Did Jesus Christ actually die?

[Skywalker]

Except that it is very unlikely that John wrote the book of John. That is only Christian tradition, it is not based upon facts or evidence. John was the last gospel written. It is the least likely to have any eyewitness testimony in it at all.

Historian Justin Martyr mentioned the gospel of John. Why Everyone Should Believe The Apostle John Wrote The Last Gospel | Reasons for Jesus

1. AN EARLY ROMAN WITNESS
We’ll start with Justin Martyr, who was writing from Rome in around 150 AD.

“In the memoirs [=Gospels], which I say have been composed by the apostles and those who followed them”… Dialogue with Trypho, 103.8.

Some skeptical scholars have suggested that Justin doesn’t know the Gospel of John. This strikes me as a silly notion. For starters, Justin implies that there were multiple Gospels. He says that apostles (plural) wrote them, so that would indicate at least two. Also, in Justin’s writings, he quotes John 3:3. See 1 Apology 61:4: “For Christ also said, ‘Except ye be born again, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.’

Justin also had a student by the name of Tatian. Just a generation later, Tatian wrote a harmony of the Gospels titled The Diatessaron. In Latin, Diatessaron quite literally means ‘made of four ingredients’. His harmony begins with: “In the beginning was the Word“, quoting John 1:1.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Historian Justin Martyr mentioned the gospel of John. Why Everyone Should Believe The Apostle John Wrote The Last Gospel | Reasons for Jesus

You might as well admit that you are wrong when you link a lying source. Instead you should look into the reasons how scholars know that John was not written by John.

Here are just some of the reasons that it was not thought to have been written by John:

"The language of the Gospel and its well-developed theology suggest that the author may have lived later than John and based his writing on John’s teachings and testimonies. Moreover, the facts that several episodes in the life of Jesus are recounted out of sequence with the Synoptics and that the final chapter appears to be a later addition suggest that the text may be a composite. The Gospel’s place and date of composition are also uncertain; many scholars suggest that it was written at Ephesus, in Asia Minor, about 100 CE for the purpose of communicating the truths about Christ to Christians of Hellenistic background."

Gospel According to John | Description, Authorship, & Facts | Britannica

 

[Skywalker]

You might as well admit that you are wrong when you link a lying source. Instead you should look into the reasons how scholars know that John was not written by John.

Here are just some of the reasons that it was not thought to have been written by John:

"The language of the Gospel and its well-developed theology suggest that the author may have lived later than John and based his writing on John’s teachings and testimonies. Moreover, the facts that several episodes in the life of Jesus are recounted out of sequence with the Synoptics and that the final chapter appears to be a later addition suggest that the text may be a composite. The Gospel’s place and date of composition are also uncertain; many scholars suggest that it was written at Ephesus, in Asia Minor, about 100 CE for the purpose of communicating the truths about Christ to Christians of Hellenistic background."

Gospel According to John | Description, Authorship, & Facts | Britannica

Justin Martyr didn't say that John didn't write the gospel of John.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Justin Martyr didn't say that John didn't write the gospel of John.

What?

 

[Skywalker]

What?

Iraenaeus said that John wrote the gospel of John. Why Everyone Should Believe The Apostle John Wrote The Last Gospel | Reasons for Jesus

2. EVIDENCE FROM WESTERN EUROPE
Next up, we have Irenaeus of Lyon, which is in modern-day France. In around 180 AD, Irenaeus wrote:

“Then [after the publication of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke] John, the disciple of the Lord, who had even rested on his breast, himself also gave forth the Gospel, while he was living at Ephesus in Asia.” (Cited in Eusebius, Church History 5:8, compare Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.1.1.)

Irenaeus was a pupil of Polycarp, and Polycarp learned from John himself when he was a youth and John was an elderly man. Irenaeus writes: “I can even describe the place where the blessed Polycarp used to sit and discourse — his going out, too, and his coming in — his general mode of life and personal appearance, together with the discourses which he delivered to the people; also how he would speak of his familiar intercourse with John, and with the rest of those who had seen the Lord; and how he would call their words to remembrance.” (Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus, Chapter 2)

Wow. That’s just one link in the chain of testimony between Irenaeus and the Apostle John.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Iraenaeus said that John wrote the gospel of John. Why Everyone Should Believe The Apostle John Wrote The Last Gospel | Reasons for Jesus

Do you have a valid source that backs up this claim?

 

[Skywalker]

Do you have a valid source that backs up this claim?

The writings of Iraenaeus are a valid source.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The writings of Iraenaeus are a valid source.

Why? And if so find a proper source that gives them. Do not use Liars for Jesus.

It is okay to get your ideas from Liars for Jesus, but they are never reliable sources themselves.

 

[Skywalker]

Why? And if so find a proper source that gives them. Do not use Liars for Jesus.

It is okay to get your ideas from Liars for Jesus, but they are never reliable sources themselves.

Iraenaeus was a historian. Who Wrote The Gospels? These 6 Ancient Sources Tell Us | Reasons for Jesus

4. Irenaeus of Lyons (ca. 130–200; Against Heresies 3.1.1–2; cf. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History5.8.1–4):
“So Matthew brought out a written gospel among the Jews in their own style, when Peter and Paul were preaching the gospel at Rome and founding the church. But after their demise Mark himself, the disciple and recorder of Peter, has also handed on to us in writing what had been proclaimed by Peter. And Luke, the follower of Paul, set forth in a book the gospel that was proclaimed by him. Later John, the disciple of the Lord and the one who leaned against his chest, also put out a Gospel while residing in Ephesus of Asia.”

So who was Irenaeus?

Irenaeus was a bishop in France and was a student of Polycarp, who was a student of the apostle John. (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3.3.3) This puts him up close to an eyewitness and Gospel writer. He wrote extensively against the heresy known as Marcionism.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Iraenaeus was a historian. Who Wrote The Gospels? These 6 Ancient Sources Tell Us | Reasons for Jesus

Not a valid source. It may be correct but the source itself is not a trustworthy so it does not support your claim.

 

[rational experiences]

To reason.

Science does not exist.

Natural created creation exists.

Using human intelligence to make this correct reasoning.

Man and men one self and lots of men agreed to science terms for machine want.

Want first motivates human to reason about creation.

Yet you don't own creation. You just own a human self. No machine science is fake.

So you make claims about earth products the only place you get science from.

Sun ejection from out of space historic body converted earth.

Did not convert your life or create your life it created a status conversion.

Was not natural. It was. Cause effect so is not any law.

You tried to copy emulate that theory by pyramid. Which factually makes you a not intelligent arrogant liar.

The church built for human healing had it resounding as a Phi structure. Taught it kept out the evil spirit by that reasoning. In the church you were safe from evil spirit phenomena conjuring.

Attacking life.

Why Christians Jesus said hypocrites as you were previously temple pyramid users who were involved as a caused attack.

Mass heavens natural.

Science causes UFO extra radiation fallout. Natural cools it is not healing.

Natural mass dealt with the condition.

Your ideas in science flawed.

Human statement taught in bible medical.

Statement said when God spirit gas emptied out it's deceased non burning spirit as science gave it light life the life DNA was removed sacrificed.

Attack irradiation stopped by the vacuum sucked out all burning. Sky went dark. Mother took body down from burning light a theme. Mother womb.

DNA sacrifice stopped. Life left harmed mutated. By damage to DNA.

Does stigmata come and go?

Yes. Evidence that the body can return to natural owned cell function after change.

Do you want to give human survival to Machine constant streaming is our question to our brother scientist?

Seeing he believes a reaction inside his machine by button pushing is linked to our atmospheric body.

Which proved consciously he knows the UFO effect changes when using machines as it is only reactive when he pushed the buttons. Is not the design machine reaction. Is not any product he puts into machine.

DNA got removed. DNA still existed why we are still human and not an ape man.

Jesus a human theme. Humans die as a natural status.

Did a man life die in that event?

Life says man DNA in body was removed and was taken away.

As it occurred.

For anyone to ask did someone die owns no logic of explanation.

If you ask did human life return to natural body function yes.

If you thought it a miracle that life survived the attack then you did. And still use that type of human expression today.

 

[Skywalker]

Not a valid source. It may be correct but the source itself is not a trustworthy so it does not support your claim.

Reasons for Jesus is no more biased than any other source. In a way everyone has a bias.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Reasons for Jesus is no more biased than any other source. In a way everyone has a bias.

Not so. You appear to have no rational reason for belief.

As the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If someone claimed that someone he knew did everything that Jesus did how much evidence would you require before you believed him?

 

[Skywalker]

Not so. You appear to have no rational reason for belief.

As the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If someone claimed that someone he knew did everything that Jesus did how much evidence would you require before you believed him?

Why is it an extraordinary claim to say that the apostle John or the other apostles wrote the gospels?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why is it an extraordinary claim to say that the apostle John or the other apostles wrote the gospels?

John was not educated. The author of John was. But you missed the point. The Gospels are not evidence. All of them make extraordinary claims and there is no evidence to support them. Why would a rational person believe them?

 

[Skywalker]

John was not educated. The author of John was. But you missed the point. The Gospels are not evidence. All of them make extraordinary claims and there is no evidence to support them. Why would a rational person believe them?

The historian Tertullian said that John wrote the gospel of John. Who Wrote The Gospels? These 6 Ancient Sources Tell Us | Reasons for Jesus

1. Tertullian of Carthage (ca. 160–225; Against Marcion 4.2.1–2):
“I lay it down to begin with that the documents of the gospel have the apostles for their authors, and that this task of promulgating the gospel was imposed upon them by the Lord himself. . . . In short, from among the apostles, John and Matthew implant in us the faith, while from among the apostolic men Luke and Mark reaffirm it.”

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

So, people say that Jesus Christ rose from the dead...

But if he rose from being supposedly "dead", was he ever really dead?

Surely by definition death is final?

I think whatever condition he was in was not death

I think he returned from a state that was medically similar to death

And that if It was truly death then he wouldn't have got up again!​

Yeah, He did. Honestly, I don't know why a Christian would have a problem with the doctrine of the Resurrection because a large part of Christianity is based around belief in it. You don't have to understand it. It's unfathomable by definition since it's God showing His power and suspending natural laws for a time. That's what a miracle is. It's best not to overthink theological matters. Just my $.02.

 

[Skywalker]

John was not educated. The author of John was. But you missed the point. The Gospels are not evidence. All of them make extraordinary claims and there is no evidence to support them. Why would a rational person believe them?

Historians in the time of Jesus would get in trouble if they didn't write what was accurate.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Historians in the time of Jesus would get in trouble if they didn't write what was accurate.

The Bible is not based upon the work of historians.

 

[Skywalker]

The Bible is not based upon the work of historians.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Some Ancient Historians Didn’t Mention Jesus: Proof He Didn’t Exist? | Reasons for Jesus

By James Bishop| Jesus mythicists are often guilty of arguing from silence when they attempt to bring doubt to the historical existence of Jesus Christ, the founder of the Christian religion. They will argue that because certain ancient writers did not mention Jesus when they “should” have, it follows that Jesus did not exist.

There are several reasons why all historians find this argument unconvincing. We will note some of these in response to an atheist writer (almost all mythicists are atheists, it is worth noting) Michael Paulkovich who back in 2014 argued Jesus is not mentioned in 126 historical texts that should have mentioned him and therefore is a mythical figure (1).

A few caveats. Arguing from silence is something that needs to be clarified. There are times when making an argument from silence is acceptable and can even be compelling to render doubt about something. If, for example, my father tells me that he met the distinguished Nelson Mandela when he was released from prison in 1990 and then had lunch with him to discuss the future of the new South Africa, I would expect there to be evidence for this significant encounter.

But if I could find no evidence of this encounter, perhaps there being no photos and no mentioning of it in my father’s diaries and journals, or nothing in the many media reports of the time, or if it is unknown to other relatives close to my father, etc., then a strong argument from silence could be made that my father did not meet Nelson Mandela in 1990. I would expect evidence for that event but the absence of evidence renders severe doubt.