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.
You are correct as ever my dear old carbuncle. We can't blame them though. 'The bible is true because it says so'.. is really all they have my dear old wart.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte
Yes, I know.
"Watch my stuff, but don't expect me to watch yours."
His favorite MO.
Thank you, You and Raffs both. I thought that was what was in the videos, and I already mentioned the brandishing about of Bible Authorities and church fathers. I prefer to go on the actual evidence, and I'll consider what Authorities, recent, ancient and in between, have to say; but nobody is immune from question. I mentioned once before an excellent book on Matthew but the author simply went into bonehead apologist mode on the two donkeys when the honest thing to do would be to admit that Matthew simply got it wrong. But too much depends on that for the believer. Admit something like that - never mind that the nativities are demonstrably bunk, let alone the resurrection and the whole big lie (that the gospels are reliable eyewitness) collapses. Totally.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-17-2016 at 03:40 PM..
I've stated many times here I could no more believe nature did all this than I could believe a man could jump to the moon. The more I contemplate our universe and the miracle of life the more I cannot deny there is a God somewhere out there.
I can understand that argument. I think it is possible to underestimate the complexity that can come about by sheer natural trial and error, given time, and underestimate the reasons to think there is not an intelligent designer behind it all, but it is really an academic discussion, and I don't have a serious problem with what you believe. provided you don't start teaching it in school as science. Because in fact I/D isn't science and science in fact argues against I/D. I think perhaps that isn't your line but more a 'This thing is so immense - there must be a Being behind it'. Again I don't agree but don't have a serious problem with it.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-17-2016 at 03:43 PM..
The disciples did not believe that Jesus was resurrected in some spiritual sense, ''that Jesus' spirit had risen from his body and gone back to heaven.''
Resurrection, whether it was believed in, or denied, as it was by the Sadducees, was always understood by the Jews to be a physical resurrection.
I'll quote Justin Martyr with regard to that fact.
Justin Martyr, DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO
CHAPTER LXXX -- THE OPINION OF JUSTIN WITH REGARD TO THE REIGN OF A THOUSAND YEARS. SEVERAL CATHOLICS REJECT IT.
For if you have fallen in with some who are called Christians, but who do not admit this[truth], and venture to blaspheme the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; who say there is no resurrection of the dead, and that their souls, when they die, are taken to heaven; do not imagine that they are Christians, even as one, if he would rightly consider it, would not admit that the Sadducees, or similar sects of Genist , Meristae,Gelilaeans, Hellenists, Pharisees, Baptists, are Jews(do not hear me impatiently when I tell you what I think), but are[only] called Jews and children of Abraham, worshipping God with the lips, as God Himself declared, but the heart was far from Him. But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare. [Bolding mine]
Note the bolded. Trypho was saying that there were those who denied the resurrection, and that when a person dies his soul goes to heaven. In other words, there were those who denied resurrection and instead believed the soul went to heaven when a person died. Or to put it another way, contrary to your opinion, resurrection was not thought of as the spirit rising from the body and going to heaven, but rather, resurrection which was denied was set in contrast with the soul going to heaven. Among the Jews who believed in resurrection, the belief was of a physical bodily resurrection at the end of the age. When Jesus told the disciples that He would die and rise again in three days, they could not understand it. They did not expect Him to rise again. But He did, and they were witnesses to His resurrection.
And that resurrection was understood as a physical resurrection is made clear in John 5:28-29 in which Jesus speaks of all who are in the tombs coming out of the tombs, some to a resurrection of life, and some to a resurrection of judgment.
John 5:28 "Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29] and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.
Resurrection in Jewish thought refers to a physical bodily resurrection. Not to the soul going to heaven when a person dies, although the soul of the believer does go to heaven at the point of physical death. That is the intermediate state between physical death and bodily resurrection in the future.
And yes, the disciples were eyewitnesses as John states in 1 John 1-3.
1 John 1:1 What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life-- 2] and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us-- 3] what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.
The New Testament writers were not writing fiction, and while you may choose not to believe them, they expected what they wrote to be taken as factual.
And no, the video doesn't make any erroneous or misleading arguments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
You will have to do better than that. John may have has some eyewitness material, am constantly given the odd feeling that he did. But he demonstrably overlaid it with his own writing. Ad if he is right, why then, the synoptic accounts must be wrong. And if we can't believe Mark or Luke, why should we believe John?
I believe you are barking up the wrong tree with the Pharisaical resurrection -idea. The Disciples thought in terms of the messianic spirit. Read Paul (Romans) on that.
And never mind the views of Justin Martyr or Trypho.
Again, it is stated in the Gospel of John itself that the writer of that Gospel is the disciple whom Jesus loved. That means that the Gospel of John was written by an eyewitness. And no, the synoptics are not wrong.
The disciples were Jews and their beliefs about resurrection were Jewish. That includes Paul. And the Jewish idea about resurrection was that of a physical bodily resurrection. The concept of resurrection did not have the connotation of the soul leaving the body and going to heaven.
You say nevermind the views of Justin. How easy it is to simply dismiss inconvenient evidence which refutes your own views.
Justin Martyr was but one example which demonstrates that resurrection was thought of as a resurrection of the body.
Another clear example is found in 2 Macabees in a story about a mother and her seven sons who refuse to obey the demands of the tyrant Antiochus Epiphanes to disregard the requirements of the Mosaic Law about not eating unclean food. As a result they are tortured and killed. As they are being tortured they voice their expectations of being raised to life again in the flesh.
2 Macabees Chapter 7
7 So when the first was dead after this number, they brought the second to make him a mocking stock: and when they had pulled off the skin of his head with the hair, they asked him, Wilt thou eat, before thou be punished throughout every member of thy body?
8 But he answered in his own language, and said, No. Wherefore he also received the next torment in order, as the former did.
9 And when he was at the last gasp, he said, Thou like a fury takest us out of this present life, but the King of the world shall raise us up, who have died for his laws, unto everlasting life.
10 After him was the third made a mocking stock: and when he was required, he put out his tongue, and that right soon, holding forth his hands manfully.
11 And said courageously, These I had from heaven; and for his laws I despise them; and from him I hope to receive them again.
12 Insomuch that the king, and they that were with him, marvelled at the young man's courage, for that he nothing regarded the pains.
13 Now when this man was dead also, they tormented and mangled the fourth in like manner.
14 So when he was ready to die he said thus, It is good, being put to death by men, to look for hope from God to be raised up again by him: as for thee, thou shalt have no resurrection to life.
23 But doubtless the Creator of the world, who formed the generation of man, and found out the beginning of all things, will also of his own mercy give you breath and life again, as ye now regard not your own selves for his laws' sake. [Bolding mine]
This passage from 2 Macabees shows that resurrection was thought of as being raised back to physical life after having been dead.
Josephus expressed his view of resurrection as being raised back to life again in the age to come.
Do you not know that those who depart out of this life, according to the law of nature, and pay that debt which was received from God, when he that lent it us is pleased to require it back, enjoy eternal fame? that their houses and their posterity are sure, that their souls are pure and obedient, and obtain a most holy place in heaven, from whence, in the revolution of ages, they are again sent into pure bodies; while the souls of those whose hands have acted madly against themselves, are received by the darkest place in Hades, and while God, who is their father, punishes those that offend against either of them in their posterity? for which reason God hates such doings, and the crime is punished by our most wise legislator. [Bolding mine]
Josephus, Wars of the Jews, book 3, chapter 8, section 5.
Josephus then believed that after having spent time in heaven, a person will be sent into pure bodies. Resurrection wasn't going to heaven, but was after going to heaven for an interim period will be physically resurrected in a future age.
Clement of Rome understood the resurrection of which Jesus is the firstfruit, as being in the flesh, which means that he understood Jesus to have been resurrected in the flesh.
1Clem 24:1
Let us understand, dearly beloved, how the Master continually
showeth unto us the resurrection that shall be hereafter; whereof He
made the Lord Jesus Christ the firstfruit, when He raised Him from
the dead.
1Clem 24:2
Let us behold, dearly beloved, the resurrection which happeneth at
its proper season.
1Clem 24:3
Day and night show unto us the resurrection. The night falleth
asleep, and day ariseth; the day departeth, and night cometh on.
1Clem 24:4
Let us mark the fruits, how and in what manner the sowing taketh
place.
1Clem 24:5
The sower goeth forth and casteth into the earth each of the
seeds; and these falling into the earth dry and bare decay: then out
of their decay the mightiness of the Master's providence raiseth them
up, and from being one they increase manifold and bear fruit.
1Clem 25:1
Let us consider the marvelous sign which is seen in the regions of
the east, that is, in the parts about Arabia.
1Clem 25:2
There is a bird, which is named the phoenix. This, being the only
one of its kind, liveth for five hundred years; and when it hath now
reached the time of its dissolution that it should die, it maketh for
itself a coffin of frankincense and myrrh and the other spices, into
the which in the fullness of time it entereth, and so it dieth.
1Clem 25:3
But, as the flesh rotteth, a certain worm is engendered, which is
nurtured from the moisture of the dead creature and putteth forth
wings. Then, when it is grown lusty, it taketh up that coffin where
are the bones of its parent, and carrying them journeyeth from the
country of Arabia even unto Egypt, to the place called the City of
the Sun;
1Clem 25:4
and in the daytime in the sight of all, flying to the altar of the
Sun, it layeth them thereupon; and this done, it setteth forth to
return.
1Clem 25:5
So the priests examine the registers of the times, and they find that
it hath come when the five hundredth year is completed.
1Clem 26:1
Do we then think it to be a great and marvelous thing, if the
Creator of the universe shall bring about the resurrection of them
that have served Him with holiness in the assurance of a good faith,
seeing that He showeth to us even by a bird the magnificence of His
promise?
1Clem 26:2
For He saith in a certain place And Thou shalt raise me up, and I
will praise Thee; and; I went to rest and slept, I was awaked,
for Thou art with me.
1Clem 26:3
And again Job saith And Thou shall raise this my flesh which hath
endured all these things. [Bolding mine]
John 12:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.
Ignatius of Antioch (died c. A.D 110) in his letter to the Smyrnaeans alludes to Luke 24:39-43 and states that he knows and believes that Jesus was raised in the flesh.
Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans
CHAPTER 2
2:1 For He suffered all these things for our sakes
[that we might be saved]; and He suffered truly, as
also He raised Himself truly; not as certain
unbelievers say, that He suffered in semblance, being
themselves mere semblance. And according as their
opinions are, so shall it happen to them, for they are
without body and demon-like.
CHAPTER 3 3:1 For I know and believe that He was in the flesh
even after the resurrection; 3:2 and when He came to Peter and his company, He
said to them, _Lay hold and handle me, and see that I
am not a demon without body._ And straightway they
touched Him, and they believed, being joined unto His
flesh and His blood. Wherefore also they despised
death, nay they were found superior to death.
3:3 And after His resurrection He [both] ate with
them and drank with them as one in the flesh, though
spiritually He was united with the Father.
Jesus Himself stated that He would be raised in the flesh when He said to the Jews, 'Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up. The temple to which He referred was His body. In three days His body would be raised up. And John who recorded this statement of Jesus understood this.
John 2:19 Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
Paul as well understood that resurrection referred to a bodily resurrection as is made clear in Romans.
Romans 8:9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. 10] If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11]But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.
Skipping ahead to Romans 8:23 Paul speaks of the resurrection in terms of the 'redemption of our body.'
Romans 8:23 And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.
While in Romans 8:9-10 Paul speaks of the believer's spiritual life which he now possesses, the subject changes in verse 11 to the promise of a future resurrection of the body which in verse 23 Paul refers to as the redemption of our body. While there is a sense in which the believer already has received the adoption as sons [v. 15], there is a future sense in which the believer will receive the adoption in its completeness with reference to the redemption of the body in resurrection.
Jesus' body was physically resurrected in a state of immortality and incorruptibility, and this is what is taught in the New Testament. Again, and as has been shown, Jewish thought concerning the subject of resurrection was of the body being raised after having been in some intermediate state after physical death. And Jesus' body was raised on the third day after His death.
This has all the earmarks of baiting and none of the signs of sincerity. You should know by now, unless you are raised in isolation, that the most convincing evidence of God is personal experience and NOT something unbelievers can examine, but you know that don't you?
So, if a personal experience of god is what it takes to convince many people to believe, then why do you christians fault atheists for not being convinced to believe when we haven't had a personal experience of god?
This has all the earmarks of baiting and none of the signs of sincerity. You should know by now, unless you are raised in isolation, that the most convincing evidence of God is personal experience and NOT something unbelievers can examine, but you know that don't you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mythunderstood
So, if a personal experience of god is what it takes to convince many people to believe, then why do you christians fault atheists for not being convinced to believe when we haven't had a personal experience of god?
Blame the churches who seek members. They are at fault.
Again, it is stated in the Gospel of John itself that the writer of that Gospel is the disciple whom Jesus loved. That means that the Gospel of John was written by an eyewitness. And no, the synoptics are not wrong.
The disciples were Jews and their beliefs about resurrection were Jewish. That includes Paul. And the Jewish idea about resurrection was that of a physical bodily resurrection. The concept of resurrection did not have the connotation of the soul leaving the body and going to heaven.
You say nevermind the views of Justin. How easy it is to simply dismiss inconvenient evidence which refutes your own views.
Justin Martyr was but one example which demonstrates that resurrection was thought of as a resurrection of the body.
Another clear example is found in 2 Macabees in a story about a mother and her seven sons who refuse to obey the demands of the tyrant Antiochus Epiphanes to disregard the requirements of the Mosaic Law about not eating unclean food. As a result they are tortured and killed. As they are being tortured they voice their expectations of being raised to life again in the flesh.
Cut for brevity.
There it is again folks! His 'evidence' is nothing more than the Bible and early Church fathers who obviously believed it was all true anyway. He just can't see the circular argument in it...or if he does, he clearly doesn't care and sees circular reasoning as a valid argument.
Can you please explain how 'John' could remember verbatim, the words spoken by specific people, when, where, what time and to whom, more than 60 years after the event and at the age of...what... 90 years old!
Can you further explain how 'John' was able to transcribes verbatim in chapter 17 the prayer of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, while being 50 metres away, SLEEPING with all the others?
Again, it is stated in the Gospel of John itself that the writer of that Gospel is the disciple whom Jesus loved. That means that the Gospel of John was written by an eyewitness. And no, the synoptics are not wrong.
The disciples were Jews and their beliefs about resurrection were Jewish. That includes Paul. And the Jewish idea about resurrection was that of a physical bodily resurrection. The concept of resurrection did not have the connotation of the soul leaving the body and going to heaven.
You say nevermind the views of Justin. How easy it is to simply dismiss inconvenient evidence which refutes your own views.
Justin Martyr was but one example which demonstrates that resurrection was thought of as a resurrection of the body.
Another clear example is found in 2 Macabees in a story about a mother and her seven sons who refuse to obey the demands of the tyrant Antiochus Epiphanes to disregard the requirements of the Mosaic Law about not eating unclean food. As a result they are tortured and killed. As they are being tortured they voice their expectations of being raised to life again in the flesh.
Readers see post #54 for the full content ^^^^^^^^
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
Cut for brevity.
There it is again folks! His 'evidence' is nothing more than the Bible and early Church fathers who obviously believed it was all true anyway. He just can't see the circular argument in it...or if he does, he clearly doesn't care and sees circular reasoning as a valid argument.
Can you please explain how 'John' could remember verbatim, the words spoken by specific people, when, where, what time and to whom, more than 60 years after the event and at the age of...what... 90 years old!
Not that you deserve an answer you fool, but,
John 14:26 "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.
Quote:
Can you further explain how 'John' was able to transcribes verbatim in chapter 17 the prayer of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, while being 50 metres away, SLEEPING with all the others?
Either Jesus told him after He had been resurrected, or it was made known to him by inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
By the way, accepting as true the testimony of eyewitness accounts is not circular reasoning. With the exception of Mark and Luke, the writers of the New Testament all were eyewitnesses to Jesus. Paul was an eyewitness to Jesus after His resurrection.
Can you further explain how 'John' was able to transcribes verbatim in chapter 17 the prayer of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, while being 50 metres away, SLEEPING with all the others?
John 14:26 "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.
Ah! Magic again!
Quote:
Either Jesus told him after He had been resurrected, or it was made known to him by inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Mere speculation in attempt to hand-wave away the fact that John cannot quote words that were being spoken when he was asleep.. The problem remains.
Quote:
By the way, accepting as true the testimony of eyewitness accounts is not circular reasoning.
You haven't got any eye-witnesses.
Quote:
With the exception of Mark and Luke, the writers of the New Testament all were eyewitnesses to Jesus.
How do you know? We don't even know who the authors of the Gospels were. What we do know is that they were not written by M.M.L or J. What we also know is that there is no mention of any gospels until the second century. The Gospels were unknown to your beloved Church Fathers and the evidence is this:
The first epistle of Clement of Rome which is reasonably dated to 95 C.E., makes no mention of any of the Gospels although it does mention the epistles of Paul. This is a strange omission had the Gospels been circulating at that time.
None of the Gospels are mentioned in the letters of Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, which can be dated from 110 C.E.
The first mention of the Gospels, as we know them, comes around 140 C.E. in the work of Aristides of Athens who refers to “the holy Gospel writing”.
Justin Martyr, writing in the middle of the second century and desperately trying to prove the divinity of your Jesus would have certainly made good use of your Gospels had they actually existed in his time. Yet , though he made more than three hundred quotations from the books of the Old Testament and nearly one hundred from the Apocryphal books of the New Testament, he didn't mention the gospels at all. Not until 150 C.E. when Justin Martyr composed the first of his two Apologies, did he specifically refers to the writings of Luke, Matthew, and Mark as “memoirs” About 10 years later, Justin’s student, Tatian brought together the four Gospels and combined them into one harmonized book which he called the Diatessaron, written in Tatian’s native language of Syric. And by 180 C.E. Irenaeus wrote in his principal work, Against Heresies, that: 'The Gospels could not possibly be either more or less in number than they are. Since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds…Now the Gospels, in which Christ is enthroned, are like these…'
So pretty good evidence that there were no gospels until the mid-second century.
Quote:
Paul was an eyewitness to Jesus after His resurrection.
No he wasn't. The claim is that he saw him in a 'vision'.
Last edited by Rafius; 09-18-2016 at 06:19 AM..
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.
and the whole big lie (that the gospels are reliable eyewitness) collapses. Totally.
