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 Yesterday, 12:55 AM
 
18,593 posts, read 14,253,368 times
Reputation: 6213

Advertisements

One of these threads is most likely going to be deleted. It should be this one since I posted my thread first. However, one thing that I said on my thread that I'll repeat here is the simple fact that

The Gospel of John was written by an eye witness of Jesus' life and of his resurrection and he presented Jesus' resurrection as physical. Mary Magdalene clung to the body of the risen Jesus (John 20:17). And John goes out of his way to show that Jesus' resurrected body was physical by stating that Jesus told Thomas to put his finger in his side (John 20:27).

The writer of the Gospel of John was with Jesus and saw the risen Jesus and he shows that Jesus' resurrection was physical. The fact that the Gospel of John was written around AD. 95 is irrelevant. The writer was an eyewitness as stated in John 21:20-24, and that refutes the claim that the physical resurrection was a legend that developed later.

You cannot deny what the Gospel of John says concerning the physical nature of Jesus' resurrection without denying that John 21:20-24 states that John was written by the disciple whom Jesus loved and was therefore an eyewitness to Jesus' resurrection. And if you are going to deny that then you have no regard for what the text says.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 12:55 AM
 
Location: Goodbye CO - Heading home
1,690 posts, read 565,828 times
Reputation: 2219
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnowMoreThanYou View Post
Nice argumentum ad populum. Tell me more about your fallacious ways oh wise one.
LOL If you think you're intimidating me, dream on Fantasy Boy. I've dealt with your kind for decades. I've been at this for awhile, and probably started on the road... way before you were ever born. Your type shut off and shut down your brain at an early stage, and stay stuck most or all of your life. You think others are blind, but you've duped yourself way beyond what you ridicule. No one owes you any information here. It's up to you to determine whether or not you'll ever take your anti-Jesus blinders off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:06 AM
 
34 posts, read 2,169 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
One of these threads is most likely going to be deleted. It should be this one since I posted my thread first. However, one thing that I said on my thread that I'll repeat here is the simple fact that

The Gospel of John was written by an eye witness of Jesus' life and of his resurrection and he presented Jesus' resurrection as physical. Mary Magdalene clung to the body of the risen Jesus (John 20:17). And John goes out of his way to show that Jesus' resurrected body was physical by stating that Jesus told Thomas to put his finger in his side (John 20:27).

The writer of the Gospel of John was with Jesus and saw the risen Jesus and he shows that Jesus' resurrection was physical. The fact that the Gospel of John was written around AD. 95 is irrelevant. The writer was an eyewitness as stated in John 21:20-24, and that refutes the claim that the physical resurrection was a legend that developed later.

You cannot deny what the Gospel of John says concerning the physical nature of Jesus' resurrection without denying that John 21:20-24 states that John was written by the disciple whom Jesus loved and was therefore an eyewitness to Jesus' resurrection. And if you are going to deny that then you have no regard for what the text says.
Is the Gospel of John written in first person? When do most scholars date the document again? The Gospel itself never says who the beloved disciple was. Moreover, most scholars take John 21 to be a later addition and reject traditional authorship based on many lines of evidence.

Christian scholar Raymond Brown (An Introduction to the New Testament, pp. 368-369) explains, “As with the other Gospels it is doubted by most scholars that this Gospel was written by an eyewitness of the public ministry of Jesus.”

Scholar Robert Kysar (The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. 3, pp. 919-920) explains, “The supposition that the author was one and the same with the beloved disciple is often advanced as a means of insuring that the evangelist did witness Jesus’ ministry. Two other passages are advanced as evidence of the same–19:35 and 21:24. But both falter under close scrutiny. 19:35 does not claim that the author was the one who witnessed the scene but only that the scene is related on the sound basis of eyewitness. 21:24 is part of the appendix of the gospel and should not be assumed to have come from the same hand as that responsible for the body of the gospel. Neither of these passages, therefore, persuades many Johannine scholars that the author claims eyewitness status.”
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:07 AM
 
34 posts, read 2,169 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoreau424 View Post
LOL If you think you're intimidating me, dream on Fantasy Boy. I've dealt with your kind for decades. I've been at this for awhile, and probably started on the road... way before you were ever born. Your type shut off and shut down your brain at an early stage, and stay stuck most or all of your life. You think others are blind, but you've duped yourself way beyond what you ridicule. No one owes you any information here. It's up to you to determine whether or not you'll ever take your anti-Jesus blinders off.
I've demonstrated that the resurrection is a legend and that means Christianity is false. I'm taking deconversion applications.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:19 AM
 
18,593 posts, read 14,253,368 times
Reputation: 6213
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnowMoreThanYou View Post
Did you find that ever elusive passage where Paul says the Risen Jesus was experienced in a way that was not a vision? Does Paul give any evidence for anything "physical" like the gospel resurrection reports tell us? For instance, does he mention that the Resurrected Jesus walked around on earth before floating to heaven?
While Paul states in Acts 26:19 that Jesus appeared in a heavenly vision, that no more implies a non- physical resurrection than Paul seeing Ananias in a vision (Acts 9:12) implies that Ananias was non-physical.

You've been shown that the writer of the Gospel of John was the disciple whom Jesus loved which makes him an eyewitness, and he shows Jesus' resurrection to be physical. And it really is just that simple. You may choose not to believe that the writer of John was an eyewitness, but you are disregarding the text.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:25 AM
 
18,593 posts, read 14,253,368 times
Reputation: 6213
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnowMoreThanYou View Post
I've demonstrated that the resurrection is a legend and that means Christianity is false. I'm taking deconversion applications.
Oh, now it comes out. You're claiming that Christianity is false. You might have just said so at the beginning. And no, you have not demonstrated anything but your own arrogance and your ability to bark 'Nuh uh.''

I'll just leave you to your unbelief then. This was time wasted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:33 AM
 
34 posts, read 2,169 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
While Paul states in Acts 26:19 that Jesus appeared in a heavenly vision, that no more implies a non- physical resurrection than Paul seeing Ananias in a vision (Acts 9:12) implies that Ananias was non-physical.
Without physical bodily appearances you can't claim it was a physical resurrection. Your entire case relies on reading the later gospels into Paul's firsthand writings. That is both anachronistic and fallacious because it doesn't necessarily follow that the earliest Christians and Paul believed those things. Paul nowhere corroborates anything like what is in the gospel resurrection reports. He equates the appearance to him (which was a vision) with that of the others in 1 Cor 15:5-8. Having a "vision" of someone doesn't necessarily mean that they were physically resurrected because it can just be something happening in your mind. That's what a "vision" usually is.

Quote:
You've been shown that the writer of the Gospel of John was the disciple whom Jesus loved which makes him an eyewitness, and he shows Jesus' resurrection to be physical. And it really is just that simple. You may choose not to believe that the writer of John was an eyewitness, but you are disregarding the text.
I've already debunked this. Stop repeating it. Since it can't be shown that the author was an eyewitness (most scholars disagree with that) and that the document dates to after 90 then this is still consistent with legendary growth. Sorry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:41 AM
 
18,593 posts, read 14,253,368 times
Reputation: 6213
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnowMoreThanYou View Post



I've already debunked this. Stop repeating it. Since it can't be shown that the author was an eyewitness (most scholars disagree with that) and that the document dates to after 90 then this is still consistent with legendary growth. Sorry.
No, you have not. You're barking 'Nuh uh' to the fact that the text of the Gospel of John clearly states that the writer of John is the disciple whom Jesus loved which makes him an eyewitness to the life and resurrection of Jesus, and that he showed that Jesus' resurrection was physical. There's nothing legendary about it.

But since you've now admitted that you believe that Christianity is false, it's evident that you're just going to continue to bark 'Nuh uh.' I'll not waste any more of my time on you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:48 AM
 
34 posts, read 2,169 times
Reputation: 13
No serious scholar thinks the apostle John wrote the gospel. I've given several reasons why and quotes from scholars but you seem incapable of actually addressing these points and instead want to keep asserting the same thing over and over. How about you actually address the evolution in the story between the accounts or are you just going to pretend there isn't any? This ought to be fun.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:51 AM
 
34 posts, read 2,169 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
the Gospel of John clearly states that the writer of John is the disciple whom Jesus loved which makes him an eyewitness to the life and resurrection of Jesus,
If I write a letter claiming I'm the King of England does that make it so? You need to learn how to give evidence and arguments. You don't just get to use an internal claim (which is highly disputed) as evidence for the claim itself. You're just using circular logic and employing a non-sequitur.
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

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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, 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 - Top