U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-14-2016, 03:26 PM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,463,277 times
Reputation: 989

Advertisements

>>>>>>Eusebius wrote: The four gospels/accounts are historical accounts.

Quote:
The gospels are NOT universally recognized as historical documents. It depends on who you ask. Apologists say they are historical. Secular scholars say they are not.
I say they are and that's all that matters.

Google "The four gospels are historical" and see what you find.


>>>>Eusebius wrote: Joseph and Pilate and Mary and others witnessed Joseph requesting the body from Pilate.


Quote:
Upon which non-Biblical source do you base this assertion?
Funny.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-15-2016, 01:01 AM
 
10,202 posts, read 10,586,064 times
Reputation: 3035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
>>>>>>Eusebius wrote: The four gospels/accounts are historical accounts.

I say they are and that's all that matters.

Google "The four gospels are historical" and see what you find.


>>>>Eusebius wrote: Joseph and Pilate and Mary and others witnessed Joseph requesting the body from Pilate.


Funny.

Eusebius, you are a card.


Quote:
Google "The four gospels are historical" and see what you find.

Here you go:




Quote:
The historical reliability of the Gospels refers to the reliability and historic character of the four New Testament gospels as historical documents. Although some claim that all four canonical gospels meet the five criteria for historical reliability,[SIZE=2][1][/SIZE] others say that little in the gospels is considered to be historically reliable
  1. The Myth about Jesus, Allvar Ellegard 1992,
  2. Craig Evans, "Life-of-Jesus Research and the Eclipse of Mythology," Theological Studies 54 (1993) p. 5,
  3. Charles H. Talbert, What Is a Gospel? The Genre of Canonical Gospels pg 42 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977).
  4. “The Historical Figure of Jesus," Sanders, E.P., Penguin Books: London, 1995, p., 3.
  5. Fire of Mercy, Heart of the Word (Vol. II): Meditations on the Gospel According to St. Matthew – Dr Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis, Ignatius Press, Introduction
  6. Grant, Robert M., "A Historical Introduction to the New Testament" (Harper and Row, 1963) http://www.religion-online.org/showc...le=1116&C=1230
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...of_the_Gospels
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-16-2016, 08:32 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
6,966 posts, read 4,322,431 times
Reputation: 1163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
He was in a rich man's borrowed tomb, but he was also rejected and crucified a horrible sinner's death. He was executed with criminals -- with wicked people. He was rejected and buried as a criminal.

Honestly...this is yet another of your attacks. I'm used to it.
I'm confused, did the O.P. ever disagree with your above statements about the possible details of the "real" story? I thought the O.P. was merely pointing out that the common New Testament (Although Jesus never gave it) detail about not being buried with the wicked does not fit in with the "Old Testament" (which Jesus would have wholly adored, other than the books that weren't considered canon by him) detail about the ugly and sickly Messiah (royal savior from Persia).

Isaiah Chapters 52,53, and 54 are clearly about the salvation of the discontent Jews from Babylon's Empire.

Infact, Isaiah 52:1 says "Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.

Yet Rome walked all over the shameful city of Jerusalem, quite a few times, after Persia, after Jesus and surely again the "unrighteous and uncircumcised" have and will walk all over it again after America and Britain.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-16-2016, 09:15 PM
 
10,202 posts, read 10,586,064 times
Reputation: 3035
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
I'm confused, did the O.P. ever disagree with your above statements about the possible details of the "real" story? I thought the O.P. was merely pointing out that the common New Testament (Although Jesus never gave it) detail about not being buried with the wicked does not fit in with the "Old Testament" (which Jesus would have wholly adored, other than the books that weren't considered canon by him) detail about the ugly and sickly Messiah (royal savior from Persia).

Isaiah Chapters 52,53, and 54 are clearly about the salvation of the discontent Jews from Babylon's Empire.

Infact, Isaiah 52:1 says "Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.

Yet Rome walked all over the shameful city of Jerusalem, quite a few times, after Persia, after Jesus and surely again the "unrighteous and uncircumcised" have and will walk all over it again after America and Britain.

I will be audacious and answer for Pastor Vizio as I know already what he is going to say---actually it is what every fundamentalist defaults to when cornered by a failed prophecy: these words of Isaiah have not yet been fulfilled. They are future-fulfilled when Jesus returns.


How'd I do, Viz?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2016, 05:03 AM
 
34,886 posts, read 9,021,289 times
Reputation: 4816
Quote:
Originally Posted by hljc View Post
``And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death , because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth ``...............he was numbered with the transgressors ..................See the wicked jealous leaders put Jesus down , as their sin was envy , but Jesus was numbered with the transgressors , meaning that Jesus ordered his disciples to buy two swords , which made Jesus numbered with the transgressors , so then Jesus would be equal with the people He would redeem of sin ........... See there is nothing failed with this Prophecy as Jesus did no violence and had no deceit , and had miracles beyond measure and the leaders went jealous, as Jesus made his grave though them ...........But still God raised Jesus up later
Thanks...you took the words out of my mouth. Rewrite the Bible to mean 'he was "put in the grave" (killed, not placed in the tomb, of course) by the wicked'. I particularly like the suggestion that the puzzling instruction to buy a couple of swords was to make himself a technical sinner so that the sacrifice would be effective. very inventive, that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2016, 05:09 AM
 
34,886 posts, read 9,021,289 times
Reputation: 4816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Really? If you were living in, say, the 1700's and were too poor to have a "normal" burial, they might take your body to the paupers cemetery and bury you with the paupers. In Jesus' day they assigned his tomb among the tombs where the wicked were entombed. It doesn't mean He was put in a tomb that had wicked people interred in that same tomb.
That's a good one. A different interpretation from hljc...but really stating the obvious so much that it sorta loses force as a prophecy of anything, doesn't it? Quite aapart from being put in a rich man's tomb in his own garden. Hardly 'amongst' the res of the burials.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
>>>>>>Eusebius wrote: The four gospels/accounts are historical accounts.

I say they are and that's all that matters.
Eusebius says it, we should all believe it; that settles it.

Quote:
Google "The four gospels are historical" and see what you find.
I di and first site I fond..."scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts of Jesus,[12] and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate."


[quote]>>>>Eusebius wrote: Joseph and Pilate and Mary and others witnessed Joseph requesting the body from Pilate.[quote]

Quote:
Upon which non-Biblical source do you base this assertion?
Quote:
Funny.
Laughing it off when you can't answer. Mind, it is in all the gospels - even John's, so it has to be given weight.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 04-17-2016 at 05:18 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2016, 08:06 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
6,966 posts, read 4,322,431 times
Reputation: 1163
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
I will be audacious and answer for Pastor Vizio as I know already what he is going to say---actually it is what every fundamentalist defaults to when cornered by a failed prophecy: these words of Isaiah have not yet been fulfilled. They are future-fulfilled when Jesus returns.


How'd I do, Viz?
If it's supposed to happen in the present-tense future, then why would the Jews accept Jesus as their Last Messiah? They are still waiting for all of the prophecies to be fulfilled (not that they would ever need to worship their possible sacrificial lamb Messiah (since they already worship G-d directly) that would be pretty pagan... although god having a son/self-incarnation is pretty pagan... and gods coming down as men is also pagan). Although the one about the Last Messiah passing the chalice of agony and servitude to the Gentiles seems to be working itself quite easily among the gullible immortality-seekers.

But a sacrificial lamb Last Messiah would contradict their prophecies that say they will know their Messiah once he establishes the essential vassalship of all Nations toward the Promised Land of Israel and Peace on Earth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2016, 05:20 PM
 
4,643 posts, read 2,285,896 times
Reputation: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte View Post
GOD'S WORD® Translation
He was placed in a tomb with the wicked
New International Version
He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
New American Standard Bible
His grave was assigned with wicked men,
So which is it; was Jesus buried alone or was he buried with wicked men as per Isaiah?
Who also died the day that Jesus died but the ' robbers '( considered as wicked enough to be executed ) on each side of Jesus, plus, although not mentioned there could have been even more than those two criminals executed that day, so his ' burial place even with the wicked ones ' - Isaiah 53:9 - easily corresponds to Matthew 27:38; Luke 23:32

And Isaiah 53:9 would also correspond with the rich class in his death ( Joseph of Aramathaea )
- Matthew 27:57; Mark 15:46; John 19:41
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2016, 05:30 PM
 
4,643 posts, read 2,285,896 times
Reputation: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER View Post
Thanks...you took the words out of my mouth. Rewrite the Bible to mean 'he was "put in the grave" (killed, not placed in the tomb, of course) by the wicked'. I particularly like the suggestion that the puzzling instruction to buy a couple of swords was to make himself a technical sinner so that the sacrifice would be effective. very inventive, that.
Is it really trying to re-write the Bible because whether the word tomb, or use the word grave as in graveyard - John 20:15 - ( caretaker of the cemetery ) it is still referring to the grave.
According to Acts 2:27; Psalm 16:10 Jesus went to the grave the day he died. KJV translated words into English as hell and hellfire. Biblical hell is just the grave.
The temporary grave for the sleeping dead until resurrected being brought back to life.

- John 1:11-14; Psalms 115:17; 146:4; Daniel 12:2,13; Ecclesiastes 9:5
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2016, 04:56 AM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
6,966 posts, read 4,322,431 times
Reputation: 1163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew 4:4 View Post
Is it really trying to re-write the Bible because whether the word tomb, or use the word grave as in graveyard - John 20:15 - ( caretaker of the cemetery ) it is still referring to the grave.
According to Acts 2:27; Psalm 16:10 Jesus went to the grave the day he died. KJV translated words into English as hell and hellfire. Biblical hell is just the grave.
The temporary grave for the sleeping dead until resurrected being brought back to life.

- John 1:11-14; Psalms 115:17; 146:4; Daniel 12:2,13; Ecclesiastes 9:5
And here I thought biblical hell was Hades (Hidden). So now Hades also just means Grave? "hiding" a corpse under the ground?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top