Let's compare Jesus and Muhammed (and debate homosexuality) (and Tombstone).

[g8terh8ter_eric]

Makes for a suspenseful and compelling narrative, right? Almost has a high-brow literature aspect to it. Are their primary documents of these feelings right after the crucifixion? Did these disciples write letters home telling their loved ones that they were afraid for their safety? Did the authors of the Gospels reference these letters? Or, is it a nice, highly dramatic story?

Have you read the Iliad? The Odyssey? The Aeneid? They are works of fiction with suspenseful plots and story lines. How about Crime and Punishment? Great suspense and drama there, too.

So, writers who were writing to prove the divinity of Jesus ensured that they mentioned prophecies that needed to be fulfilled. Too bad history proves some of these writers to be liars: Mary and Joseph had to travel to Bethlehem in 5 BCE for a census that did not take place until 6 CE...

You do realize that the prophecies in the Old Testament that referred to Jesus were written over 400 years before Jesus was even born, right?? Some of them even longer than that.

 

[g8terh8ter_eric]

How so? Are you just hiding behind a skirt?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Hiding behind a skirt?? I just thought it was pretty good ownage. I thought that was appreciated on here from time to time. Maybe next time I will just post, "Solid" instead.

 

[IBlvNTmWrk]

The story of 500 people seeing Jesus after his resurrection is noted by only Saul of Tarsus; a person whose only encounter with Jesus was when he was delirious after a horse-riding accident.

The only "credible" non-Biblical account of the resurrection is from Josephus; he wasn't born until 37 CE, though. So, he did not witness this event, either.

Wow... this is how you choose to present this story? Saul, perhaps the biggest persecutor of Christianity and its followers, and authorized to capture and possibly put to death anyone claiming to be a follower... and your focus is to claim that he was delirious from a horse-riding accident. The far bigger story is that this "delirious" persecutor of Christianity had an encounter with the resurrected Christ and then dedicated the rest of his life... much spent in prison... claiming Jesus as his/our Savior and writing most of the books of the New Testament. What could possibly get someone to change such a strong belief against Christianity to suddenly dedicate the rest of his life to spreading the gospel of Jesus?

I suppose when Hank Aaron broke Babe's record you were focusing instead on the bad pitching day by Al Downing.

btw... still waiting on those witnesses/stories/etc. explaining how it was all a hoax.

 

[IPorange]

Hiding behind a skirt?? I just thought it was pretty good ownage. I thought that was appreciated on here from time to time. Maybe next time I will just post, "Solid" instead.

I detected no ownage. I assume you were just vicariously living through his coherent response, is all.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[therealUT]

You do realize that the prophecies in the Old Testament that referred to Jesus were written over 400 years before Jesus was even born, right?? Some of them even longer than that.

The prophecies could have been recorded an eon earlier and it would not change what I said.

Hiding behind a skirt?? I just thought it was pretty good ownage. I thought that was appreciated on here from time to time. Maybe next time I will just post, "Solid" instead.

You also implied that people could not write down stories at the time of Jesus...

Wow... this is how you choose to present this story? Saul, perhaps the biggest persecutor of Christianity and its followers, and authorized to capture and possibly put to death anyone claiming to be a follower... and your focus is to claim that he was delirious from a horse-riding accident. The far bigger story is that this "delirious" persecutor of Christianity had an encounter with the resurrected Christ and then dedicated the rest of his life... much spent in prison... claiming Jesus as his/our Savior and writing most of the books of the New Testament. What could possibly get someone to change such a strong belief against Christianity to suddenly dedicate the rest of his life to spreading the gospel of Jesus?

It was a pretty hard hit. He ran into a branch at full speed with his head and was knocked to the ground. He most likely suffered a great deal of brain trauma; then, he saw an apparition of Jesus. Not exactly the most credible witness. There are also thousands of documented cases where insane individuals believe wholeheartedly that they are kings, gods, and statesmen to their own detriment. So, the fact that he was willing to go to jail for his delirium does not convince me of anything.

 

[g8terh8ter_eric]

You also implied that people could not write down stories at the time of Jesus...

I was talking about the area from which he came. Just having an Old Testament back then in your possession was a big deal. That's why they memorized everything in it. Most of the time the only manuscript of the Old Testament was in the temple, in certain smaller towns. I didn't mean no one could write, but the availability of everything was minuscule compared to recent times.

 

[g8terh8ter_eric]

I detected no ownage. I assume you were just vicariously living through his coherent response, is all.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Wow, the ability to infer things into posts on this board, with no knowledge of what the actual poster is really thinking or reading to themselves by other posters, is truly remarkable. Aren't you the one that is convinced all churches are corrupt, based solely on your experiences alone??

 

[therealUT]

I was talking about the area from which he came. Just having an Old Testament back then in your possession was a big deal. That's why they memorized everything in it. Most of the time the only manuscript of the Old Testament was in the temple, in certain smaller towns. I didn't mean no one could write, but the availability of everything was minuscule compared to recent times.

So, for the "biggest event" to occur in any of their lifetimes, not one person and/or group of persons thought to log these stories at the time they were happening? Judaism matched Hellenism for scholarship at that time in history; yet, these stories weren't recorded by primary witnesses and weren't recorded until an entire generation had passed (probably another large reason there are scarce rejections of such as a hoax...nobody aside from "Christians" would have cared about the hubbub by that time...that, and many of the Jews were dead from a bloody civil war and revolt). Ironic that does not strike you as interesting.

I imagine you have a camera phone. When something incredibly out of the ordinary happens, you take a picture to remember it, right?

I just find it interesting that there were either no literate witnesses to his resurrection or none that thought it was out of the ordinary enough to write down.

 

[g8terh8ter_eric]

So, for the "biggest event" to occur in any of their lifetimes, not one person and/or group of persons thought to log these stories at the time they were happening? Judaism matched Hellenism for scholarship at that time in history; yet, these stories weren't recorded by primary witnesses and weren't recorded until an entire generation had passed (probably another large reason there are scarce rejections of such as a hoax...nobody aside from "Christians" would have cared about the hubbub by that time...that, and many of the Jews were dead from a bloody civil war and revolt). Ironic that does not strike you as interesting.

I imagine you have a camera phone. When something incredibly out of the ordinary happens, you take a picture to remember it, right?

I just find it interesting that there were either no literate witnesses to his resurrection or none that thought it was out of the ordinary enough to write down.

I would venture to say that probably 95% of the society Jesus was a part of was illiterate, and maybe more. You think people just went to class on a regular basis in those times, especially under Roman occupation?? No, most were tradesmen, and only the wealthy knew how to read or write.

 

[IBlvNTmWrk]

It was a pretty hard hit. He ran into a branch at full speed with his head and was knocked to the ground. He most likely suffered a great deal of brain trauma; then, he saw an apparition of Jesus. Not exactly the most credible witness. There are also thousands of documented cases where insane individuals believe wholeheartedly that they are kings, gods, and statesmen to their own detriment. So, the fact that he was willing to go to jail for his delirium does not convince me of anything.

I'm sorry but I finally have to ask... where is the story of Saul running into a branch and any suggestion that he suffered a great deal of brain trauma?

According to Paul's own testimony he fell to the ground after seeing a bright light, and both he and his companions claimed to hear the voice of Jesus.

Also, for the 3rd time, where is any documentation that the resurrection was a hoax? As you've claimed in other posts... when something like this happens you'd think there would be many who would write about it.

 

[therealUT]

I would venture to say that probably 95% of the society Jesus was a part of was illiterate, and maybe more. You think people just went to class on a regular basis in those times, especially under Roman occupation?? No, most were tradesmen, and only the wealthy knew how to read or write.

As a Rabbi, Jesus would have known how to write. He didn't leave any manuscripts. Had 95% of Jesus' followers been illiterate, that still leaves 5% that did not think anything was important enough to write down. If 500 people saw a resurrected messiah preaching to them, that would mean that twenty-five saw it, could write about it, and chose not to.

 

[g8terh8ter_eric]

As a Rabbi, Jesus would have known how to write. He didn't leave any manuscripts. Had 95% of Jesus' followers been illiterate, that still leaves 5% that did not think anything was important enough to write down. If 500 people saw a resurrected messiah preaching to them, that would mean that twenty-five saw it, could write about it, and chose not to.

So, you think they just should have just broke out their trapper keepers and got some paper, huh?? Wow, you think that parchment was just available everywhere during that time?? It didn't work like that, especially in most every poverty stricken area they were in. There were also MANY wars back then, and a lot of historical documents destroyed.

 

[therealUT]

I'm sorry but I finally have to ask... where is the story of Saul running into a branch and any suggestion that he suffered a great deal of brain trauma?

My apologies. Mind is confused with all the Renaissance artwork concerning the conversion of Paul. There are some pretty powerful pieces, easily leaving the impression that he most definitely suffered great trauma.

According to Paul's own testimony he fell to the ground after seeing a bright light, and both he and his companions claimed to hear the voice of Jesus.

He also lost his sight for a while; which would coincide with severe brain trauma.

Also, for the 3rd time, where is any documentation that the resurrection was a hoax? As you've claimed in other posts... when something like this happens you'd think there would be many who would write about it.

People writing about a non-event?

The sun did not turn green today.

 

[therealUT]

So, you think they just should have just broke out their trapper keepers and got some paper, huh?? Wow, you think that parchment was just available everywhere during that time?? It didn't work like that, especially in most every poverty stricken area they were in. There were also MANY wars back then, and a lot of historical documents destroyed.

There might not have been a lot of paper available; however, had this event actually happened, there would have been somebody to find paper and write it down when it did happen. There are plenty of primary source documents cited in historical texts as far back as Herodotus (5th Century BCE) for quite extraordinary, non-everyday events.

 

[BlueHalo]

15 pages comparing 2 fairytale characters. Only on VolNation.

 

[Tenacious D]

They can run their church how they want. I've been through plenty of sermons about "You'll go to hell if you do this/that" some including homosexuality. I have no issue with those, I consider myself of Christian faith. I won't presume to tell others how they should run their congregation.

I believe that people are generally good. I believe that with few exceptions, if you get a large enough group of people, the majority of them will be pleasant individuals.

Oh, assuming things. Fun game, let's play.

You don't place enough importance on your life to be doing something aside from putting statements in other people's mouth on the internet trying to goad them into an argument.

Apparently you're intelligent enough to earn an income that supports you owning a computer and an internet connection... Or you happen to live near a city bus line that will take you to the library.

In fact, that was directly aimed at you! I wasn't even adding anything to the conversation in general, just thinking about how much I can't STAND to listen to pastors talk bad about the gay community. I came on here to talk about it on the internet hoping that a person with disabilities would turn a simple comment I made about a single pastor whom I didn't have taste for into a multi-post diatribe about how wrong my views on religion are and how they offend all of my PC sensibilities.

Thanks, ten. Pure class, you.

Posted via VolNation Mobile

Bi-Lo,

So, it was that particular pastor damning homosexuals to hell that you walked out on.....but others, you found to be fine and listened for the duration? Or, can you not STAND it at all? Then what do you make of the Biblical teachings found in Leviticus 18:22, 20:13 and Romans 1:26-27? Are you opposed to Biblical teaching / preaching? Perhaps you're more concerned with appearing open-minded and appeasing than upholding theologically correct, yet societally unpopular position? If so, I hope that resurrections don't fall out of fashion, or you'll have to go full rogue.

I don't want to put words in your mouth, if only for spacial considerations, so I ask.

How do you reconcile your belief that people are generally good (sans gays, of course) with innumerous and oppositional passages found in the Bible (which I thought a somewhat significant text to Christians....but I digress) - particularly Psalms 51:5, 58:3 and Ephesians 2:3 (admittedly, I've only heard rumors of the last one, having never read the NT)?

From my inability to discern your eclectic mixture of wishful thinking and Unitarian theology you assume that I devalue my existence. If I ever take the bus to the library, you're welcome to come with - as we'd all benefit by your being given a tutorial on the Dewey Decimal System, particularly sections 100, 200, 500 and 800.

You know, between you and Eric, I'm really learning a lot about Christianity from you here, and I really appreciate it. Let's keep it going.

 

[JZVOL]

Therefore, if, according to your belief, Jesus is God, then wouldn't you have to attribute all the Old Testament murders, judicial stonings, and genocides to Jesus?

"Totally begotten from the Father, light from light, true God from true God..."

Not at all.

 

[JZVOL]

Interesting, if not predictable where this thread went. The usual suspects telling people that they are essentially stupid for believing in Jesus and he's a fairytale character yet they always end up spending a lot of time talking about something they have no use for.

For me, if I typically believe something is not true, stupid or made up I ignore it and don't waste my time on it.

I do believe Jesus is who he claimed to be. If people don't like it, they can get over it.

I'm a pretty simple guy, wouldn't consider myself "smart" and if you want to debate topics that happened hundreds of years ago and what people did that was so horrible have at it; I can only control my belief and my actions. At the end of the day, I believe we will be judged, individually, based on our actions, motives and give an account for the way we lived our lives.

People who committed terrible acts in the name of Jesus, well good luck to you. They will have to give an account for that.

I had nothing to do with any of that. I've seen my youth pastor cheat on his wife, my pastor cheat on his wife and people in my church do some pretty sh*tty things that made me want beat the crap out of them.

None of that has changed my belief in Christ, and why should it? I won't be swayed by others actions because the fact is when a youth minister for example cheats on his wife, that's why we believe in Christ's forgiveness, because we aren't perfect and we need his grace to cover our sins.

I'm not looking to call anyone silly or whatever for not believing in Christ, I'm not claiming to have all the answers, it doesn't really bother me that I don't have all the answers, I just believe Jesus covered my sin with his blood and is the way to Heaven.

 

[CSVol]

Interesting, if not predictable where this thread went. The usual suspects telling people that they are essentially stupid for believing in Jesus and he's a fairytale character yet they always end up spending a lot of time talking about something they have no use for.

For me, if I typically believe something is not true, stupid or made up I ignore it and don't waste my time on it.

I do believe Jesus is who he claimed to be. If people don't like it, they can get over it.

I'm a pretty simple guy, wouldn't consider myself "smart" and if you want to debate topics that happened hundreds of years ago and what people did that was so horrible have at it; I can only control my belief and my actions. At the end of the day, I believe we will be judged, individually, based on our actions, motives and give an account for the way we lived our lives.

People who committed terrible acts in the name of Jesus, well good luck to you. They will have to give an account for that.

I had nothing to do with any of that. I've seen my youth pastor cheat on his wife, my pastor cheat on his wife and people in my church do some pretty sh*tty things that made me want beat the crap out of them.

None of that has changed my belief in Christ, and why should it? I won't be swayed by others actions because the fact is when a youth minister for example cheats on his wife, that's why we believe in Christ's forgiveness, because we aren't perfect and we need his grace to cover our sins.

I'm not looking to call anyone silly or whatever for not believing in Christ, I'm not claiming to have all the answers, it doesn't really bother me that I don't have all the answers, I just believe Jesus covered my sin with his blood and is the way to Heaven.

That sums it up pretty well for me also. Thank you for saying what I'm too simple to explain for myself.

 

[IBlvNTmWrk]

My apologies. Mind is confused with all the Renaissance artwork concerning the conversion of Paul. There are some pretty powerful pieces, easily leaving the impression that he most definitely suffered great trauma.

Gotcha... I would have gone with the 'shrooms addiction myself, but your explanation makes much more sense. Renaissance artwork = most definite brain trauma.

He also lost his sight for a while; which would coincide with severe brain trauma.

Or... it could coincide with a bright light which he claims he saw. But again, lets go with your diagnosis of a severe brain trauma versus what the person actually said.

People writing about a non-event?

The sun did not turn green today.

Non-event??? A person claims to be the Son of God and is crucified for this in front of 100's of witnesses. But before he dies he also claims that he will rise again in 3 days. So, the Pharisees and Pontius Pilate are so concerned that someone may try to steal the dead body from the tomb that they place guards at the tomb to protect it (they obviously didn't think it was a non-event). They also place a 1 - 2 ton stone over the entrance and then affixed the Roman seal to the stone (a penalty of death to anyone who might remove it).

And yet... miraculously... the body disappears and Jesus (a dead man) is witnessed to be walking around for weeks by more than 500 people! Thousands of people are immediately converting to Christianity, and the disciples (who were at one time afraid to even admit knowing Jesus) are now willing to die because they have seen the risen Christ.

Once again... you are obviously right. A dead man walking the earth claiming to be God is most certainly a non-event.

 

[therealUT]

Non-event??? A person claims to be the Son of God and is crucified for this in front of 100's of witnesses. But before he dies he also claims that he will rise again in 3 days. So, the Pharisees and Pontius Pilate are so concerned that someone may try to steal the dead body from the tomb that they place guards at the tomb to protect it (they obviously didn't think it was a non-event). They also place a 1 - 2 ton stone over the entrance and then affixed the Roman seal to the stone (a penalty of death to anyone who might remove it).

And yet... miraculously... the body disappears and Jesus (a dead man) is witnessed to be walking around for weeks by more than 500 people! Thousands of people are immediately converting to Christianity, and the disciples (who were at one time afraid to even admit knowing Jesus) are now willing to die because they have seen the risen Christ.

Once again... you are obviously right. A dead man walking the earth claiming to be God is most certainly a non-event.

From four writers, none of which were eye-witnesses to said event, and one who, even according to your opinion, say a bright light and then spoke with a ghost, who already have historical inaccurate information within their narratives. Why should I trust them that these events happened? I certainly can't trust them when they said that it was customary for the Romans to release a prisoner to them at Passover: that is a most dubious claim with no historical basis (the Catholic Church has admitted that much).

Story is riddled with holes concerning what should be pretty normal day to day events (census, births, legal customs, etc.), yet I am supposed to believe the supernatural claims?

Does not pass the common sense test. Maybe you have received some divine revelation and god has specifically told you that these things are true; if so, go forth and believe. This has not happened in my life and unless it does, I see nothing in the Bible or in history that would convince me that these extraordinary events occurred.

 

[droski]

:lol:

You either believe in God, or you don't. There is no middle ground.

ummm. what if you aren't sure? seems like that's a far more resonable belief than 0% chance god exists or 100% chance god does no?

 

[droski]

It is both unprovable and unfalsifiable: one can be justified in believing he was a historical figure; as well, one can be justified in believing he was not.

not a whole lot of evidence that jesus didn't actually exist. not much evidence he was the son of god though.

 

[rjd970]

ummm. what if you aren't sure? seems like that's a far more resonable belief than 0% chance god exists or 100% chance god does no?

JMO, but I disagree. Do you go around pretending to not be sure any of the God's of Olympus exist? To me, if you are unsure, then every God throughout history, no matter how ridiculous, is on equal footing.

I could probably find many Zeus atheists that are God agnostics. That doesn't make sense since the evidence for either is equally lacking.

 

[IPorange]

Aren't you the one that is convinced all churches are corrupt, based solely on your experiences alone??

Link?
Posted via VolNation Mobile