• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why I CANNOT Believe in The Resurrection

PureX

Veteran Member
So you're saying Jesus didn't really rise bodily from the tomb. It's all a hoax designed to convey a belief like Hercules and Zeus.
IT'S A STORY!

What part of that can't you understand? It reflects real world circumstances, but it represents an ideal. That is it's purpose: to convey an ideal. It does not have to be historically accurate to convey it's ideal. In fact, most stories convey their ideal better by being partly historically accurate, and partly fictionalized. Which is why nearly all mythical stories employ some historical fact, and some symbolic fiction.
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
IT'S A STORY!

What part of that can't you understand? It reflects real world circumstances, but it represents an ideal. That is it's purpose: to convey an ideal. It does not have to be historically accurate to convey it's ideal. In fact, most stories convey their ideal better by being partly historically accurate, and partly fictionalized. Which is why nearly all mythical stories employ some historical fact, and some symbolic fiction.

Do you believe that without Jesus you are not saved?
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
They were eyewitness testimonies and you’re still accountable to God for what’s written in the Scriptures. We are now in the period of the ministry of the Holy Spirit who we are also accountable to.
“But very truly I tell you, it is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment: about sin, because people do not believe in me; about righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; and about judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned.”
‭‭John‬ ‭16:7-11‬ ‭NIV‬‬
This is very sad you trying to sell me on this stuff. Secular historians say they are NOT eyewitness accounts. Read it and weep:

The majority of New Testament scholars agree that the Gospels do NOT contain eyewitness accounts; but that they present the theologies of their communities rather than the testimony of eyewitnesses.

Historical reliability of the Gospels - Wikipedia
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Sure, one can doubt anything, but lets consider something quickly.
There was people who knew Jesus, they were apostles and disciples.
They wrote what they knew about him.
They went around the Jewish world, preached in synagogues, and made many Jews to accept Jesus as their Messiah.
These people also knew Jesus, or there was a lot of people who knew him, and remembered when He taught in their villages, and if these Apostles and Disciples would have concocted lies, they would have been corrected and such scriptures would have survived.

Therefore, by pure peer observation, it is highly impropable that Jesus never existed, and totally propable that the reason why these apostles gave their lives in believing that Jesus was ressurrected from the dead, and that He did exist.
Furthermore, it was the same first Christians who collected the writings about Jesus, and their desacendends who kept it safe during 300 years of persecution that gave us the NT.
people such as Polycarp, who knew John well, certainly would not have given his life by burning, if he thought there was a scant hint of corruption in the history of Jesus and the apostles.

I would like to continue, but it is time to go home now.

Show us what the apostles wrote about Jesus. Historians cannot even prove the apostles existed.
 
This is very sad you trying to sell me on this stuff. Secular historians say they are NOT eyewitness accounts. Read it and weep:

The majority of New Testament scholars agree that the Gospels do NOT contain eyewitness accounts; but that they present the theologies of their communities rather than the testimony of eyewitnesses.

Historical reliability of the Gospels - Wikipedia
Read Wikipedia and weep? Lol But now your comments are showing your original post was disingenuous. I have to laugh when I hear the “scholar” references.
 
This is very sad you trying to sell me on this stuff. Secular historians say they are NOT eyewitness accounts. Read it and weep:

The majority of New Testament scholars agree that the Gospels do NOT contain eyewitness accounts; but that they present the theologies of their communities rather than the testimony of eyewitnesses.

Historical reliability of the Gospels - Wikipedia
“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life— the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us— that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. And these things we write to you that your joy may be full.”
‭‭I John‬ ‭1:1-4‬ ‭NKJV‬‬
Just because someone claims to be a scholar doesn’t mean much, especially when they are false teachers.
 
This is very sad you trying to sell me on this stuff. Secular historians say they are NOT eyewitness accounts. Read it and weep:

The majority of New Testament scholars agree that the Gospels do NOT contain eyewitness accounts; but that they present the theologies of their communities rather than the testimony of eyewitnesses.

Historical reliability of the Gospels - Wikipedia
“For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain. And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”
‭‭II Peter‬ ‭1:16-21‬ ‭NKJV‬‬
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
But what about the resurrection?


What about it? I’m agnostic on that point. I try not to get hung up on religious dogma of any sort. I certainly don’t believe that any one faith has a monopoly on the truth.

I do believe in a loving God, the God Jesus referred to as the father. Was Jesus the Son of God? I think we are all the Sons and Daughters of God.

Did Jesus die on the cross for our sins, then rise again from the dead, to show us all that death has no power? I can’t completely abandon the idea. Even though it does sound absurd.
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
What about it? I’m agnostic on that point. I try not to get hung up on religious dogma of any sort. I certainly don’t believe that any one faith has a monopoly on the truth.

I do believe in a loving God, the God Jesus referred to as the father. Was Jesus the Son of God? I think we are all the Sons and Daughters of God.

Did Jesus die on the cross for our sins, then rise again from the dead, to show us all that death has no power? I can’t completely abandon the idea. Even though it does sound absurd.
We're closer in our philosophies than I thought. ;)
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
“For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain. And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”
‭‭II Peter‬ ‭1:16-21‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

II peter is a forgery. Peter, if he existed, did not write that.

Although 2 Peter internally purports to be a work of the apostle, most biblical scholars have concluded that Peter is not the author, and instead consider the epistle pseudepigraphical.

Authorship of the Petrine epistles - Wikipedia

I quote scholarship. You just quote forged documents.

The majority of New Testament scholars agree that the Gospels do NOT contain eyewitness accounts;
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
II peter is a forgery. Peter, if he existed, did not write that.

Although 2 Peter internally purports to be a work of the apostle, most biblical scholars have concluded that Peter is not the author, and instead consider the epistle pseudepigraphical.

Authorship of the Petrine epistles - Wikipedia

I quote scholarship. You just quote forged documents.

The majority of New Testament scholars agree that the Gospels do NOT contain eyewitness accounts;
Do you even believe that God exists at all????
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Do you believe that without Jesus you are not saved?
Without the story of Jesus' life, death, and ressurrection I may well have never discerned the message, or recognized the promise it contains. Though it could have been discerned in other ways, and by some other religions, even.

Then again, lots of people have read the story of Jesus and still have not discerned the message, or understood the promise it offers, because they got all caught up in the useless pursuit of historical factuality, or the religious fantasies instigated by magical thinking.
 
Last edited:

Colt

Well-Known Member
When dealing with anti-Christs people need to remember that the apostles would have had understudies do their writing as was the custom in that age.
 
II peter is a forgery. Peter, if he existed, did not write that.

Although 2 Peter internally purports to be a work of the apostle, most biblical scholars have concluded that Peter is not the author, and instead consider the epistle pseudepigraphical.

Authorship of the Petrine epistles - Wikipedia

I quote scholarship. You just quote forged documents.

The majority of New Testament scholars agree that the Gospels do NOT contain eyewitness accounts;
Too funny bro, do you even know what books of the Bible are considered the Gospels?
II peter is a forgery. Peter, if he existed, did not write that.

Although 2 Peter internally purports to be a work of the apostle, most biblical scholars have concluded that Peter is not the author, and instead consider the epistle pseudepigraphical.

Authorship of the Petrine epistles - Wikipedia

I quote scholarship. You just quote forged documents.

The majority of New Testament scholars agree that the Gospels do NOT contain eyewitness accounts;
If you’re authority of whether or not Scripture is accurate is coming from Wikipedia it explains why you’re confused.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
The gospels are NOT biographies in the modern sense of the word. Rather, they are stories told in such a way as to evoke a certain image of Jesus for a particular audience."

I think the Gospels begin with a 'confession' of faith, Jesus crucified, lives, and the narrative (story) is the vehicle of transmission. Are they penned by eye witnesses ,no, but there was an older oral tradition handed down. And each evangelist wrote for a particular audience, his community, There is no evidence of Jesus outside of the NT, the closest is only that of Pliny, 'Christians sing a hymn to Christ as a God'. Unless one wants to bring up Josephus, not very reliable.
Another thing to consider, there was belief in a general resurrection before Jesus.
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Too funny bro, do you even know what books of the Bible are considered the Gospels?

If you’re authority of whether or not Scripture is accurate is coming from Wikipedia it explains why you’re confused.


What a lame response. You quoted II Peter--I told you it's a forgery and I proved it with scholarship. What did you produce beside insults?
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
I think you missed the point that Jesus was Not resurrected back to his old physical body, but his God resurrected Jesus back to his former pre-human heavenly spirit body.
This is why after his resurrection Jesus used different materialized bodies.
People did Not recognize the resurrected Jesus until he revealed himself to them - see Luke 24:13-43
And yet the very word “resurrection” is a very common Greek term denoting a very common and physical experience. It literally means “to stand up” (out of bed in the morning — to get up from sleep). And when Jesus appeared to his disciples, he showed them physical wounds and was hungry. So resurrection is, in some way, a very physical thing.
 
Top