[Misc] Christians seem to be really good people

[BadFish]

It's no laughing matter, I have realised that Jesus is the only way.

I believe that Deuteronomy 23:1 explains why there are so many non believers on here.

 

[BadFish]

Now is the time to follow the instruction of Genesis 38:8-10

Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform your duty as a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother

obviously being very careful of Leviticus 20
And if a man shall lie with a woman having her sickness, and shall uncover her nakedness; he hath discovered her fountain, and she hath uncovered the fountain of her blood: and both of them shall be cut off from among their people.”

It's a bloody minefield.

 

[kuzushi]

1. The opposite is most likely accurate - the fact that so many gospels were written indicates that there were a myriad of leaders of religious sects in the region at the time - demonstrating that it is likely the Jesus of the modern bible was an amalgam of the story of a number of different individuals.

First of all, you have provided no evidence for what you are saying here whatsoever, and as far as I know there is none.
Read this: "Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that a human Jesus existed,[5][6][7][8] but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the biblical accounts of Jesus,[9] and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[10][11][12] Elements whose historical authenticity is disputed include the two accounts of the Nativity of Jesus, the miraculous events including the resurrection, and certain details about the crucifixion." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_reliability_of_the_Gospels

So not only are virtually all scholars in agreement that the man Jesus existed, but there is almost universal assent that he was baptised by John the Baptist and crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate. There are elements that are disputed, which does not mean they are refuted, it just means that there is not consensus on those points. Let's not have any more nonsense regarding whether or not Jesus existed as a person.

Secondly, what you say is a logical fallacy. The fact that so many gospels were written does not indicate that there was a myriad of leaders of religious sects in the region at the time - and does not demonstrate that it is likely the Jesus of the modern bible was an amalgam of the story of a number of different individuals. This is utterly spurious. It would be like saying the fact that lots of journalists have written about Lionel Messi indicates that there are a lot of footballers and that the Messi we see on TV is an amalgam of a whole bunch of different individuals.

Of course you are free to say what you like, but it would be more helpful if your contributions were factually based rather than mere conjecture, and if you still insist on doing so, at least understand that you are going against virtually all scholars of antiquity. I say unfounded because you have said it without reference to any sources or anything to back it up at all. If you want to say something that goes against the consensus of experts in this field, you have to do better than just pulling things out of thin air. If you do have something solid to back up what you are saying, by all means let us know, and while you're at it you could submit it for peer review by experts.

2. The New Testament isn't a book - it is a collection of a series of writings from countless different authors in different languages (proven by the study of the language and syntax used in the original texts) - and because of the major discrepancies in the texts, clearly about numerous different religious characters written over a period of probably 150 years.

3. It had nothing to do with 'the most correct ones' going 'into the canon' - The first synod to draft the canons was a political move by Constantine to gain control, using Christianity, over his empire - he need the help of the Christian sects as a power base for his rule and the canons were assembled to appease different local religious leaders. The second synod in 382CE was part of a schism over who should control Constantinople. The series of synods that led to the formation of the bible most closely aligned with the modern Western bible (but not the Eastern Orthodox version) took place in the late fourth and early fifth centuries CE and were designed to exert political control over North Africa by the Church in Rome - the local religious leaders in the region were exercising too much local control and attempting one-upmanship on each other in an effort to extend their local political and economic influence - and these synods were designed to pull them back into line under the control of Rome. These synods ultimately led to the persecution of various sects who, while Christian in origin, were gaining too much influence through adapting to local circumstances and cultures. These synods were also used to align the Christian Church with the dominant political establishment of the period through active support for political authority and offering religious support in return for Church control over religious belief. The documents that eventually ended up in the bible of this period were designed to facilitate the exercise of this political patronage.

4. So your assertions in relation to the origins of the bible are based on religious fundamentalism that has been passed down over the last 300 years - and in reality based on the notion of manifest destiny that is the backbone of the religious right in America -

Er, no. All I said is that they chose the most correct ones. Don't know how you get from that to talking about America.

the blind faith that Jesus existed -

My understanding that Jesus existed is supported by scholarly opinion. If anything, you're the one flying in the face of reality here.

that he was the son of God - and that the Gospels are historically accurate - the reality is that we do not know if there was ever a historical figure of Jesus -

Yes we do. He's as much as figure of history as Caesar or Cleopatra or anyone else.

if he did exist he could have been the son of a carpenter and his much, much, much younger wife, and not the son of a deity - and there is very little in the bible that is historically accurate (something that has been shown by the research of countless biblical scholars).

That's not true either. Let me ask you a question: Was Pontius Pilate a real person? Was there ever a historical figure of Pontius Pilate?

 

[Blues Guitarist]

First of all, you have provided no evidence for what you are saying here whatsoever, and as far as I know there is none.

Can you please provide evidence that god exists, that he created the universe and life on earth, and that Jesus is his son?

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Can you please provide evidence that god exists, that he created the universe and life on earth, and that Jesus is his son?

I thought I'd proved it using simultaneous equations earlier.
Then I realised I'd misread one of the indices as a subtraction
Back to the drawing board.

 

[kuzushi]

Can you please provide evidence that god exists, that he created the universe and life on earth, and that Jesus is his son?

That's a very good question.
God has set it up for you so that you can logically work your way towards finding him.

You establish whether Jesus was real or not.
You establish whether he was crucified or not.
You establish whether his disciples sincerely believed in his resurrection or not.

If you get that far, you then have to explain why they believed in it.
If you conclude that it is because it happened, then you are on the threshold of answering the question.

 

[Bold Seagull]

First of all, you have provided no evidence for what you are saying here whatsoever, and as far as I know there is none.
Read this: "Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that a human Jesus existed,[5][6][7][8] but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the biblical accounts of Jesus,[9] and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[10][11][12] Elements whose historical authenticity is disputed include the two accounts of the Nativity of Jesus, the miraculous events including the resurrection, and certain details about the crucifixion." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_reliability_of_the_Gospels

So not only are virtually all scholars in agreement that the man Jesus existed, but there is almost universal assent that he was baptised by John the Baptist and crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate. There are elements that are disputed, which does not mean they are refuted, it just means that there is not consensus on those points. Let's not have any more nonsense regarding whether or not Jesus existed as a person.

Secondly, what you say is a logical fallacy. The fact that so many gospels were written does not indicate that there was a myriad of leaders of religious sects in the region at the time - and does not demonstrate that it is likely the Jesus of the modern bible was an amalgam of the story of a number of different individuals. This is utterly spurious. It would be like saying the fact that lots of journalists have written about Lionel Messi indicates that there are a lot of footballers and that the Messi we see on TV is an amalgam of a whole bunch of different individuals.

Scholars also agree that even within Palestine at the time of the Roman occupation multiple sects existed, four of the most prominent in terms of influence were Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes, and a sect called the Fourth Philosophy. If you believe in sources as you do, it is recorded that Jesus interacted with these sects. That’s as Christianity formed you’re talking 40-100 years later that gospels were written and it would be completely logical that at the time the gospels were being written, given the time frame, different Christian branches were forming.

Not sure you can dismiss the modern Bible’s depiction of Jesus being an amalgamation of various stories from different sects or beliefs as falacy. He supposedly performed 37 miracles, none of which there is evidence for other than what is written some 100 years later.

 

[Insel affe]

That's a very good question.
God has set it up for you so that you can logically work your way towards finding him.

You establish whether Jesus was real or not.
You establish whether he was crucified or not.
You establish whether his disciples sincerely believed in his resurrection or not.

If you get that far, you then have to explain why they believed in it.
If you conclude that it is because it happened, then you are on the threshold of answering the question.

So, in layman's terms....

You can't....

 

[Blues Guitarist]

That's a very good question.

The ball is in your court to provide evidence.

But I will address your points. To establish whether Jesus was real or not I read the New Testament. With so many contradictions it is very clear that Jesus, as described in the bible, did not exist. You don't have to look past his birth. Matthew and Luke contradict each other over the year he was born, exactly where he was born, his genealogy, where the family lived and what happened after the birth. So either Matthew is wrong, or Luke is wrong or they are both wrong - so Jesus didn't exist.

 

[kuzushi]

Scholars also agree that even within Palestine at the time of the Roman occupation multiple sects existed, four of the most prominent in terms of influence were Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes, and a sect called the Fourth Philosophy. If you believe in sources as you do, it is recorded that Jesus interacted with these sects. That’s as Christianity formed you’re talking 40-100 years later that gospels were written and it would be completely logical that at the time the gospels were being written, given the time frame, different Christian branches were forming.

Not sure you can dismiss the modern Bible’s depiction of Jesus being an amalgamation of various stories from different sects or beliefs as falacy. He supposedly performed 37 miracles, none of which there is evidence for other than what is written some 100 years later.

You make it sound like there is only written evidence for miracles dating from the year 130AD, but as we read in the Encyclopedia Britannica, "the First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, probably written about 53–54 CE at Ephesus, Asia Minor, deals with problems that arose in the early years after Paul’s initial missionary visit (c. 50–51) to Corinth and his establishment there of a Christian community." So, 50-51AD is not 100 years later. More like 20.

Within it we read this:
"Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them – yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.
But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he ‘has put everything under his feet’. Now when it says that ‘everything’ has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptised for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptised for them? 30 And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? I face death every day – yes, just as surely as I boast about you in Christ Jesus our Lord. If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus with no more than human hopes, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised,
‘Let us eat and drink,
for tomorrow we die.’
Do not be misled: ‘Bad company corrupts good character.’ Come back to your senses as you ought, and stop sinning; for there are some who are ignorant of God – I say this to your shame.
But someone will ask, ‘How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?’ How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body. Not all flesh is the same: people have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendour of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendour of the earthly bodies is another. The sun has one kind of splendour, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendour.
So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven. As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the heavenly man, so also are those who are of heaven. And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man.
I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I tell you a mystery: we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed – in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: ‘Death has been swallowed up in victory.’
‘Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?’
The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labour in the Lord is not in vain."

 

[Bold Seagull]

You make it sound like there is only written evidence for miracles dating from the year 130AD, but as we read in the Encyclopedia Britannica, "the First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, probably written about 53–54 CE at Ephesus, Asia Minor, deals with problems that arose in the early years after Paul’s initial missionary visit (c. 50–51) to Corinth and his establishment there of a Christian community." So, 50-51AD is not 100 years later. More like 20.

Within it we read this:
"Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them – yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.
But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he ‘has put everything under his feet’. Now when it says that ‘everything’ has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptised for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptised for them? 30 And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? I face death every day – yes, just as surely as I boast about you in Christ Jesus our Lord. If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus with no more than human hopes, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised,
‘Let us eat and drink,
for tomorrow we die.’
Do not be misled: ‘Bad company corrupts good character.’ Come back to your senses as you ought, and stop sinning; for there are some who are ignorant of God – I say this to your shame.
But someone will ask, ‘How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?’ How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body. Not all flesh is the same: people have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendour of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendour of the earthly bodies is another. The sun has one kind of splendour, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendour.
So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven. As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the heavenly man, so also are those who are of heaven. And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man.
I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I tell you a mystery: we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed – in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: ‘Death has been swallowed up in victory.’
‘Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?’
The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labour in the Lord is not in vain."

Pure deflection. I said in my post 40-100 years in terms of gospels, not other texts, however the accuracy of that was not the point as well you know.

 

[kuzushi]

The ball is in your court to provide evidence.

But I will address your points. To establish whether Jesus was real or not I read the New Testament. With so many contradictions it is very clear that Jesus, as described in the bible, did not exist. You don't have to look past his birth. Matthew and Luke contradict each other over the year he was born, exactly where he was born, his genealogy, where the family lived and what happened after the birth. So either Matthew is wrong, or Luke is wrong or they are both wrong - so Jesus didn't exist.

I thought you said you were a great liker of Bart Ehrman.
You like him but think he's totally wrong, then?
Because as I am sure you know, he and virtually all scholars are already at the third step.


You establish whether Jesus was real or not.
You establish whether he was crucified or not.
You establish whether his disciples sincerely believed in his resurrection or not. <---This is where you can start.
If you get that far, you then have to explain why they believed in it (either because it happened, or you can invoke group hallucination if you believe it's a thing, or some other theory).



"Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that a human Jesus existed,[5][6][7][8] but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the biblical accounts of Jesus,[9] and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.

 

[Insel affe]

You make it sound like there is only written evidence for miracles dating from the year 130AD, but as we read in the Encyclopedia Britannica, "the First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, probably written about 53–54 CE at Ephesus, Asia Minor, deals with problems that arose in the early years after Paul’s initial missionary visit (c. 50–51) to Corinth and his establishment there of a Christian community." So, 50-51AD is not 100 years later. More like 20.

Within it we read this:
"Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them – yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.
But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he ‘has put everything under his feet’. Now when it says that ‘everything’ has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptised for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptised for them? 30 And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? I face death every day – yes, just as surely as I boast about you in Christ Jesus our Lord. If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus with no more than human hopes, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised,
‘Let us eat and drink,
for tomorrow we die.’
Do not be misled: ‘Bad company corrupts good character.’ Come back to your senses as you ought, and stop sinning; for there are some who are ignorant of God – I say this to your shame.
But someone will ask, ‘How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?’ How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body. Not all flesh is the same: people have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendour of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendour of the earthly bodies is another. The sun has one kind of splendour, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendour.
So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven. As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the heavenly man, so also are those who are of heaven. And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man.
I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I tell you a mystery: we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed – in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: ‘Death has been swallowed up in victory.’
‘Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?’
The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labour in the Lord is not in vain."

Your gonna be so pissed off when you pass on, and arrive at the gates of Helheim.

 

[kuzushi]

Your gonna be so pissed off when you pass on, and arrive at the gates of Helheim.

Do you have any evidence for that?

 

[Insel affe]

Do you have any evidence for that?

About as much as you do for heaven, God and Jesus, you see it is an even older religion than yours.
It was an oral religion and things are open to misinterpretation, distortion and embellishment, just like your religion.

 

[kuzushi]

About as much as you do for heaven, God and Jesus, you see it is an even older religion than yours.
It was an oral religion and things are open to misinterpretation, distortion and embellishment, just like your religion.

Must be quite strong evidence then.

 

[Eeyore]

You make it sound like there is only written evidence for miracles dating from the year 130AD, but as we read in the Encyclopedia Britannica, "the First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, probably written about 53–54 CE at Ephesus, Asia Minor, deals with problems that arose in the early years after Paul’s initial missionary visit (c. 50–51) to Corinth and his establishment there of a Christian community." So, 50-51AD is not 100 years later. More like 20.

Within it we read this:
"Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them – yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.
But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he ‘has put everything under his feet’. Now when it says that ‘everything’ has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.
Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptised for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptised for them? 30 And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? I face death every day – yes, just as surely as I boast about you in Christ Jesus our Lord. If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus with no more than human hopes, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised,
‘Let us eat and drink,
for tomorrow we die.’
Do not be misled: ‘Bad company corrupts good character.’ Come back to your senses as you ought, and stop sinning; for there are some who are ignorant of God – I say this to your shame.
But someone will ask, ‘How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?’ How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body. Not all flesh is the same: people have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendour of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendour of the earthly bodies is another. The sun has one kind of splendour, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendour.
So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven. As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the heavenly man, so also are those who are of heaven. And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man.
I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I tell you a mystery: we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed – in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: ‘Death has been swallowed up in victory.’
‘Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?’
The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labour in the Lord is not in vain."

One of the key issues to consider concerning New Testament composition is not the actual dates that transcripts were written but the earliest copies that are in existence.

In the case of Corinthians, this would be at least 50+ years later. It's a long time since my biblical studies, but I seem to remember that the latter part of the second century is where fragments appear.

So this is around 150 years after the event.

One of my problems is that we know stuff was altered in historical manuscripts and that, given with what little contradiction there is, it's astonishing that so much seems to have disappeared (I'd love to take a look in the Vatican vaults).

My fascination was secular references to Christ, rather than biblical ones. There are precious few in the first 70 years. I found reference to a 'Crucified sophist' in a Roman one talking about Christians, and there is Josephus in, I think, the Antiquities, which is so obviously altered that it is embarrassing.

Jesus existed, most, through a chain of events, would conclude this. But there is such a minimal amount of evidence (not later re-produced evidence) for anything else. It's all a matter of faith.

And folk like Josh McDowell, for example, cannot convince me otherwise.

 

[Blues Guitarist]

I thought you said you were a great liker of Bart Ehrman.
You like him but think he's totally wrong, then?
Because as I am sure you know, he and virtually all scholars are already at the third step.


You establish whether Jesus was real or not.
You establish whether he was crucified or not.
You establish whether his disciples sincerely believed in his resurrection or not. <---This is where you can start.
If you get that far, you then have to explain why they believed in it (either because it happened, or you can invoke group hallucination if you believe it's a thing, or some other theory).



"Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that a human Jesus existed,[5][6][7][8] but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the biblical accounts of Jesus,[9] and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.

If I'm so obviously wrong, please tell me what is wrong with my evidence and my argument.

 

[Baldseagull]

That's a very good question.
God has set it up for you so that you can logically work your way towards finding him.

You establish whether Jesus was real or not.
You establish whether he was crucified or not.
You establish whether his disciples sincerely believed in his resurrection or not.

If you get that far, you then have to explain why they believed in it.
If you conclude that it is because it happened, then you are on the threshold of answering the question.

What is your definition of "logically"?
Logically, if God wanted me to know the truth, he would tell me, unless this is some sort of divine game of hide and seek. If it is important to him that I have to find the correct religion amongst the many red herrings, against reason, and by reading a text that was cobbled together from texts written over centuries if not millennia, and making sense of all the contradictions contained therein, then he is a twat.



You can be fairly confident Jesus existed, and that he was crucified, but it is not an absolute fact.
There are a number of different ways of answering the question of how come it is written that he appeared to people as real flesh and blood after he was taken down from the cross.
1. He didn't, this bit of the story is made up, and no one claimed they saw him alive after, but it is easier to sell his teachings if he looks a bit special, so it got added into the story.
2. They saw Thomas and thought he was Jesus, Thomas and Didymus both mean Twin, whose twin was he?
3. They stole his body from the Tomb, and claimed he had risen, for the reasons above.
4. Jesus did die on the cross but was resuscitated, not resurrected, before brain death occurred.
5. Jesus did not die on the cross, and was nursed back to health.

OR, magic!

 

[Baldseagull]

Bus load of Nuns goes over a Cliff, they all die and end up queuing outside the Pearly Gates with St. Peter.
St. Peter asks the first Nun in the queue, as a bride of Christ, this is quite important, have you had any experience with a male "member".
The Nun replies that she did once see Father Brian stepping out of the shower and saw his penis, St Peter tells her to splash her eyes with the holy water in the font and she can proceed to heaven.
He asks the second Nun in the queue the same question, she replies that she once touched Father Brian's penis when he was bedridden and needed bed bathing.
St. Peter tells her to wash her hands in the Holy Water in the font, and she can proceed to Heaven.
At that point a scuffle breaks out in the queue as one Nun is trying to jump in front of a couple of others in the queue, St. Peter calls out "Ladies! Ladies! there is no need to rush, I will deal with you all in time". The Nun that was trying to push in replies, "Yes, but I don't want to have to gargle that Holy water after these two have washed their Arseholes in it!"