Rincewind
Philosopher
So, pretty much all of the disciples weren't true believers, then?
Evidence that substantiates ANYTHING that happened in the Bible.
- Thread starter Quad4_72
- Start date
So, pretty much all of the disciples weren't true believers, then?
dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
There are often plot twists in works of fiction.
Rincewind
Philosopher
And there's always a need for NPCs...
justintime
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2012
- Messages
- 1,260
The problem with Christianity is there are too many believers today. The world population has grown to 7 billion and so have the Christian believers. By comparison there are only 55,000 subscribers of the Skeptic Magazine and some 1 million skeptics world wide.
The evangelical movement is a victim of its own success. There aren't enough souls to save unless Christians accept other primates as equals and expand their mission.
But can Christians ignore the skeptics? The atheist are lost forever but skeptics are just in denial, doubtful, questioning, uncertain and terribly insecure individuals. They are the right candidates for conversion.
We are basking in the mercy of grace because the world was spared for the sake of a few good believers. A few bad skeptics will not reverse that decision.
The evangelical movement is a victim of its own success. There aren't enough souls to save unless Christians accept other primates as equals and expand their mission.
But can Christians ignore the skeptics? The atheist are lost forever but skeptics are just in denial, doubtful, questioning, uncertain and terribly insecure individuals. They are the right candidates for conversion.
We are basking in the mercy of grace because the world was spared for the sake of a few good believers. A few bad skeptics will not reverse that decision.
Last edited:
TimCallahan
Philosopher
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 6,293
Actually, this thread is about the veracity of the Bible, irrespective of whether there is or isn't a God or gods. Perhaps you can answer the specific objections I have below, with respect to contradictions between the various gospels:
The contradictions I've pointed out to you are gross contradictions that cannot be harmonized, For example, either the women who met the angel at the tomb were so terrified that they ran away and told nobody of their encounter (Mark) or they told the disciples (Matthew). Either Jesus expressly gave the message he would meet the disciples in Galilee, and did so (Matthew) or he expressly told them not to leave Jerusalem (Luke). Either the risen Christ appeared to nobody (Mark), first appeared to women (Matthew and John) or did not appear to any of the women (Luke, 1 Corinthians).
justintime
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2012
- Messages
- 1,260
Christian don't have a problem with the resurrection of Christ. If you have searched so hard for the answer and still have found none. Then there are none so blind as those who will not see.
Maybe you serve best as a skeptic. You would be trampled for your slowness in a wave of Christian believers rushing to greet the savior. Your doubts are what is preserving you from a premature heavenly bliss and so are your good instincts.
dafydd
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 35,398
No.
Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2006
- Messages
- 23,510
Nor do Muslims have a problem with the idea that Mohammed was God's last true prophet. Mormons don't have a problem with the golden plates and the seer stones. Scientologists don't have a problem with Xenu.
This doesn't even begin to address Tim's question. Can you explain the many contradictions within the various canonical gospel accounts? Are you even aware of them?
Funny, I'll bet those are the same things that are prevening him from getting his own planet to be god of after this life, or ridding himself of his body thetans and attaining OT8, or getting 70 virgins in Heaven.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Almost all the information we have on Alexander the Great (the man who conquered Jerusalem and much of the known world) comes from writers writing over 350 years after his death. All the other writing except an offhand comment in a single letter and an inscription has been lost.
Actions speak louder than words. Jesus told his disciples go into all the world and "preach" the gospel. He didn't say hey guys write all this down and carry around heavy scrolls in your travels around the world for people who can't read anyway.
Last edited:
Tim, as you have done at least two other times, you state as fact an opinion you have. You can lose credibility when you keep doing this. This is why it is important for people to do their own research and not take anyone's comments as fact (including mine.)
The manuscripts from the Alexandria area didn't go beyond an empty tomb, but other manuscripts do have the resurrection. That could have been something as simple as the last page of the manuscript in the Alexandria area fell off with heavy use (passed around from person to person) and then was copied from that manuscript. Have you ever had a notebook where the end page ripped or came off, I have and I was the only one who used it.
But there are other explanations, for example in the article:
The Last 12 Verses of Mark
by Chuck Missler
"However, it seems that Irenaeus in 150 A.D., and also Hypolytus in the 2nd century, each quote from these disputed verses, so the documentary evidence is that they were deleted later in the Alexandrian texts, not added subsequently.)
But there is even more astonishing evidence for their original inclusion that is also profoundly instructive for broader reasons..."
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2000/201/
Last edited:
TimCallahan
Philosopher
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 6,293
Originally Posted by TimCallahan
In other words, you need to tell us who these nine sources are, so we can judge whether they were contemporaries with Jesus, near contemporaries or later writers.
Of course, this is not an answer to my question as to who these nine sources are. Please answer that question by listing the nine sources.
As to information on Alexander the Great, or, for that matter Julius Caesar, Augustus Caesar, etc., in addition to writings, we have coins struck during their lifetimes and busts made of them reliably dated to their lifetimes. In sharp contrast to this, we have no contemporary images of Jesus. The earliest images of him, made centuries after his time, depict him as a beardless youth. However, as a first century Jew, e would certainly have been bearded.
In addition to this iconographic evidence, we have inscriptions carved during or shortly after their lifetimes, bearing their names. The earliest mention of Jesus from a preserved document that I know of is the Rylands fragment. It has been dated to ca. 125 by palaeographic dating. However, as was pointed out by maximara on another thread, palaeogrphic dating is rather unreliable.
Again, we need to hear from you who your nine sources are.
In other words, you need to tell us who these nine sources are, so we can judge whether they were contemporaries with Jesus, near contemporaries or later writers.
Of course, this is not an answer to my question as to who these nine sources are. Please answer that question by listing the nine sources.
As to information on Alexander the Great, or, for that matter Julius Caesar, Augustus Caesar, etc., in addition to writings, we have coins struck during their lifetimes and busts made of them reliably dated to their lifetimes. In sharp contrast to this, we have no contemporary images of Jesus. The earliest images of him, made centuries after his time, depict him as a beardless youth. However, as a first century Jew, e would certainly have been bearded.
In addition to this iconographic evidence, we have inscriptions carved during or shortly after their lifetimes, bearing their names. The earliest mention of Jesus from a preserved document that I know of is the Rylands fragment. It has been dated to ca. 125 by palaeographic dating. However, as was pointed out by maximara on another thread, palaeogrphic dating is rather unreliable.
Again, we need to hear from you who your nine sources are.
TimCallahan
Philosopher
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 6,293
Originally Posted by TimCallahan
Actually, this thread is about the veracity of the Bible, irrespective of whether there is or isn't a God or gods. Perhaps you can answer the specific objections I have below, with respect to contradictions between the various gospels:
The contradictions I've pointed out to you are gross contradictions that cannot be harmonized, For example, either the women who met the angel at the tomb were so terrified that they ran away and told nobody of their encounter (Mark) or they told the disciples (Matthew). Either Jesus expressly gave the message he would meet the disciples in Galilee, and did so (Matthew) or he expressly told them not to leave Jerusalem (Luke). Either the risen Christ appeared to nobody (Mark), first appeared to women (Matthew and John) or did not appear to any of the women (Luke, 1 Corinthians).
Apparently, you've completely missed the points I made regarding the inconsistencies in the gospels accounts of the Resurrection. The gospels are purportedly witnessed events. However, they grossly contradict each other. Try explaining why that is so, rather than preaching at me.
Actually, this thread is about the veracity of the Bible, irrespective of whether there is or isn't a God or gods. Perhaps you can answer the specific objections I have below, with respect to contradictions between the various gospels:
The contradictions I've pointed out to you are gross contradictions that cannot be harmonized, For example, either the women who met the angel at the tomb were so terrified that they ran away and told nobody of their encounter (Mark) or they told the disciples (Matthew). Either Jesus expressly gave the message he would meet the disciples in Galilee, and did so (Matthew) or he expressly told them not to leave Jerusalem (Luke). Either the risen Christ appeared to nobody (Mark), first appeared to women (Matthew and John) or did not appear to any of the women (Luke, 1 Corinthians).
Apparently, you've completely missed the points I made regarding the inconsistencies in the gospels accounts of the Resurrection. The gospels are purportedly witnessed events. However, they grossly contradict each other. Try explaining why that is so, rather than preaching at me.
pipelineaudio
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2006
- Messages
- 5,092