From a neutral standpoint. Which religion is right? (myths, believer, Jesus)
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.
During the last 2,000 years the world over there where the Bible was written has seen famines, whole areas burnt to the ground through warfare, and on and on. We are fortunate to have what we do from that era.
And why would something like Christ ascending into heaven have to be false if neither Josephus or Tacitus never wrote about it? The fact that we DO have ancient writings which are written about it proves it occurred. The historic accounts in the Scriptures are just as valid as any not biblical historical account by Josephus or Tacitus.
Well, how convenient! Extra-biblical evidence may have existed at some point, but it was conveniently destroyed.
One would think that the early Christians would have realized the value of the corroborating accounts and preserved said writings every bit as well as they preserved the New Testament writings.
If you applied the same kind of reasoning to the Book of Mormon and the Quran, logically you should become a Mormon and/or a Muslim. But naturally you have a double standard for determining the truth claims of a particular religion: one standard for the religion to which you currently subscribe, and a much tougher standard for every other religion.
We know the identities of Josephus and Tacitus..........we have no idea who penned the gospels.
So? That proves nothing. You've never seen an actual Kodak picture of Josephus and Tacitus. Therefore, according to your way of thinking, someone just made those historians up.
Quote:
We do know that the actual Bible has many translation issues, and has been edited down,added to, and amended to suit the agendas of both the clergy and rulers like Constantine and King James.......... not to mention amended to accommodate Jewish messiah prophecy concerning the line of King David.
Actually we don't know that.
Quote:
Within the gospels you have inconsistencies with the birth of Jesus and the resurrection stories,
Not really. What some have are misunderstandings and agendas to poopoo the Bible.
Quote:
whatever the Bible lays claim to be, one thing it is not......... is a historical account of any reliability whatsoever.
Actually it is an historical and valid collection of accounts.
One would think that the early Christians would have realized the value of the corroborating accounts and preserved said writings as well as they preserved the New Testament.
It's a simple question. If there were so many written secular accounts of the Ascension of Jesus into Heaven, why didn't the church carefully preserve those writings so that we would still have them (as evidence) today?
It's a simple question. If there were so many written secular accounts of the Ascension of Jesus into Heaven, why didn't the church carefully preserve those writings so that we would still have them (as evidence) today?
We don't know if there were secular writings of His ascension. But we do have historical accounts collected and put into what we call the Bible concerning the historical account of His ascension. That is good enough for me and should be good enough for anyone.
We don't know if there were secular writings of His ascension. But we do have historical accounts collected and put into what we call the Bible concerning the historical account of His ascension. That is good enough for me and should be good enough for anyone.
Then logically, the historical account of the Visitation of the Angel Moroni to Joseph Smith should also be good enough for you. And the historical account of the Night of Power in which the Final Revelation of God was given to humanity via the Prophet Mohammed should likewise be enough for you.
We don't know if there were secular writings of His ascension. But we do have historical accounts collected and put into what we call the Bible concerning the historical account of His ascension. That is good enough for me and should be good enough for anyone.
There is a good modern day parallel of sorts: It's called "The Starchild Project"
The Starchild skull (an oddly shaped 900 year old skull) has been tested twice independently with the results made public........the Starchild had human DNA.
Not satisfied with the human DNA findings the Starchild project decide to do their own DNA tests using a very conveniently anonymous geneticist and an anonymous lab.
The Starchild project declare that their latest DNA tests show that the skull was not human after all.....but alien.
The Starchild project put up their latest DNA findings and conclusions on their dedicated Starchild project website.
When people debate the subject of the Starchild, the Starchild apologists would always quote the findings off the starchild website.
The debates would generally go............ Debater A: "The Starchild is merely a deformed human."
Debater B: "No it's not, it's alien..........it says so here"......... (They link to the Starchild website!)
"Jesus was virgin born and was resurrected because it says so here".........(link to the Bible!)
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.
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.
