, I believe, written about from direct experience outside the Bible. In particular Paul and Peter. Can you support all 12? Please do so if you can.Jesus was recorded by Roman and Jewish Historians, so did they write about the Apostles.
Then John did not write Revelations, as the author of revelations identifies himself as living in exile on the Greek island of Patmos.John was one of the Disciples who actually lived without being killed. John did not move to llRC(w/e that is) he lived in Ephesus with Mary the Mother of Jesus.
Paul wrote more of the NT than any other author. Who in the religion wielded more power than Paul after his conversion? Peter appears to have been his only nigh-equal.Paul did not rule the religion, he was the Apostle to the Gentiles, Paul taught others just as Preachers today teach others.
And that evidence would be where?And there is evidence that the Apostles were ridiculed more than mere men
Prove this claim.Jesus said Peter would be crucified (John 21:18-19), this is what happened, and every single Apostle including Paul was killed, except John.
Like the Illiad proves Zeus? 4 gospels: one attributed to someone who never met Jesus. Tell me what three books prove about 12 men?The Fact that this Gospel exists, is proof enough that the Apostles existed.
So then your claim is indeed that the gospel writers didn't claim to see it and didn't actually see it? Good.They didn't claim to see anything, they simply wrote about it. Just as any Author of an Encylopedia would, just becuase they didn't see it doesn't mean it didn't happen. You weren't there for WWII, or maybe not Vietnam, not even the Civil War, did theses happen? Men wrote about them too...
You don't seem to know your bible very well:dont know where you get your information from, but Jesus can wear a diffrent color robe on diffrent days...
and also the Bible states that Judas hung himself, never anything about being evecierated.
Very correct, but in doing so, Luke crosses Abraham. Let's just look at David down:The Two diffrent Liniages start from Diffrent Places. Matthew gives the genealogies from Jesus to Abraham, and Luke gives it from Jesus to Adam
I'm not discussing intent, I'm discussing factual error. What color was the robe? What was the mechanism of Judas's death? Who was Joseph's father?Mark and Luke did not just copy from John and Matthew, God uses diffrent individuals to convey a diffrent message, Each Gospel is unique.
Cite please.The Average Life Expectancy for Romans was less than half of 80, although many lived to be much older than that. The Average Life Expectancy for Jews was much higher than that of the Romans, becuase they lived the Kosher diet.
Speculative, and based on an unsubstantiate assertion. Please prove that the other apostles exsited, and that they were being persecuted and people were trying to kill them. Both Peter and Paul were quite public figures.John and the other Apostles were being persecuted, searched for, people were trying to kill them. If this was to happen to me i surely wouldn't sit down and write a book about somebody eles's life when mine was in jepordy, until i was safe.
Paul was a traveller throughout the region http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11567b.htmPaul did not live in Rome, Paul merely travled to Rome and was killed there upon his last visit there, Paul was a Jew and Lived in Judea.
1) It was a Ossuary (bone-box), not a tomb.Archeologist discoverd a tomb, and written on it was James, the Brother of Jesus...
That would be "me".I am sorry to say this, but that statement was stupid. Who said Creationist don't beleive in Geology, Physics, and Biology.
Go find the biology book that said that.Biology states that Life only arises from Life
The Romans believed that Zeus killed Chronos. The Heavan's Gate group believed that Aliens were coming to take their souls to paradise. The Christians believe that the Earth was formed by creating a firmament within the eternal waters. I see no difference between these three myths.No we dont believe Roman or Greek myths either, they are myths... and I have no idea what you mean about Aliens taking heaven's Gate, please enlighten me.
The Bible has not made a single extraordinart prophecy which can be shown to have been made before the event and for which the event can be shown to have occurd.Are you insulting me? The Bible is HIstory, filled with Prophecy, History fortold. So much prophecy has come true, that none can rpoove otherwise. The Illiad is a story, written of a myth, and Fairytale about the ideal of Greek society, Don't dare compare the Bible to it.
I respect that this is your belief, and I'm sorry if I've offended you, as I take it I have from all the bolding. I was just trying to get an answer to a question that's always bothered me, and you gave me your perspective. Thank you.Jerrell said:If you ask a group of people to tell you exactaly what happened on 9/11, all would give you diffrent accounts, THAT IS THE GOOD THING. With diffrent accounts you can get the whole story, peice things together, get a better understanding. Yes the Bible does have Human Perspective, becuase Jesus was seen by HUman Eyes, and Preached by Human Mouths. John wrote his Gospel for one reason, "[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica] that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God" John 20:31. The Gospels fit in Harmony and are Gos inspired for have we not been saved by the name of Jesus, which was the goal of the New Testament writers?
One Shouldn't expect to get the very same story, for the account of Jeus. If that was true all you wouldn need is one Gospel, but no, we have four, why? Becuase Each contains diffrent information not elaborated on by the Other, each was written for a diffrent crowd, that is God's way of explaining things, using diffrent people.
[/FONT]
Halcyon said:And people accuse the Gnostics of reading things into those texts.
If that is a description of crucifixion, then i'm a marshmellow.
Do you know where the tradition that Peter was crucified upside down came from Jerrell?
An apocryphal text called the Acts of Peter, in the same text Peter performs miracles such as making dogs talk and having a magical battle with Simon Magus - you can see why this wasn't included in the biblical NT. Why believe the martyrdom story?
Another case of selective reading?
Matthew has Judas hanging himself. Acts (Acts 1:18-19) has Judas falling over in a field and bursting open.
It seems you know a fair bit about your beliefs Jerrell, but i'm not sure you are truly able to answer the questions people are posing you here because of the nature of your faith. You seem to mix and match information between texts, discarding some completely and reading in meanings into passages that could mean a multitude of other things.
Amalgamating the NT into a single book may well work for you, and i'm hapopy that it does. However, there are many here who have researched the origins of the various texts, understand that they are not "God breathed" - that they were written at different times, are often the result of more than one authors work and contain specific messages, unrelated to the other works they have been collected with. Therefore, people are posing scholarly questions to you that your version of Christianity is not in a position to answer to their satisfaction.