How would you answer?

[traveller]

Okay quotes working on a small post. lol.

I am just messed up. Everyone else in the world seems to have no problems with this

Woe is me.

Honestly? I have no idea why that long post won't work. I edited it trying to fix it, but couldn't. I have no idea what's wrong. Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees?

If anyone sees the problem, please let me know as well.

[artsylady]

Honestly? I have no idea why that long post won't work. I edited it trying to fix it, but couldn't. I have no idea what's wrong. noidea.gif Maybe we can't see the forest for the trees? noidea.gif

I think Island Rose was going to try to fix it too.

She suggested I just try to make shorter posts. I'll try that next time. This time actually.

[WISDOM]

I replied on this in the other thread in the same post I apologized on.

But I'll bring it up here for posterity.

Me and Artsylady are talking about the origins of the Bible, the Bible that tells you everything about his resurrection.

I'm trying to convey the message that the new Testament, ALL OF IT, was written after Jesus died, which means after his RESURRECTION. During this time, pooled from other writings of the time, we see that allegorical literature was the in thing. If I were to write a book and make a super hero, he'd better do better than the heroes before him did. So, one up it, he didn't just RISE FROM THE GRAVE and ASCEND TO HEAVEN. We have witnesses, it's common with a lot of rehashed stories. Nothing new or different here except for maybe the bones, but it screams of one-ups-manship. It's sensationalized, which was what writers did back then.

Is the Matrix sensationalized? WE STILL DO IT!

It's hard to talk about hypothetical bones.

Matt....I've read your posts on two different threads and I can tell you that all you've been doing is philosophying your way AROUND my question. I could respect your response much, much better if you'll say, "I don't know", because then that leaves room for sincere and BALANCED research (if one wants that). However, you have intentionally ducked out an honestly reply to the question. Again I ask you or any of the other atheist posting here to explain to me, WHAT HAPPENED to the BODY?? I don't want any excuses such as pointing to allegoric writings, because that has proven not to fly with honest historical research and debate.

[artsylady]

How likely would it be for the creator of superman to die rather than renounce him as real? On top of that, how likely would it be it all of his editors, fellow writers, artists, plus a thousand of his readers would also die for this belief?

[Smalcald]

How likely would it be for the creator of superman to die rather than renounce him as real? On top of that, how likely would it be it all of his editors, fellow writers, artists, plus a thousand of his readers would also die for this belief?

Exactly my point Artsy, the 9/11 hijackers died for their BELIEFS. It's that easy for anyone to do it.

My personal thing is, if beliefs didn't exist, we wouldn't kill ourselves so much.

matt

Maybe, although I am sure about that, I am not sure the evidence would support that. Violence is perpetrated by people who believe things, and by people who believe nothing. I think if we could change human nature to not have desire for self, to forget our own selves to move toward ultimate love which means ultimate humility, as both Christ and Buddha taught, then you may have something. But even if we take away all beliefs, people will still have self motivations, they will still want power, want things, want control, want land, want pleasure, and without beliefs outside of their own desires, why not simply kill somebody else and take those things to satisfy our own desires and needs?

[artsylady]

Exactly my point Artsy, the 9/11 hijackers died for their BELIEFS. It's that easy for anyone to do it.

So you then must believe that these Christians really did in fact beleive. They didn't simply make Jesus up and write him into a superhero as you've suggested.

More common ground?

[Fiosh]

I replied on this in the other thread in the same post I apologized on.

But I'll bring it up here for posterity.

Me and Artsylady are talking about the origins of the Bible, the Bible that tells you everything about his resurrection.

I'm trying to convey the message that the new Testament, ALL OF IT, was written after Jesus died, which means after his RESURRECTION. During this time, pooled from other writings of the time, we see that allegorical literature was the in thing. If I were to write a book and make a super hero, he'd better do better than the heroes before him did. So, one up it, he didn't just RISE FROM THE GRAVE and ASCEND TO HEAVEN. We have witnesses, it's common with a lot of rehashed stories. Nothing new or different here except for maybe the bones, but it screams of one-ups-manship. It's sensationalized, which was what writers did back then.

Is the Matrix sensationalized? WE STILL DO IT!

It's hard to talk about hypothetical bones.

Matt....I've read your posts on two different threads and I can tell you that all you've been doing is philosophying your way AROUND my question. I could respect your response much, much better if you'll say, "I don't know", because then that leaves room for sincere and BALANCED research (if one wants that). However, you have intentionally ducked out an honestly reply to the question. Again I ask you or any of the other atheist posting here to explain to me, WHAT HAPPENED to the BODY?? I don't want any excuses such as pointing to allegoric writings, because that has proven not to fly with honest historical research and debate.

I went ahead and ran it by some of my friends and they agree, so this must be a Christian/Atheist won't agree thing.

I don't know what happened to a potential allegorical body. That's as far as I'm willing to go. I don't even know that Jesus existed at this point except for some slightly convincing tax records in Thomas. Even if he did, I can call myself the Son of God and get a following just like David Kouresh and THEY WILL DIE FOR ME TOO, JUST LIKE THE BRANCH DAVIDIANS.

People need some group, and they got religion.

matt

Matt & A.L. :

Please excuse the interuption. I just wanted to add a little tidbit of info I ran across while searching for something else.

I'm enjoying reading thru this thread. Ok, please continue.

Thanks!

Fiosh

The following pagan historians mention Jesus:

* The correspondence between the Emperor Trajan (98 - 117) and Pliny the younger corroborates the New Testament history including the persecution of the Christians under the Emperor Nero.

* Tacitus in his Annals (c.115 A.D.) mentions that Christ was crucified under Pontius Pilate and gives detailed descriptions of Nero's persecutions -- also alluded to in the New Testament.

* Flavius Josephus, the first century Jewish historian, makes mention of Jesus and John the Baptist.

[artsylady]

Exactly, it's the power of belief. It's in our brains like a virus in the bloodstream. Was that example to harsh?

I SINCERELY THINK YOU BELIEVE IT.

You almost make it sound like it's negative. Belief in anything at all. Or a strong beleif anyway. I

So obviously he wasn't just written up later as a superhero. Many firmly believed he was the son of God - specifically those who followed him very closely while he was on earth. They truly did beleive he was God.

Now you have to ask yourself why these men who were very human and doubtful to the point of denying him before his death, went out on a vengeance preaching him as saviour after his death?

And you do understand the difference between 9/11 and Christian martrdom, wherein the 9/11 people were murdering for their beliefs (pure evil any way you look at it) and the Christians were jailed tortured and victimized for their beleifs (pure evil any way you look at it)

As well, would you agree that if his resurrection were faked, they would not have chosen 2 women as the first witnesses to see him, as women were not considered reliable witnesses in a court of law?

[EricH]

BUT: Of all the facts historians know of the ancient world, the BEST ATTESTED FACT is the Resurrection of Jesus. There are more first hand, second hand, and third hand reports for this event, than for ANY other event of ancient history.

Will anyone provide these multitudes of first-hand accounts?

But remember, these first-hand accounts must be contemporary extra-biblical accounts (not including the Bible). Reason being, if we accepted a source as evidence of it's own accuracy/truthfulness/validity, then we would be forced to accept every event recorded in the Quran (and countless other holy books).

Hmmm. This is interesting. We have first hand witnesses, but you will not allow them because of the place they now reside. Who is coming with a preconceived notion?

[EricH]

The reason I reject the story of Mohammed's ascention is not because of the book it was written in. That is bad historical method. The reason I reject the story is because archaeology does not support it. We have a tomb that Mohammed is buried in that his followers revere and visit.

In terms of Jesus there is no eveidence that dismisses the 4 independent accounts given by the witnesses. In addition, we have no witnesses to the actual resserectio. What we have is documentation that gives accounts of appearances after the death and burial. I would be interested in why you feel these accounts are not trust worthy (other than that they are in the Bible)