• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
* * - - - 10 votes

IS THERE EVIDENCE FOR CHRISTIANITY???

christianity religion spirituality

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
1818 replies to this topic

#811 Jeoshua

  • Guest
  • 662 posts
  • 186
  • Location:North Carolina

Posted 28 April 2014 - 09:06 PM

Now you're pandering to an imaginary crowd? My audience is you, I'm not trying to win in some public forum. Slow down the rhetoric, already.

I already answered the question posed here:
If Christianity were true, would I become a Christian?
The answer is yes, with the caveat that it would have to be conclusively proven to me, in a way that passes intensive scrutiny, that it is true. I would not immediately say "Oh, that's true, now I'm Christian". I would attempt to find out as much as I could about that specific point, explore alternate routes, and would only agree that point was correct after a lot of research. I take this same standpoint on anything of an extremely unbelievable nature, from cancer cures and other miracle medicines, to whether or not a coffee joint really does have a mocha that is better than sex, all the way to whether Christianity is true.

However, I will also add that even if I were to become a Christian, I would not immediately support everything any Christian does, and would still find the behavior of much that has been done under the banner of Christianity completely abhorrent, maybe more so at that point if I considered myself to be one of them. That's as an aside, and you don't have to respond to it The behavior of someone who believes in Christ does not strictly pertain to whether the stories in the bible are the God's honest truth.

Edited by Jeoshua, 28 April 2014 - 09:07 PM.


#812 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 28 April 2014 - 11:54 PM

Bluecloud:  "Christians long suffered under Islam" ... Hilarious.

And by the way, the only time Jews didn't suffer under Christianity ( pre-Renaissance ) was during Muslim Andalussia where their faith was protected. Once the Reconquista took back the territories, the Christian Monarchy offered the Jews two choices : convert to christianism, or leave the country ( wich many did, and found refuge in... islamic north africa ), or death without a trial if they didn't leave or convert...


I can’t help it if you are ignorant of the history of the East and Islam’s encounter with Jews, Christians and other religions.  At one point, half of all Christians in the world had been killed by Muslims.  When did you learn that in Western Civilization?  It is off topic but here are some sources to fill in the blanks..  Would you like to see what Islam did to Jews and other religions?  The proof is in the pudding, how many Jews, Christians and other faiths are currently in Islamic lands?  How many in Christian lands?  This is all off topic so start a new thread on “How Islam Treats Other Religions.”  Perhaps I will.  By the way, Bat Yeor in the list below is a Jew.  She is my favorite historian on the subject.  Be sure to read her.

http://en.wikipedia....n_of_Christians
http://www.raymondib...-of-christians/
http://www.raymondib...rsecution-room/
http://www.christian...tremism-112255/
http://members.tripo...m/joe_matalski/
http://int.icej.org/...tion-christians
http://www.aina.org/...10118151407.htm
http://www.amazon.co...s/dp/1621570258
http://www.jihadwatc...n-of-christians
http://www.jpost.com...ountries-338682
http://www.religious...-of-christians/
http://3lotus.com/en...middle-east.htm
http://www.amazon.co...k/dp/B0058P4PHG
http://www.theguardi...-prince-charles
http://www.hoover.or.../article/152651
http://www.blog.stan...the-middle-east
http://www.mefacts.c....asp?x_id=11162
http://www.dhimmi.org/
http://www.amazon.co...98725680&sr=1-3
http://www.amazon.co...98725680&sr=1-4
http://www.amazon.co...98725680&sr=1-6
http://www.discovert...gory.asp?id=742
http://www.wnd.com/2...ing-christians/
http://www.persecuti...dle-east/islam/
http://www.persecuti...dle-east/islam/
http://www.greaterth...an/Persecution/
http://www.persecution.com/
http://www.christianpersecution.info/
http://shoebat.com/2...ling-everybody/
http://www.frontline...-cat&Itemid=196
 


Edited by shadowhawk, 29 April 2014 - 12:20 AM.

  • dislike x 1

#813 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 28 April 2014 - 11:59 PM

Now you're pandering to an imaginary crowd? My audience is you, I'm not trying to win in some public forum. Slow down the rhetoric, already.

I already answered the question posed here:
If Christianity were true, would I become a Christian?
The answer is yes, with the caveat that it would have to be conclusively proven to me, in a way that passes intensive scrutiny, that it is true. I would not immediately say "Oh, that's true, now I'm Christian". I would attempt to find out as much as I could about that specific point, explore alternate routes, and would only agree that point was correct after a lot of research. I take this same standpoint on anything of an extremely unbelievable nature, from cancer cures and other miracle medicines, to whether or not a coffee joint really does have a mocha that is better than sex, all the way to whether Christianity is true.

However, I will also add that even if I were to become a Christian, I would not immediately support everything any Christian does, and would still find the behavior of much that has been done under the banner of Christianity completely abhorrent, maybe more so at that point if I considered myself to be one of them. That's as an aside, and you don't have to respond to it The behavior of someone who believes in Christ does not strictly pertain to whether the stories in the bible are the God's honest truth.

 

Good, sounds like we are on the same page.  Now you have not said what is historical evidence.



#814 BlueCloud

  • Guest
  • 540 posts
  • 96
  • Location:Europa

Posted 29 April 2014 - 08:54 AM

 

I can’t help it if you are ignorant of the history of the East and Islam’s encounter with Jews, Christians and other religions.  At one point, half of all Christians in the world had been killed by Muslims

 

haha... again.. Hilarious. Links with websites and books written by white suprematists and other KKKers...

 

You know, this "My religion will beat yours" contest is like nuclear war, it's a lose/lose game.

 

Instead of filling pages and pages of farfetched imaginary "proofs" about Christianity's ( or ANY other religion ) superiority to Science and Reason, why don't you just consider that faith or belief in an imaginary omnipotent God is a personal thing, if it makes you feel better, then that's good. As long as you don't confuse that with reality. When Im' anxious or tense, I like to imagine I'm floating above clouds, I then feel more relaxed. However I don't confuse that with reality, I KNOW I'm NOT floating above clouds.

Life is hard. Mythologies that can help people feel better are fine in my book. As long as people keep in mind that they are just mythologies. In fact , all these mythologies  ( from prehistoric animism , to Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, etc..) have contributed some beautiful artistic things to humanity, as some point or another. Spiritual architecture, music, paintings, poetry, etc.. That is, of course,  when they were not busy killing each other in the name of their imaginary Gods ( while said God is passively watching the whole mess ). If religion was seen purely as an artistic endeavour, things would have been better.

 

Like I said, this "my daddy can beat your daddy" religion contests are doomed to fail. Wanna play some more ? How about the ultimate crime commited under Christianity ? The Shoah. Case closed.

I'm out of this thread. 



#815 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 29 April 2014 - 08:21 PM

BlueCloud:  haha... again.. Hilarious. Links with websites and books written by white suprematists and other KKKers...


Web sites, books, videos.  Over your head.  Just stick to ad hominem attacks and name calliong.

You know, this "My religion will beat yours" contest is like nuclear war, it's a lose/lose game.
Instead of filling pages and pages of farfetched imaginary "proofs" about Christianity's ( or ANY other religion ) superiority to Science and Reason, why don't you just consider that faith or belief in an imaginary omnipotent God is a personal thing, if it makes you feel better, then that's good. As long as you don't confuse that with reality. When Im' anxious or tense, I like to imagine I'm floating above clouds, I then feel more relaxed. However I don't confuse that with reality, I KNOW I'm NOT floating above clouds.


Science and reason no less is what we are witnessing!  Perhaps this is a floating above clouds moment.

Life is hard. Mythologies that can help people feel better are fine in my book. As long as people keep in mind that they are just mythologies. In fact , all these mythologies  ( from prehistoric animism , to Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, etc..) have contributed some beautiful artistic things to humanity, as some point or another. Spiritual architecture, music, paintings, poetry, etc.. That is, of course,  when they were not busy killing each other in the name of their imaginary Gods ( while said God is passively watching the whole mess ). If religion was seen purely as an artistic endeavour, things would have been better.


You are describing a problem of Humanity and the fact they are all bigots.  Even Atheists suffer this.  They act like you do.

Like I said, this "my daddy can beat your daddy" religion contests are doomed to fail. Wanna play some more ? How about the ultimate crime commited under Christianity ? The Shoah. Case closed.
I'm out of this thread.

Christians didn’t cause the Shoah Case. How insane.   http://sfi.usc.edu/r...ch/publications
 

#816 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 29 April 2014 - 09:58 PM

THE MINIMAL FACTS APPROACH TO THE EVIDENCE

 

 

 

 

 



#817 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 30 April 2014 - 09:47 PM

“The evidence for the resurrection is better than for claimed miracles in any other religion. It’s outstandingly different in quality and quantity.”

—Atheist, Antony Flew—



#818 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 30 April 2014 - 10:06 PM

MINIMAL FACTS

 

“The truth of Christianity stands or falls on the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. As Paul himself said, “If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.”[1] Here the Apostle provides an objective criterion by which to judge the legitimacy of the Christian worldview. Show that Christ has not been raised from the dead and you will have successfully proven Christianity false. Conversely, if Jesus did rise from the dead then His life and teachings are vindicated. The Christian faith, as it turns out, is falsifiable. It is the only religion which bases its faith on an empirically verifiable event.[2]

Christ Himself testified that His resurrection is the sign given to the world as evidence for His extraordinary claims: “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”[3] Furthermore, the resurrection was the central message proclaimed by the early church as most clearly demonstrated in the book of Acts.[4] Therefore, it is entirely appropriate that an objective examination of Christianity focus on the most pivotal historical event of the faith: the Resurrection.

THE MINIMAL FACTS APPROACH

The approach I will take in this paper is commonly referred to as the “minimal facts approach.” This method “considers only those data that are so strongly attested historically that they are granted by nearly every scholar who studies the subject, even the rather skeptical ones.”[5] It should be noted this approach does not assume the inerrancy or divine inspiration of any New Testament document. Rather it merely holds these writings to be historical documents penned during the first century AD.[6]

Though as many as 12 minimal facts surrounding the death and resurrection of Christ may be examined,[7] the brevity of this paper limits our examination to four: the death of Jesus by crucifixion, the empty tomb,[8] the post-resurrection appearances, and the origin of the Christian faith. I contend that the best explanation for these minimal facts is that Jesus was raised bodily from the grave.

Finally, if these facts “can be established and no plausible natural explanation can account for them as well as the resurrection hypothesis, then one is justified in inferring Jesus’ resurrection as the most plausible explanation of the data.”[9]”

The footnotes will be posted at the end of these four facts.  This is evidence.



#819 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 01 May 2014 - 07:06 PM

FACT #1—THE DEATH OF JESUS BY CRUCIFIXION

"Perhaps no other fact surrounding the life of the historical Jesus is better attested to than His death by crucifixion. Not only is the crucifixion account included in every gospel narrative[17] but it is also confirmed by several non-Christian sources. These include the Jewish historian Josephus, the Roman historian Tacitus, the Greek satirist Lucian of Samosata, as well as the Jewish Talmud.[18] Josephus tells us that “Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us…condemned him to the cross…”[19] From a perspective of historiography, Jesus’ crucifixion meets the historical criteria of multiple, independent and early eyewitness sources including enemy attestation. John Dominic Crossan, non-Christian critical scholar and co-founder of the Jesus Seminar, states, “That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be.”[20]

Objection #1: Jesus Didn’t Really Die (The Swoon Theory)

Some skeptics argue that Jesus may have been crucified but He did not actually die. Instead, He lost consciousness (swooned) and merely appeared to be dead only to later be revived in the cool, damp tomb in which He was laid. After reviving He made His way out of the tomb and presented Himself to His disciples as the “resurrected” Messiah. Thus the Christian religion begins. This theory is problematic for several reasons.

First, the Swoon Theory does not take seriously what we know about the horrendous scourging and torture associated with crucifixion. As an expert team from the Journal of the American Medical Association concludes, “Accordingly, interpretations based on the assumption that Jesus did not die on the cross appear to be at odds with modern medical knowledge.”[21]

Second, Jesus faking His own resurrection goes against everything we know about His ethical ministry.

Third, a half-dead, half-resurrected “messiah” could hardly serve as the foundation for the disciples’ belief in the resurrection. German theologian David Friederick Strauss explains:

 

It is impossible that a being who had stolen half-dead out of the sepulcher, who crept about weak and ill, wanting medical treatment, who required bandaging, strengthening and indulgence, and who still at last yielded to his sufferings, could have given to the disciples the impression that he was a Conqueror of death and the grave, the Prince of Life, an impression which lay at the bottom of their future ministry. Such a resuscitation could only have weakened the impression which He had made upon them in life and in death, at the most could only have given it an elegiac voice, but could by no possibility have changed their sorrow into enthusiasm, have elevated their reverence into worship.[22]

Fourth, this theory is anachronistic in postulating that the disciples, upon seeing Jesus in his half-comatose state, would be led to conclude that He had been raised from the dead within history, in opposition to the Jewish belief in one final resurrection at the end of time. On the contrary, seeing Him again would lead them to conclude He didn’t die![23]

Fifth, Roman soldiers were professional executioners and everything we know about the torture and crucifixion of Jesus confirms His death, making this theory physically impossible.

Sixth, no early evidence or testimony exists claiming Jesus was merely wounded.

Finally, this theory cannot account for the conversion of skeptics like Paul who also testified to having seen the risen Lord and willing suffered and died for his belief in the resurrection."

Finally, we are going to later talk about the Shroud of Turin.  If it is the burial cloth of Christ, he was dead.  
 


Edited by shadowhawk, 01 May 2014 - 07:08 PM.


#820 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 02 May 2014 - 07:51 PM

FACT #2—THE EMPTY TOMB

“Something happened to the body of Jesus. Of this we can be sure. Not only was Jesus publicly executed in Jerusalem but “His post-mortem appearances and empty tomb were first publicly proclaimed there.”[24] This would have been impossible with a decaying corpse still in the tomb. “It would have been wholly un-Jewish,” notes William Lane Craig, “not to say foolish, to believe that a man was raised from the dead when his body was still in the grave.”[25] The Jewish authorities had plenty of motivation to produce a body and silence these men who “turned the world upside down,”[26] effectively ending the Christian religion for good. But no one could. The only early opposing theory recorded by the enemies of Christianity is that the disciples stole the body.[27] Ironically, this presupposes the empty tomb.

In addition, all four gospel narratives attest to the burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea and place women as the primary witnesses to the empty tomb.[28] Both of these are highly unlikely to be Christian inventions.

First, with regard to Joseph of Arimathea, Biblical scholar James G. D. Dunn explains that he
is a very plausible historical character: he is attested in all four Gospels… and in the Gospel of Peter…; when the tendency of the tradition was to shift blame to the Jewish council, the creation ex nihilo of a sympathizer from among their number would be surprising; and ‘Arimathea, ‘a town very difficult to identify and reminiscent of no scriptural symbolism, makes a thesis of invention even more implausible.’[29]

Atheist Jeffery Lowder agrees that “the burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea has a high final probability.”[30]

Second, just as unlikely to be invented is the report of women followers discovering the empty tomb, especially when considering the low social status of women in both Jewish and Roman cultures and their inability to testify as legal witnesses.[31] If the empty tomb account were a fabricated story intended to persuade skeptics it would have been better served by including male disciples as the primary witnesses. In other words, both the burial and empty tomb accounts demonstrate a ring of authenticity which lends credibility to the gospel narratives.

As with the crucifixion, the account of the empty tomb meets the historical criteria of multiple, independent and early eyewitness sources,[32] including implicit enemy attestation as well as the principle of embarrassment. In addition, the reports of the burial and empty tomb are simple and lack theological or legendary development.

Finally, there is no competing burial story in existence. Historian and skeptic Michael Grant concedes that “the historian… cannot justifiably deny the empty tomb” since applied historical criteria shows “the evidence is firm and plausible enough to necessitate the conclusion that the tomb was indeed found empty.”[33]

Objection #2: The Disciples Stole the Body (The Fraud or Conspiracy Theory)

As mentioned above, the earliest recorded polemic against the empty tomb is the charge by Jewish authorities that the disciples stole the body. This is commonly referred to as the Fraud or Conspiracy Theory. This scenario posits that Jesus’ followers stole the body away unbeknownst to anyone and lied about the resurrection appearances, pulling off what has thus far been the greatest hoax in human history. There are several problems with this view.

First, this theory does not explain well the simplicity of the resurrection narratives nor why the disciples would invent women as the primary witnesses to the empty tomb.[34] This is hardly the way one gets a conspiracy theory off the ground.

Second, this also doesn’t explain why the disciples would perpetuate a story that they stole they body (Matt. 28:11-15) if in fact they stole the body! Propagating an explanation which incriminates oneself is again at odds with a conspiracy theory.

Third, as will be discussed below, this theory does not account for the fact that the disciples of Jesus had genuine experiences in which they believed they saw the risen Christ. So convinced were these men that their lives were transformed into committed followers willing to suffer and die for their belief. Liars make poor martyrs.

Fourth, this theory runs opposite to everything we know about the disciples. As J. N. D. Anderson states, “This would run totally contrary to all we know of them: their ethical teaching, the quality of their lives, their steadfastness in suffering and persecution. Nor would it begin to explain their dramatic transformation from dejected and dispirited escapists into witnesses whom no opposition could muzzle.”[35]

Fifth, this theory is completely anachronistic. There was no expectation by first century Jews of a suffering-servant Messiah who would be shamefully executed by Gentiles as a criminal only to rise again bodily before the final resurrection at the end of time: “As Wright nicely puts it, if your favorite Messiah got himself crucified, then you either went home or else you got yourself a new Messiah. But the idea of stealing Jesus’ corpse and saying that God had raised him from the dead is hardly one that would have entered the minds of the disciples.”[36]  

Finally, this theory cannot account for the conversion of skeptics like Paul who also testified to having seen the risen Lord and willing suffered and died for his belief in the resurrection.”
 



#821 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,386 posts
  • 240
  • Location:Italy

Posted 02 May 2014 - 08:47 PM

Why did the Bible get evolution so wrong?



#822 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 02 May 2014 - 09:27 PM

Why did the Bible get evolution so wrong?

I know you are trying to derail the topic, but the bible does not talk about evolution as a subject.  Try http://www.longecity...-14#entry659735
 

 



#823 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,386 posts
  • 240
  • Location:Italy

Posted 02 May 2014 - 09:29 PM

And the global flood? We know that is a complete fairytale. 



#824 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 02 May 2014 - 09:35 PM

And the global flood? We know that is a complete fairytale. 

 

Can't handle the discussion it appears.  Typical derailment. 
 



#825 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,386 posts
  • 240
  • Location:Italy

Posted 03 May 2014 - 07:30 AM

 

And the global flood? We know that is a complete fairytale. 

 

Can't handle the discussion it appears.  Typical derailment. 
 

 

I'm presenting evidence against Christianity. It's clear that the Bible has errors in it. This is a huge problem for some Christians but perhaps you're not one of them.



#826 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 04 May 2014 - 01:01 AM

 

 

And the global flood? We know that is a complete fairytale. 

 

Can't handle the discussion it appears.  Typical derailment. 
 

 

I'm presenting evidence against Christianity. It's clear that the Bible has errors in it. This is a huge problem for some Christians but perhaps you're not one of them.

 

I will deal with your so called problems later.  Here it is an obvious attempt at derailment.  That is all you have.  But for those interested in following this now, get, “New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties .”
http://www.amazon.co...99164577&sr=1-3
 



#827 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 04 May 2014 - 01:09 AM

FACT #3—THE POST-RESURRECTION APPEARANCES

“In 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 Paul recounts what biblical scholars recognize as an early Christian creed dating to within a few years of the crucifixion. Notice the creedal nature and repetitive structure of this passage when broken down in the following form:

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, in which also you stand,
that Christ died for our sins
according to the Scriptures,
and
that He was buried,
and
that He was raised on the third day
                        according to the Scriptures,
and
that He appeared to Cephas,
then to the twelve.
After
that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time,
most of whom remain until now,
but some have fallen asleep;
then He appeared to James,
then to all the apostles;
and last of all, as to one untimely born,
He appeared to me also.[37]


Included in this creed are three of our minimal facts: the death of Jesus, the empty tomb, and the post-resurrection appearances. Furthermore, our fourth minimal fact (the origin of Christianity) is easily explained given the first thee facts. Paul not only mentions the multiple post-resurrection appearances but includes himself as having seen the risen Lord. Several indicators in the text confirm this to be an early Christian creed.

First, as shown above, the passage uses stylized wording and parallel structure common to creedal formulas.

Second, the words “delivered” and “received” are technical terms indicating a rabbinic heritage is in view.

Third, the phrases “He was raised,” “third day,” and “the twelve” are unusual Pauline terms making this unlikely to have originated with Paul himself.

Fourth, the Aramaic term “Cephas” is used for Peter indicating an extremely early origin.[38] New Testament scholar and skeptic Gerd Lüdemann assigns this passage a very early date stating, “the elements in the tradition are to be dated to the first two years after the crucifixion of Jesus…not later than three years…the formation of the appearance traditions mentioned in 1 Cor. 15:3-8 falls into the time between 30 and 33 C.E.”[39]

The early date of this creed rules out the possibility of myth or legendary development as a plausible explanation and demonstrates that the disciples began proclaiming Jesus’ death, resurrection, and post-resurrection appearances very early. Christian philosopher and theologian J. P. Moreland elaborates:

“There was simply not enough time for a great deal of myth and legend to accrue and distort the historical facts in any significant way. In this regard, A. N. Sherwin-White, a scholar of ancient Roman and Greek history at Oxford, has studied the rate at which legend accumulated in the ancient world, using the writings of Herodotus as a test case. He argues that even a span of two generations is not sufficient for legend to wipe out a solid core of historical facts. The picture of Jesus in the New Testament was established well within that length of time.”[40]

Again Lüdemann acknowledges, “It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ.”[41] There is no dispute among scholars that the disciples experienced something.

But there’s more. The disciples not only proclaimed that Jesus was raised but they sincerely believed the resurrection occurred as demonstrated by their transformed lives. Eleven early sources testify to the willingness of the apostles to suffer and die for their belief in the resurrection.[42] For example, we know extra-Biblically that Jesus’ brother James was stoned to death by the Sanhedrin and that the apostle Paul was beheaded in Rome under Nero.[43] Many people will die for what they believe to be true but no one willingly suffers and dies for what they know to be false. Again, liars make poor martyrs. This important point should not be confused by an appeal to modern-day martyrs who willingly die for their religious beliefs. Making this comparison is a false analogy: “Modern martyrs act solely out of their trust in beliefs that others have taught them. The apostles died for holding to their own testimony that they had personally seen the risen Jesus. Contemporary martyrs die for what they believe to be true. The disciples of Jesus died for what they knew to be either true or false.”[44]

As with the crucifixion and empty tomb, the post-resurrection appearances meet the historical criteria of multiple, independent and early eyewitness sources, as well as the testimony of a former enemy of Christianity: Saul of Tarsus. Nine early and independent sources testify to the disciples’ proclamation that Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to them.[45] To list just one example of this, the appearance “to the twelve” mentioned by Paul above is also attested to in Luke 24:36-42 and John 20:19-20. “The evidence,” says William Lane Craig, “makes it certain that on separate occasions different individuals and groups had experiences of seeing Jesus alive from the dead. This conclusion is virtually indisputable—and therefore undisputed.”[46]

Objection #3: The Disciples Experienced Hallucinations (The Hallucination Theory)

The most popular theory offered by skeptics to explain away the post-resurrection appearances is that the disciples experienced hallucinations. This is the position taken by Gerd Lüdemann (quoted above) among others. However, appealing to hallucinations as an explanation simply won’t work for the following reasons.

First, the testimony of Paul along with the Gospel writers is that the appearances of Jesus were physical, bodily appearances.[47] In fact, this is the unanimous consent of the Gospel narratives. This is an important point because if “none of the appearances was originally a physical, bodily appearance, then it is very strange that we have a completely unanimous testimony in the Gospels that all of them were physical, with no trace of the supposed original, non-physical appearances.”[48]

Second, hallucinations are private experiences (as opposed to group experiences). A group of people “may be in the frame of mind to hallucinate, but each experiences hallucinations on an individual basis. Nor will they experience the same hallucination. Hallucinations are like dreams in this way.”[49] Therefore, hallucinations cannot explain the group appearances attested to in 1 Cor. 15, the Gospel narratives, and the book of Acts.[50]

Third, ironically, the Hallucination Theory cannot explain the origin of the disciples’ belief in Jesus’ resurrection! Just like in today’s modern world, “for someone in the ancient world, visions of the deceased are not evidence that the person is alive, but evidence that he is dead!”[51] This is a crucial argument to grasp:

Hallucinations, as projections of the mind, can contain nothing new. Therefore, given the current Jewish beliefs about life after death, the disciples, were they to project hallucinations of Jesus, would have seen Jesus in heaven or in Abraham’s bosom, where the souls of the righteous dead were believed to abide until the resurrection. And such visions would not have caused belief in Jesus’ resurrection.[52]

In other words, a hallucination of the resurrected Jesus presupposes the proper frame of mind which the disciples simply did not possess.

Finally, hallucinations cannot explain such facts as the empty tomb, the conversions of skeptics like Paul, nor the multiple and varied resurrection appearances which defy a purely psychological, naturalistic explanation.[53] “To be perfectly candid,” concludes Craig, “the only grounds for denying the physical, corporeal nature of the postmortem appearances of Jesus is philosophical, not historical.”[54]



#828 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,386 posts
  • 240
  • Location:Italy

Posted 04 May 2014 - 10:39 AM

Miracles and conversion of skeptics happen in every religion. It is mind-boggling that you seem to think that the way you are convinced about your own religion would only happen inside Christianity. That is just not the case, your experiences are universal and not limited to Christianity in any way. 


  • like x 1
  • dislike x 1

#829 addx

  • Guest
  • 711 posts
  • 184
  • Location:croatia
  • NO

Posted 04 May 2014 - 11:45 AM

shadowhawk, there's no discussion derailing, why should things you discuss currently be "on rail" and things other people say are DECLARED to be derailment even when they're ON TOPIC because YOU don't feel like discussing them.

who authorised you to post 30 videos and ranting posts and declare them to be the only topic of discussion.

there's NO DISCUSSION since only YOUR MATERIALS and YOUR POINTS are allowed to be discussed WHEN YOU FEEL LIKE IT and they are to be INTERPRETED HOW YOU SAY THEY ARE.

you're an idiot soliciting christian fundamentalism, there is no discussion here unless people discuss your flawed thinking. and this board should ban you

YOUR MATERIALS and YOUR POINTS a blitzkrieg amount crap spewed by redneck mullet wearing escapees from mental institutions that are allowed to talk within the borders of some universities within the spirit of helping mullet wearing inbred retards feel like a part of society. the way you emphasise some of these lectures being held at yale really shows how desperate you are for any real validation! I'm sure that yale officials allowing such lectures are in fact proof of christianity, they would allow retards at yale if it weren't true. that's seriously pathetic. I'm sure yale only allows christian lectures as well! these little "helping interpretations" of what happened(yale allowed the lecture making it more true, it's like a "go faster!" sticker on a car adding 10 horsepower) are in fact the only "proof" you ever come up with and you try to run a discussion to collect as many as possible of these "proofs". it is much easier to disprove these "proofs" than actually find them so you are desperate to keep the thread going ONLY your way because it all falls apart if we're allowed a "derailing subquestion". your argument can obviously only enchant a retard that doesn't dare to think for himself because it never worked out for him. such as you.

this is my last post here, i only came because I'm still "subscribed" to this thread and came here to unsubscribe as it is spamming my inbox with nonsense

enjoy the solitude of insanity.

Edited by addx, 04 May 2014 - 11:51 AM.


#830 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,386 posts
  • 240
  • Location:Italy

Posted 04 May 2014 - 05:29 PM

This is just in, Jesus was just a prophet and not crucified, Apostle Paul was "an impostor" and that New Testament gives an incorrect interpretation of the teachings if Jesus:

 

https://webcache.goo...lient=firefox-a

 

(sorry for the cached link, the original site was down)



#831 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 04 May 2014 - 09:25 PM

Miracles and conversion of skeptics happen in every religion. It is mind-boggling that you seem to think that the way you are convinced about your own religion would only happen inside Christianity. That is just not the case, your experiences are universal and not limited to Christianity in any way. 

We are, and have been talking about the evidence for the resurrection.  There is no comparable in any other religion.  Is this boggling you?  No comparable and I might note you have produced no evidence, as usual, for your comments.  I have and will finish talking about facts.  So you don’t believe.  OK.



#832 Jeoshua

  • Guest
  • 662 posts
  • 186
  • Location:North Carolina

Posted 04 May 2014 - 09:37 PM

Actually, the evidence of Mohammed's existence and the truth of most of his teachings is evident in the same way you're claiming that the Bible and people studying it proves Jesus' resurrection. Same with The Buddha, Lao Tzu, L. Ron Hubbard, and David Koresh. Honestly so far nothing you've posted (other than the books I haven't had time to read) actually points to anything other than people believing it happened, or that it's possible, or that it's unlikely to be a bald faced lie. I could prove that people of every religion, smart learned people, believe in their religions. But it doesn't prove that their beliefs are correct, or that they have a unique standpoint on truth that no other religion cannot likewise claim. The problem is the truly outlandish bits, which need explanation and to be proven, simply cannot be. You have yet to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus was killed and came back, all of these supposed pieces of evidence you are giving are only information from people who were looking for reasons that it isn't completely out of the question, none of them proves that it actually happened.

 

One of the craziest points is that the gospels agree, and therefore they are more likely to be true. It is a known fact that during the Council of Nicea, any book that did not agree was thrown out of the nascent Bible and put into the Apocrypha. There are many disagreeing accounts in that collection of stories. And lest we forget, the Bible is, itself, only a collection of stories chosen because they agree with each other and the intent of the binders.

 

However, in the interest of fairness, you did mention that several people did attest to some of these things. People who were not linked with the Christian Church. But you didn't actually show any of that evidence. Please do, it's the biggest point against what you're saying. If you can provide that outside evidence (and biblical scholars don't count, they're linked here), then you're heading the right way towards proof. Otherwise you're still just proving plausibility, not actuality.

 

 


Edited by Jeoshua, 04 May 2014 - 09:40 PM.

  • like x 1

#833 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 04 May 2014 - 10:31 PM

Jeoshua:  If you think there is the same evidence for Mohammed then we have a topic for that and you can present it there.  I will be interested.  Just coming here and blowing empty wind with nothing to back it up is ignorant.  The evidence for Mohammed is very different than Christ.  I presented the now famous but poorly done video on Mohammed.  Tell me where it is in error from Islamic historic sources.  http://www.longecity...sm/#entry659997
 
The gospels do agree on most points.  There are minor but not contradictory differences called the Synoptic Problem by Scholars.  Perhaps we shall discuss this later.  Nicea is not where the canon was recognized.  As far as outside sources, I will present them again after I finish with the Minimal Facts.  By the way, I am treating the Biblical documents the same way as any other historical document.  No different.  You have no basis for doing so either.
 



#834 Jeoshua

  • Guest
  • 662 posts
  • 186
  • Location:North Carolina

Posted 04 May 2014 - 10:51 PM

I do have basis for treating the Bible as different: It is what is being questioned in this line of reasoning. One cannot take a writing and prove it by taking quotes from itself. If that were the case, I could take Kim Stanley Robinson's Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars trilogy as evidence that people live on Mars. Everything in those writings is completely reasonable, scientifically sound, and utterly possible. But it's just a story, as other documents outside of the Mars trilogy can prove (notably, a calendar that proves we're not living in the same century, which hasn't even come yet). Same concept applies here. The Bible can't be the proof if it's also the question.


Edited by Jeoshua, 04 May 2014 - 10:53 PM.


#835 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 04 May 2014 - 11:21 PM

Jeoshua:  Then, can I treat the Bible different just because I believe?  You don’t get to treat it different just because you believe it is not true.  Do you believe people live on Mars?  Where is your evidence?  You claim it is scientifically sound and utterly possible.  Evidence.

The Bible is not a fiction nor intended to be..

Just treat the Bible the same way you do any other historical evidence.  Do you believe there was an Alexander the Great?  You question that?


  • dislike x 1

#836 Jeoshua

  • Guest
  • 662 posts
  • 186
  • Location:North Carolina

Posted 05 May 2014 - 01:02 AM

I'm not treating it different because I don't believe! I'm treating it differently because it's what you're trying to prove is true!
Let me phrase it differently, even tho I know you are just going to misrepresent it, again:

There are many works of fiction that are well crafted, internally consistent, make sense, and portray events that could happen. They did not happen, but all evidence within that same work of fiction will show that it works out. I gave one example already, but one could use almost any work of fiction by a good writer. In the absence of plot holes, and using only that work of fiction as your guiding post, everything would seem to point towards that being true.

However, go outside of that work of fiction and you will find more definitive evidence about it, and you will see that it's not true.

Also, having more believable information from another book doesn't always help ones case. Look at The Lord Of The Rings. It's so well crafted, it all seems logical when you are presented with only those books as a source. In the third book, at the end, there is even an appendix that lays out the writing systems, family lineages, maps, and a brief history of the world of Middle Earth. Why, there is even another two books in the series, one about a plucky Hobbit, and another which is basically the Elven Bible, The Simarillion.

Now, can you use the adventures of Bilbo, Frodo, and Gandalf to prove that the events in The Silmarillion took place? Of course not, but if you did, you would find everything falling right into place, everything agreeing, and given the information of how the world works in The Silmarillion, it would all work out to saying "yeah, this is plausible".

Heck, even when asked about the truth of the stories by his child, Christopher, J.R.R. Tolkien maintained that these were real events about a real place, deep in history. He assured them that it was all true, and that he had really met Gandalf.

But it's not proof. Even a cursory glance at the world around us, or anything not written by J.R.R. or Christopher Tolkien would show that it's just a story.

And that's what I'm trying to say to you.

TL;DR so you don't misconstrue it too bad:
No book can prove itself true. No author can conclusively attest to the truth of their own work.
One must go to outside sources to have it proved.

Edited by Jeoshua, 05 May 2014 - 01:15 AM.


#837 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 05 May 2014 - 02:36 AM

Jeoshua,  How about this for a misrepresentation.  Everything you have compared the Bible to is an obvious fiction.  The authors would and did, tell us so.  The Bible is not fiction, it is history and the authors told us so.  I have been presenting the minimal “facts,” that most historians, of all persuasions accept.  I have given outside sources but I deny your argument.  One source may be enough.  In this case we have many.

Just because I am making a case for its validity does not make it wrong.  Finally I have not used the word “proof,” for reasons I have rep;eatedly given.



#838 shadowhawk

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest, Member
  • 4,700 posts
  • 12
  • Location:Scotts Valley, Ca.
  • NO

Posted 05 May 2014 - 03:53 AM

SOME EXTRA BIBLICAL SOURCES FROM COLD CASE CHRISTIANITY
http://coldcasechris...e Christianity)

The reliable Gospel eyewitness accounts aren’t the only ancient description of Jesus. There are also non-Christian descriptions of Jesus from the late 1st to 5th Century. What do the non-Biblical accounts say about Jesus and how are we to assess them? It’s been my experience that two people can examine the same event (or even the same historical character) and disagree about what they have seen. Many years ago President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, and the entire event was captured on video tape. There were hundreds of eyewitnesses. The tapes were watched over and over again. Yet, in the midst of such a robust eyewitness record, people still argue to this day about what they saw and what actually happened. Was it a lone shooter or an elaborate conspiracy? Something very similar occurred when the World Trade Center was attacked by terrorists. Most of us either saw the attack live on television or watched the video for months afterward. But the event is still interpreted in a variety of ways. Was this the act of international terrorists or an elaborate governmental conspiracy? Two well documented historical events with a rich set of evidences. In spite of this, both events have been interpreted in a variety of ways. It shouldn’t surprise us then to find the historical records of Jesus Christ might also experience the same type of scrutiny and diverse interpretation. Did Jesus truly live, minister, died and rise from the grave as the Gospels record or was it an elaborate conspiracy? One thing we know about the Kennedy assassination and the World Trade Center attack: regardless of interpretation, there were eyewitnesses to the events, and the events did truly occur. In a similar manner, the ancient evidence related to Jesus reveals there were eyewitnesses and e did He did exist in history. Is there any evidence for Jesus outside the Bible? Yes, and the ancient non-Christian interpretations (and critical commentaries) of the Gospel accounts serve to strengthen the core claims of the New Testament.

Hostile Non-Biblical Pagan Accounts
There are a number of ancient classical accounts of Jesus from pagan, non-Christian sources. These accounts are generally hostile to Christianity; some ancient authors denied the miraculous nature of Jesus and the events surrounding His life:

Thallus (52AD)
Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus and he is so ancient his writings don’t even exist anymore. But Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD does quote Thallus who previously tried to explain away the darkness occurring at Jesus’ crucifixion:

“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.” (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

If only more of Thallus’ record could be found, we might find more confirmation of Jesus’ crucifixion. But there are some things we can conclude from this account: Jesus lived, He was crucified, and there was an earthquake and darkness at the point of His crucifixion.

Tacitus (56-120AD)
Cornelius Tacitus was known for his analysis and examination of historical documents and is among the most trusted of ancient historians. He was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and was also proconsul of Asia. In his “Annals’ of 116AD, he describes Emperor Nero’s response to the great fire in Rome and Nero’s claim that the Christians were to blame:

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”

In this account, Tacitus confirms several historical elements of the Biblical narrative: Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Christ.

Mara Bar-Serapion (70AD)
Sometime after 70AD, a Syrian philosopher named Mara Bar-Serapion, writing to encourage his son, compared the life and persecution of Jesus with that of other philosophers who were persecuted for their ideas. The fact Jesus is known to be a real person with this kind of influence is important. Mara Bar-Serapion refers to Jesus as the “Wise King”:

“What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?…After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men…The wise king…Lived on in the teachings he enacted.”

From this account, we can add to our understanding of Jesus: He was a wise and influential man who died for His beliefs. The Jewish leadership was somehow responsible for Jesus’ death. Jesus’ followers adopted His beliefs and lived their lives accordingly.

Phlegon (80-140AD)
In a manner similar to Thallus, Julius Africanus also mentions a historian named Phlegon who wrote a chronicle of history around 140AD. In this history, Phlegon also mentions the darkness surrounding the crucifixion in an effort to explain it:

“Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth to the ninth hour.” (Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

Phlegon is also mentioned by Origen (an early church theologian and scholar, born in Alexandria):

“Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events . . . but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 14)

“And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place … ” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 33)

“Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59)

From these accounts, we can add something to our understanding: Jesus had the ability to accurately predict the future, was crucified under the reign of Tiberius Caesar and demonstrated His wounds after he was resurrected.

Pliny the Younger (61-113AD)
Early Christians were also described in early, non-Christian history. Pliny the Younger, in a letter to the Roman emperor Trajan, describes the lifestyles of early Christians:

“They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food—but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.”

This early description of the first Christians documents several facts: the first Christians believed Jesus was GOD, the first Christians upheld a high moral code, and these early followers met regularly to worship Jesus.

Suetonius (69-140AD)
Suetonius was a Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. His writings about Christians describe their treatment under the Emperor Claudius (41-54AD):

“Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome).” (Life of Claudius, 25:4)

This expulsion took place in 49AD, and in another work, Suetonius wrote about the fire which destroyed Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians for this fire and he punished Christians severely as a result:

“Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief.” (Lives of the Caesars, 26.2)

There is much we can learn from Suetonius as it is related to the life of early Christians. From this account, we know Jesus had an immediate impact on His followers: They were committed to their belief Jesus was God and withstood the torment and punishment of the Roman Empire. Jesus had a curious and immediate impact on His followers, empowering them to die courageously for what they knew to be true.

Lucian of Samosata: (115-200 A.D.)
Lucian was a Greek satirist who spoke sarcastically of Christ and Christians, but in the process, he did affirm they were real people and never referred to them as fictional characters:

“The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account….You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property.” (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine. 11-13)

From this account we can add to our description of Jesus: He taught about repentance and about the family of God. These teachings were quickly adopted by Jesus’ followers and exhibited to the world around them.

Celsus (175AD)
This is the last hostile, non-Christian account we will examine (although there are many other later accounts in history). Celsus was quite antagonistic to the claims of the Gospels, but in his criticism he unknowingly affirmed and reinforced the Biblical authors and their content. His writing is extensive and he alludes to 80 different Biblical quotes, confirming their early appearance in history. In addition, he admits the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the early 2nd century:

“Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.”

Celsus admits Jesus was reportedly born of a virgin, but then argues this could supernatural account could not be possible and offers the idea Jesus was the illegitimate son of a man named Panthera (an idea borrowed from Jews who opposed Jesus at the time). But in writing this account, Celsus does confirm several important claims: Jesus had an earthly father who was a carpenter, possessed unusual magical powers and claimed to be God.

Hostile Non-Biblical Jewish Accounts
In addition to classical pagan sources chronicling the life of Jesus and His followers, there are also a number of ancient hostile Jewish sources describing Jesus. These are written by Jewish theologians, historians and leaders who were definitely not sympathetic to the Christian cause. Their writings are often very harsh, critical and even demeaning to Jesus. But there is still much these writings confirm:

Josephus (37-101AD)
In more detail than any other non-biblical historian, Josephus writes about Jesus in his “the Antiquities of the Jews” in 93AD. Josephus was born just four years after the crucifixion. He was a consultant for Jewish rabbis at an early age, became a Galilean military commander by the age of sixteen, and he was an eyewitness to much of what he recorded in the first century A.D. Under the rule of Roman emperor Vespasian, Josephus was allowed to write a history of the Jews. This history includes three passages about Christians, one in which he describes the death of John the Baptist, one in which he mentions the execution of James (and describes him as the brother of Jesus the Christ), and a final passage which describes Jesus as a wise man and the messiah. There is much legitimate controversy about the writing of Josephus, because the first discoveries of his writings are late enough to have been re-written by Christians who were accused of making additions to the text. So to be fair, we’ll examine a scholarly reconstruction stripped of Christian embellishment:

“Now around this time lived Jesus, a wise man. For he was a worker of amazing deeds and was a teacher of people who gladly accept the truth. He won over both many Jews and many Greeks. Pilate, when he heard him accused by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, (but) those who had first loved him did not cease (doing so). To this day the tribe of Christians named after him has not disappeared” (This neutral reconstruction follows closely the one proposed by John Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus: The Roots of the Problem and the Person).

Now there are many other ancient versions of Josephus’ writing which are even more explicit about the nature of Jesus’ miracles, life and his status as the Christ, but let’s take this conservative version and see what we can learn. From this text, we can conclude: Jesus lived in Palestine, was a wise man and a teacher, worked amazing deeds, was accused by the Jews, crucified under Pilate and had followers called Christians.

Jewish Talmud (400-700AD)
While the earliest Talmudic writings of Jewish Rabbis appear in the 5th century, the tradition of these Rabbinic authors indicates they are faithfully transmitting teachings from the early “Tannaitic” period of the 1st Century BC to the 2nd Century AD. Scholars believe there are a number of Talmudic writings referring to Jesus, and many of these writings are said to use code words to describe Jesus (such as “Balaam” or “Ben Stada” or “a certain one”). But for our purposes we’ll be very conservative and limit our examination to the passages referring to Jesus in a more direct way:

“Jesus practiced magic and led Israel astray” (b. Sanhedrin 43a; cf. t. Shabbat 11.15; b. Shabbat 104b)

“Rabbi Hisda (d. 309) said that Rabbi Jeremiah bar Abba said, ‘What is that which is written, ‘No evil will befall you, nor shall any plague come near your house’? (Psalm 91:10)… ‘No evil will befall you’ (means) that evil dreams and evil thoughts will not tempt you; ‘nor shall any plague come near your house’ (means) that you will not have a son or a disciple who burns his food like Jesus of Nazareth.” (b. Sanhedrin 103a; cf. b. Berakhot 17b)

“Our rabbis have taught that Jesus had five disciples: Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah. They brought Matthai to (to trial). He said, ‘Must Matthai be killed? For it is written, ‘When (mathai) shall I come and appear before God?’” (Psalm 92:2) They said to him, “Yes Matthai must be killed, for it is written, ‘When (mathai) he dies his name will perish’” (Psalm 41:5). They brought Nakai. He said to them, “Must Nakai be killed? For it is written, “The innocent (naqi) and the righteous will not slay’” (Exodus 23:7). They said to him, “Yes, Nakai must be kille, for it is written, ‘In secret places he slays the innocent (naqi)’” (Psalm 10:8). (b. Sanhedrin 43a; the passage continues in a similar way for Nezer, Buni and Todah)

And this, perhaps the most famous of Talmudic passages about Jesus:

“It was taught: On the day before the Passover they hanged Jesus. A herald went before him for forty days (proclaiming), “He will be stoned, because he practiced magic and enticed Israel to go astray. Let anyone who knows anything in his favor come forward and plead for him.” But nothing was found in his favor, and they hanged him on the day before the Passover. (b. Sanhedrin 43a)

From just these passages mentioning Jesus by name, we can conclude the following: Jesus had magical powers, led the Jews away from their beliefs, had disciples who were martyred for their faith (one of whom was named Matthai), and was executed on the day before the Passover.

The Toledot Yeshu (1000AD)
The Toledot Yeshu is a medieval Jewish retelling of the life of Jesus. It is completely anti-Christian, to be sure. There are many versions of these ‘retellings’, and as part of the transmitted oral and written tradition of the Jews, we can presume their original place in antiquity, dating back to the time of Jesus’ first appearance as an influential leader who was drawing Jews away from their faith in the Law. The Toledot Yeshu contains a determined effort to explain away the miracles of Jesus and to deny the virgin birth. In some places, the text is quite vicious, but it does confirm many elements of the New Testament writings. Let’s take a look at a portion of the text (Jesus is called ‘Yehoshua’):

“In the year 3671 (in Jewish reckonging, it being ca 90 B.C.) in the days of King Jannaeus, a great misfortune befell Israel, when there arose a certain disreputable man of the tribe of Judah, whose name was Joseph Pandera. He lived at Bethlehem, in Judah. Near his house dwelt a widow and her lovely and chaste daughter named Miriam. Miriam was betrothed to Yohanan, of the royal house of David, a man learned in the Torah and God-fearing. At the close of a certain Sabbath, Joseph Pandera, attractive and like a warrior in appearance, having gazed lustfully upon Miriam, knocked upon the door of her room and betrayed her by pretending that he was her betrothed husband, Yohanan. Even so, she was amazed at this improper conduct and submitted only against her will. Thereafter, when Yohanan came to her, Miriam expressed astonishment at behavior so foreign to his character. It was thus that they both came to know the crime of Joseph Pandera and the terrible mistake on the part of Miriam… Miriam gave birth to a son and named him Yehoshua, after her brother. This name later deteriorated to Yeshu (“Yeshu” is the Jewish “name” for Jesus. It means “May His Name Be Blotted Out”). On the eighth day he was circumcised. When he was old enough the lad was taken by Miriam to the house of study to be instructed in the Jewish tradition. One day Yeshu walked in front of the Sages with his head uncovered, showing shameful disrespect. At this, the discussion arose as to whether this behavior did not truly indicate that Yeshu was an illegitimate child and the son of a niddah. Moreover, the story tells that while the rabbis were discussing the Tractate Nezikin, he gave his own impudent interpretation of the law and in an ensuing debate he held that Moses could not be the greatest of the prophets if he had to receive counsel from Jethro. This led to further inquiry as to the antecedents of Yeshu, and it was discovered through Rabban Shimeon ben Shetah that he was the illegitimate son of Joseph Pandera. Miriam admitted it. After this became known, it was necessary for Yeshu to flee to Upper Galilee. After King Jannaeus, his wife Helene ruled over all Israel. In the Temple was to be found the Foundation Stone on which were engraven the letters of God’s Ineffable Name. Whoever learned the secret of the Name and its use would be able to do whatever he wished. Therefore, the Sages took measures so that no one should gain this knowledge. Lions of brass were bound to two iron pillars at the gate of the place of burnt offerings. Should anyone enter and learn the Name, when he left the lions would roar at him and immediately the valuable secret would be forgotten. Yeshu came and learned the letters of the Name; he wrote them upon the parchment which he placed in an open cut on his thigh and then drew the flesh over the parchment. As he left, the lions roared and he forgot the secret. But when he came to his house he reopened the cut in his flesh with a knife an lifted out the writing. Then he remembered and obtained the use of the letters. He gathered about himself three hundred and ten young men of Israel and accused those who spoke ill of his birth of being people who desired greatness and power for themselves. Yeshu proclaimed, “I am the Messiah; and concerning me Isaiah prophesied and said, ‘Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.’” He quoted other messianic texts, insisting, “David my ancestor prophesied concerning me: ‘The Lord said to me, thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee.’” The insurgents with him replied that if Yeshu was the Messiah he should give them a convincing sign. They therefore, brought to him a lame man, who had never walked. Yeshu spoke over the man the letters of the Ineffable Name, and the leper was healed. Thereupon, they worshipped him as the Messiah, Son of the Highest. When word of these happenings came to Jerusalem, the Sanhedrin decided to bring about the capture of Yeshu. They sent messengers, Annanui and Ahaziah, who, pretending to be his disciples, said that they brought him an invitation from the leaders of Jerusalem to visit them. Yeshu consented on condition the members of the Sanhedrin receive him as a lord. He started out toward Jerusalem and, arriving at Knob, acquired an ass on which he rode into Jerusalem, as a fulfillment of the prophecy of Zechariah. The Sages bound him and led him before Queen Helene, with the accusation: “This man is a sorcerer and entices everyone.” Yeshu replied, “The prophets long ago prophesied my coming: ‘And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse,’ and I am he; but as for them, Scripture says ‘Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly.’” Queen Helene asked the Sages: “What he says, is it in your Torah?” They replied: “It is in our Torah, but it is not applicable to him, for it is in Scripture: ‘And that prophet which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.’ He has not fulfilled the signs and conditions of the Messiah.” Yeshu spoke up: “Madam, I am the Messiah and I revive the dead.” A dead body was brought in; he pronounced the letters of the Ineffable Name and the corpse came to life. The Queen was greatly moved and said: “This is a true sign.” She reprimanded the Sages and sent them humiliated from her presence. Yeshu’s dissident followers increased and there was controversy in Israel. Yeshu went to Upper Galilee. the Sages came before the Queen, complaining that Yeshu practiced sorcery and was leading everyone astray. Therefore she sent Annanui and Ahaziah to fetch him. The found him in Upper Galilee, proclaiming himself the Son of God. When they tried to take him there was a struggle, but Yeshu said to the men of Upper Galilee: “Wage no battle.” He would prove himself by the power which came to him from his Father in heaven. He spoke the Ineffable Name over the birds of clay and they flew into the air. He spoke the same letters over a millstone that had been placed upon the waters. He sat in it and it floated like a boat. When they saw this the people marveled. At the behest of Yeshu, the emissaries departed and reported these wonders to the Queen. She trembled with astonishment. Then the Sages selected a man named Judah Iskarioto and brought him to the Sanctuary where he learned the letters of the Ineffable Name as Yeshu had done. When Yeshu was summoned before the queen, this time there were present also the Sages and Judah Iskarioto. Yeshu said: “It is spoken of me, ‘I will ascend into heaven.’” He lifted his arms like the wings of an eagle and he flew between heaven and earth, to the amazement of everyone…Yeshu was seized. His head was covered with a garment and he was smitten with pomegranate staves; but he could do nothing, for he no longer had the Ineffable Name. Yeshu was taken prisoner to the synagogue of Tiberias, and they bound him to a pillar. To allay his thirst they gave him vinegar to drink. On his head they set a crown of thorns. There was strife and wrangling between the elders and the unrestrained followers of Yeshu, as a result of which the followers escaped with Yeshu to the region of Antioch; there Yeshu remained until the eve of the Passover. Yeshu then resolved to go the Temple to acquire again the secret of the Name. That year the Passover came on a Sabbath day. On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu, accompanied by his disciples, came to Jerusalem riding upon an ass. Many bowed down before him. He entered the Temple with his three hundred and ten followers. One of them, Judah Iskarioto apprised the Sages that Yeshu was to be found in the Temple, that the disciples had taken a vow by the Ten Commandments not to reveal his identity but that he would point him out by bowing to him. So it was done and Yeshu was seized. Asked his name, he replied to the question by several times giving the names Mattai, Nakki, Buni, Netzer, each time with a verse quoted by him and a counter-verse by the Sages. Yeshu was put to death on the sixth hour on the eve of the Passover and of the Sabbath. When they tried to hang him on a tree it broke, for when he had possessed the power he had pronounced by the Ineffable Name that no tree should hold him. He had failed to pronounce the prohibition over the carob-stalk, for it was a plant more than a tree, and on it he was hanged until the hour for afternoon prayer, for it is written in Scripture, “His body shall not remain all night upon the tree.” They buried him outside the city. On the first day of the week his bold followers came to Queen Helene with the report that he who was slain was truly the Messiah and that he was not in his grave; he had ascended to heaven as he prophesied. Diligent search was made and he was not found in the grave where he had been buried. A gardener had taken him from the grave and had brought him into his garden and buried him in the sand over which the waters flowed into the garden. Queen Helene demanded, on threat of a severe penalty, that the body of Yeshu be shown to her within a period of three days. There was a great distress. When the keeper of the garden saw Rabbi Tanhuma walking in the field and lamenting over the ultimatum of the Queen, the gardener related what he had done, in order that Yeshu’s followers should not steal the body and then claim that he had ascended into heaven. The Sages removed the body, tied it to the tail of a horse and transported it to the Queen, with the words, “This is Yeshu who is said to have ascended to heaven.” Realizing that Yeshu was a false prophet who enticed the people and led them astray, she mocked the followers but praised the Sages.

Now in spite of the fact that the ancient Jews who wrote this did their best to argue for another interpretation of the life of Christ, they did make several claims here about Jesus. This passage, along with several others from the Toledot tradition, confirm: Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, healed the lame, said Isaiah foretold of His life, was worshipped as God, arrested by the Jews, beaten with rods, given vinegar to drink, wore a crown of thorns, rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, was betrayed by a man named Judah Iskarioto, and had followers who claimed He was resurrected and ascended, leaving an empty tomb.

Let’s review what we’ve learned from hostile pagan and Jewish sources describing Jesus. We’ll do our best to discount the anti-Christian bias we see in the sources, just as we discounted the pro-Christian bias we think might exist in some versions of the writing of Josephus. Many elements of the Biblical record are confirmed by these hostile accounts, in spite of the fact they deny the supernatural power of Jesus:

Jesus was born and lived in Palestine. He was born, supposedly, to a virgin and had an earthly father who was a carpenter. He was a teacher who taught that through repentance and belief, all followers would become brothers and sisters. He led the Jews away from their beliefs. He was a wise man who claimed to be God and the Messiah. He had unusual magical powers and performed miraculous deeds. He healed the lame. He accurately predicted the future. He was persecuted by the Jews for what He said, betrayed by Judah Iskarioto. He was beaten with rods, forced to drink vinegar and wear a crown of thorns. He was crucified on the eve of the Passover and this crucifixion occurred under the direction of Pontius Pilate, during the time of Tiberius. On the day of His crucifixion, the sky grew dark and there was an earthquake. Afterward, He was buried in a tomb and the tomb was later found to be empty. He appeared to His disciples resurrected from the grave and showed them His wounds. These disciples then told others Jesus was resurrected and ascended into heaven. Jesus’ disciples and followers upheld a high moral code. One of them was named Matthai. The disciples were also persecuted for their faith but were martyred without changing their claims. They met regularly to worship Jesus, even after His death.

Not bad, given this information is coming from ancient accounts hostile to the Biblical record. While these non-Christian sources interpret the claims of Christianity differently, they affirm the initial, evidential claims of the Biblical authors (much like those who interpret the evidence related to Kennedy’s assassination and the Twin Tower attacks come to different conclusions but affirm the basic facts of the historical events). Is there any evidence for Jesus outside the Bible? Yes, and the ancient non-Christian interpretations (and critical commentaries) of the Gospel accounts serve to strengthen the core claims of the New Testament.



#839 Lewis Carroll

  • Guest
  • 170 posts
  • 44
  • Location:United States

Posted 05 May 2014 - 05:50 AM

I was raised Catholic for 18 years. Church every Sunday, Sunday School as a kid, private catholic schools for nearly my entire education. I was conditioned from birth to accept all the Christian dogma, doctrine, and beliefs. It wasn't until college that I was really able to think for myself...

 

Scientific method, critical thinking, and human psychology all allowed me to question the beliefs I had been raised with my entire life. I quickly realized how silly religion, especially Christianity, was.  

 

Shadowhawk, I am not going to try to argue with you, since that would obviously accomplish nothing, but I will throw out some thoughts...

 

The Bible is a FICTION. How could you possible say all the short stories contained within the Bible are meant to be taken literally? A man being swallowed by a fish and living there unarmed for multiple days? There are no references or sources. We don't even know who wrote the different sections! The Gospels were not even written by who they are named after! The stories were at first passed along solely verbally (and if you have ever played the children's game telephone you know that never turns out as intended). It wasn't until decades later people started writing the stories down. And it wasn't until decades after that the these separate writings where compiled together. The version of the Bible we have now is highly edited and translated (which leaves tremendous room for error and mistranslation). And how about all the different gospels and books that were not included!? The Council of Nicea, the Council of Trent, all the modifications done by the Church of England?

 

I am under the impression that the Bible states or implies that the 1. the earth is flat 2. the earth is the center of the universe 3. the universe only consists of our solar system. Plus, doesn't Genesis deny evolution since God created man at the same time as all the other animals (minus dinosaurs since those never existed)? If the Bible is this off on such huge issues, how can one be accepted to believe that the rest is then factual and correct?

 

The God of the Old Testament was an oppressor and a savage. First, he wants to keep the human species from becoming sentient/intelligent beings. The best event that happened in the Bible was the snake convincing Eve to eat the fruit of knowledge!!! Next, he decides his creation (humanity) is bad, so he is going to kill everyone!! I thought he was all loving and perfect!? Killing everything on Earth seems a bit extreme. Especially when you realize God is also omnipotent. Couldn't he have figured out a better way then killing everyone? Doesn't seem very fair or reasonable or loving. If he was omniscient wouldn't he have known that his first batch of humans would turn on so... unsatisfactory? (Then comes the trouble of building a giant arc to house 2 of every animal) How about when God plays a practical joke on Abraham to see if he can convince Abraham to kill his own son?

 

Do you know that we are currently living in one of the most peaceful/nonviolent times in history? Violence is at a low in every category besides one. Can you guess the one category in regards to violence that is not lowering? Its religious violence. How ironic that this system that is supposed to teach peace, love, and acceptance is constantly doing the opposite. 

 

Homosexuality is not acceptable? I often hear its not acceptable because its not natural... tell that to all the homosexual animals out there. Plus homosexuality goes back thousands and thousands of years.

 

Institutionalized religion is a way to systematically control people. Not to mention it is a huge money maker. And since everyone is looking for purpose and freedom from death, Religion is the perfect answer. Denial of Death by Ernest Becker is a superb book that really goes into detail in regards to how desperate humans are to relinquish there anxiety/fear of death. Religion is the easy solution, since it provides answers. People are then able to sweep there anxiety into the unconscious knowing their chosen religion has the answers.

 

Do you know how many great minds throughout history were killed, locked up, or oppressed because their revolutionary ideas (which were often correct) disagreed with the teachings of the church? The Church doesn't want you searching for your own answers. They want you to adopt the answers they provide you. How about the Salem Witch Trials and the Inquisition of the Knights Templar? Talk about closed minded.

 

When one understands the impact conditioning can have (in regards to psychology) it's very easy to start to question any beliefs that one has solely based on faith (especially when its the result of years of exposure). Faith is believing without seeing - without evidence or proof. Faith is beyond unreasonable.

"It's easier to fool people than convince them they have been fooled" - Mark Twain

 

Have you ever heard of the book The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross by John Marco Allegro?

 

Have you ever heard the explanation for Christianity explained by astrology?

 

Did you know the life of Jesus mirrors a multitude of earlier gods/prophets?

 

Have you ever thought about the possibility that the people living 2,000 years ago made up these stories to help explain the world around them the best way they could with the very limited knowledge and understanding that they possessed at that time?


  • like x 1
  • dislike x 1

#840 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,386 posts
  • 240
  • Location:Italy

Posted 05 May 2014 - 07:25 AM

 

Miracles and conversion of skeptics happen in every religion. It is mind-boggling that you seem to think that the way you are convinced about your own religion would only happen inside Christianity. That is just not the case, your experiences are universal and not limited to Christianity in any way. 

We are, and have been talking about the evidence for the resurrection.  There is no comparable in any other religion.  Is this boggling you?  No comparable and I might note you have produced no evidence, as usual, for your comments.  I have and will finish talking about facts.  So you don’t believe.  OK.

 

All the evidence can easily have been fabricated as hearsay was written down decades after the events. What about the other resurrected cult-leaders around those times, what is wrong with the evidence for their resurrection?







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: christianity, religion, spirituality

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users