Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [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 02-10-2017, 06:33 AM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,082 posts, read 20,553,961 times
Reputation: 5927

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
As a child, I was brought up to believe the story of the resurrection. I became very interested in religion, looking at a variety of sources and discovered what made sense, that Jesus' placement on the stake/cross was questionable, actually the whole thing. And, it doesn't "fit" since one of the Commandments is to worship only one God. This is an example, weak one, but what I could find quickly of what changed my mind: The biggest cover up of human history : The revelations that Jesus didn't die on the cross | Technology of the Heart

Some years ago, I saw a television special on this. I have to go with what makes sense at which time I wrote off the New Testament, but not God, of course.

I think the whole thing of Jesus sold because of the "by faith alone" rather than living by the laws of God.
Yes, like I said, the story if taken as reliable pretty much guarantees a plot to get Jesus off the cross alive.

But the Gospels are not reliable, and thus the Clues we use to see what was going on (if we do consider the Plot -hypothesis rather than dismiss it on Faith grounds) may not have occurred.
E.g The wine on a stick. Put together and the most probable story is that Arimathea was the one who was behind the drugged wine, as he was behind everything from the Lazarus 'test -run' of the resurrection to getting Jesus out of the tomb before the guard even arrived.

You even have not only the soldiers having to be in the plot - and that means Pilate too (why not? He was on very good terms with the Pharisee Sanhedrin member Arimathea but not so sympathetic to the Sadducee High priest) but Jesus has to be in the plot as he first refuses the wine, but later (when he realized he is 'forsaken', he asks for the wine and promptly conks out.

Well..damn' I was going to say it's scriptural prophecy backdates, but put like that, it is a common story even without the 'Gall' in the wine. So it's can't be discounted as easily as the resurrection, and after all, I don't think may people doubt Jesus really was executed by Pilate (I don't), but neither can the details be relied upon. So either way, there was no plot and a death or there was a plot - and still a death.

What there was not was a solid -body resurrection, or there would have been four broadly reconcilable accounts 9as in the crucifixion). But instead, we get four contradictory account - John's, Matthew's, Luke's ..and Paul's.

And to relate back to that site, the Muslims may have spotted some reasons to doubt a resurrection, but (and I am just saying If) if they haven't spotted all the conclusions, then they haven't got the actual truth. So it doesn't do the Quran any more good than it does the Bible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-11-2017, 05:53 AM
 
692 posts, read 373,108 times
Reputation: 55
Default Is the story of the Resurrection fact or fiction?

A basis of Christianity is the claim of the Resurrection from the dead of Jesus.

But is this a fact of history or only a legend?

Let's begin at the beginning - when did Jesus die?

Scholars have provided estimates for the year of crucifixion in the range 30–33 AD, with the majority of modern scholars favoring the date April 7, 30 AD. Another popular date is Friday, April 3, 33 AD.

Crucifixion of Jesus - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion_of_Jesus

The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke claim that Jesus was crucified on a Passover.

The gospel of John claims that Jesus was crucified a day earlier, on the Day of Preparation (for the Passover)

Although estimates of the dates of the writings of the gospels vary, the present consensus is that Mark was written in 70 AD, Matthew and Luke in 80 AD, and John about 95 AD.

Since a resurrection of someone dead would be the most amazing fact of history, are there any earlier reports?

Last edited by Aristotles child; 02-11-2017 at 06:07 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-11-2017, 10:49 AM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,082 posts, read 20,553,961 times
Reputation: 5927
I'll have to leave that discussion to You, mate, as looking at the points looks like a discussion of what isn't on the agenda - for me, at least. dating the Passover? It wasn't at passover at all; it was during Sukkhot. Passover was foisted on the story later by the idea of Jesus being a sin -sacrifice.

When did Jesus die- or when was his mission? Well, it's an interesting but academic discussion, as none of the dating is that certain, though the mid 30's looks credible. Dating by eclipses is of course a waste of time. I might credit it if John had a crucifixion darkness, but he doesn't.

What might be better is Josephus linking the execution of the Baptist with the defeat of Antipas by the Nabateans (seen by the Jews as a punishment). Given that a prophecy can't be too late in fulfillment, we are looking at 34=5 for a crucifixion. And wasn't it 36 AD that Pilate was recalled?

What more? Dates of the gospels. Irrelevant, I'd say, Because clearly there was around 37 -8 the apostolic stories of Jesus,

Around mid forties (coinciding the the Judean famine) Paul was peddling His view of Jesus to the gentiles.

50 -60 AD the original Christianized view of the Paulinist take on Jesus appeared in its' earlier form.

Post the Jewish war the synoptic original appeared as it had a retrospective prophecy of the war,

early - mid 100's AD we have the earliest fragment of John, and Matthew was probably even later with references to tales of Jesus coming down to his day. Luke is even later 3rd c perhaps, even though his story of Paul stop s60 AD. And of course the updated synoptics, the 'completion' of Mark and additional material like the woman taken in adultery, Nativities and resurrections have to be done pretty much late 2nd - 3rd c AD and the gospel of Peter, even later than the gospels we have (except possibly Luke- there are still clues to be sorted) and the various letters and gospels (never mind the Arian and gnostic ones) were being combined and recombined (though broadly in the same way) right up to the Time Constantine thought a KJV equivalent (ECV ) should be codified for the new Govt. Approved religion.

You get my point - trying the Date the True story is pointless. What I argue and propse is that the True story was dead as soon as Paul reinvented it to suit himself, and thereafter even if the disciples were dying for the truth at that very moments, Paul was peddling, if not actually a lie, a Selection of truth, the partial truth and nothing much like the truth. And what the Christian Gospel -writers were going to do with it later would have appalled even Paul, who was pretty appalling himself. And this was STILL before the destruction of the Temple.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 02-11-2017 at 11:05 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2017, 05:39 PM
 
Location: US
32,530 posts, read 21,918,865 times
Reputation: 2226
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorInSpirit View Post

If you want other extrabiblical accounts; there is verification of the darkness at His crucifixion; one secular historian, Thallus, made the mistake of saying that it was caused by an eclipse, but another secular historian, Julius Africanus, said that it was unlikely because there was a full moon that day.
Sextus Julius Africanus was a Christian traveler and historian of the late second and early third centuries. He is important chiefly because of his influence on Eusebius, on all the later writers of Church history among the Church Fathers, and on the whole Greek school of chroniclers. - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sextus_Julius_Africanus

Thallus

The works are considered important by some Christians because they believe them to confirm the historicity of Jesus and provide non-Christian validation of the Gospel accounts: a reference to a historical eclipse, attributed to Thallus, has been taken as a mention of the worldwide darkness described in the Synoptic gospels account of the death of Jesus, although an eclipse could not have taken place during Passover when this took place. A common view in modern scholarship is that the Crucifixion darkness is a literary creation rather than a historical event. - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thallus_(historian)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2017, 06:24 AM
 
Location: Southern California
2,039 posts, read 2,148,158 times
Reputation: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aristotles child View Post
Jesus was crucified by the Romans c. 30 – 33 AD.

No records of his resurrection or ascension have been found.

Paul, who was not a witness to either, wrote in 1 Cor 15 (c. 53-57 AD) that Jesus had appeared to 500 witnesses. That group of people would logically have included Jews, Romans, Greeks, and various other Gentiles residing in Jerusalem.

Paul’s letter was written to Corinth, 813 miles from Jerusalem in which these things were supposed to have taken place.

None of the 500 witnesses nor any of the thousands they would reasonably have told left any written records
.
Based on the evidence, what historical credibility does the fact of the Resurrection have?
The resurrection has nothing to do with Jesus appearing to a few people after he passed over to the spirit world. It has to do with the rebestowal by God of His Divine Love, which was rejected by the first parents. Jesus' soul was created to long for this Love. He received it and eventually became a Divine man... and at-one with God while on earth. His teachings are all about receiving God's Divine Love. He didn't die on the cross to save our sins. A soul transformed by being completely infused with God's Divine Love is our salvation. This Love brings immortality.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top