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.
If a non-Christian scholar became convinced that the Old Testament prophecies referred to Jesus of Nazareth, wouldn't it stand to reason that they would then convert to Christianity if they were intellectually honest?
I don't consider secular scholars to be "impartial", and neither should you. Since the question of *who Jesus is* has eternally-lasting implications, literally EVERYBODY has a horse in the race.
Referencing the Old Testament Scriptures and explaining to unbelievers how they point to Jesus is the single oldest tradition in Christian apologetics. Jesus did it, His disciples did it, Paul did it...
Some see it, and some don't.
In this thread, you have clearly shown that non-believers don't believe.
Did your accomplishment help to soothe your conscience?
Not a bit because just this post of yours alone demonstrates you are long on opinions and beliefs and woefully short on evidence. Any intellectual could disassemble your argument with a toothpick.
Just Matthew 21:1-7 alone shows that Jesus tried to jimmy his narrative--the Zechariah prophecy text said "Your king comes to you on a donkey". So what does Jesus do? He tells his apostles to go get a donkey so he can ride into Jerusalem to fulfill it. And Matthew admits it, writing "So Jesus instructed his disciples to go get him a donkey that it might be fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophet". How about I get a donkey and ride into Jerusalem right now and declare, "See? I fulfilled Zechariah 9:9. I'm your Messiah!"
It's patently absurd to insist that the whole thing happened according to some cockamamie divine plan. It was a calculated move to make it appear Jesus was the Messiah. But of course none of the things in the gospels really happened. The plain truth is the writers of the gospels had the Old Testament in front of them and they tried to squeeze as many of the OT's stories into their gospels as they could so they would mimic Jesus' life. Jesus' entire life can be found in the Old Testament and stories of other pagan mythical gods. Secular scholars don't buy into this laughable idea that Jesus fulfilled 400 prophecies. They would argue that the gospel writers stole the details of Jesus' life from other sources.
Last edited by thrillobyte; 04-13-2023 at 09:25 AM..
But another point of view I'd like to point out is....what is the proper way of reading the bible? Some people read the bible literally. I think the bible is a mixture of storytelling based on real stuff. Someone sat down and started writing a story but based the story on real things and real events. Should the bible be studied using a logical mind? I think yes and no.
The bible is a collection of texts of different categories, from letters to allegories to faked histories and real history, so there is no one way to read the whole Bible.
Just Matthew 21:1-7 alone shows that Jesus tried to jimmy his narrative--the Zechariah prophecy text said "Your king comes to you on a donkey". So what does Jesus do? He tells his apostles to go get a donkey so he can ride into Jerusalem to fulfill it. And Matthew admits it, writing "So Jesus instructed his disciples to go get him a donkey that it might be fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophet". How about I get a donkey and ride into Jerusalem right now and declare, "See? I fulfilled Zechariah 9:9. I'm your Messiah!"
All you have to do is rise from the dead, and then maybe your Messianic claim will have the same "cachet".
The bible is a collection of texts of different categories, from letters to allegories to faked histories and real history, so there is no one way to read the whole Bible.
The Bible is a collection of Bronze-Age primitive writings by ordinary fallible men who filled them with fables and stories and smatterings of history that are filled with errors, contradictions in details, discrepancies, mistakes--the whole nine yards. In short, they are not divinely inspired, they have nothing to do with any god dictating the writings to these men, they are no different than any sacred writings of other religions like the Veda of Hindus and the Egyptian Book of the Dead. Hence they couldn't possibly have any predictions of Jesus.
That's just another of the many fables drawn from the OT, Mike. Where's your secular evidence Jesus rose? Where's the tomb? Where's the slab stained with Jesus' blood? Where's the extra-Biblical accounts of Jesus' resurrection from witnesses outside the Bible who saw him? You've got nothing, Mike. It's all religious writings designed to convert people to a certain belief.
That's just another of the many fables drawn from the OT, Mike. Where's your secular evidence Jesus rose?
I'm not sure what "secular evidence" means. As I have explained to you ad nauseum, the existence of the Church Jesus founded is evidence that He rose from the dead.
Where's the extra-Biblical accounts of Jesus' resurrection from witnesses outside the Bible who saw him?
If there were any written accounts other than the books of the New Testament, they have apparently not survived.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte
You've got nothing, Mike. It's all religious writings designed to convert people to a certain belief.
Many writings are designed to convert people to certain beliefs - religious and otherwise. That fact alone does not discredit any particular writing. What matters is if the claims made are true or not. It is our responsibility to evaluate these things and find Truth. I have found nothing in the Christian Scriptures that I would consider problematic; certainly nothing that would call the Faith into question.
I'm not sure what "secular evidence" means. As I have explained to you ad nauseum, the existence of the Church Jesus founded is evidence that He rose from the dead.
If there were any written accounts other than the books of the New Testament, they have apparently not survived.
Many writings are designed to convert people to certain beliefs - religious and otherwise. That fact alone does not discredit any particular writing. What matters is if the claims made are true or not. It is our responsibility to evaluate these things and find Truth. I have found nothing in the Christian Scriptures that I would consider problematic; certainly nothing that would call the Faith into question.
The Shroud Of Turin is not, in any sense of the word, conclusively what you claim it is.
The Bible is a collection of Bronze-Age primitive writings by ordinary fallible men who filled them with fables and stories and smatterings of history that are filled with errors, contradictions in details, discrepancies, mistakes--the whole nine yards. In short, they are not divinely inspired, they have nothing to do with any god dictating the writings to these men, they are no different than any sacred writings of other religions like the Veda of Hindus and the Egyptian Book of the Dead. Hence they couldn't possibly have any predictions of Jesus.
Iron age. The Bible is a collection of iron age writings, and I am not sure I would use the word primitive. Naturally, I agree with the rest of your post.
I'm not sure what "secular evidence" means. As I have explained to you ad nauseum, the existence of the Church Jesus founded is evidence that He rose from the dead.
Your source's claim of 'absolutely insurmountable discrepancies between certain figures provided by the Oxford laboratory and those of Zurich in Switzerland and Tucson, Arizona' has been explained by Van Haelst.
And any source that quotes Fanti and Rogers can not claim their new book is a ‘definitive investigation’. Have you read Roger's paper?
I'm not sure what "secular evidence" means. As I have explained to you ad nauseum, the existence of the Church Jesus founded is evidence that He rose from the dead.
Much like the existence of Hinduism is proof Krishna rose from the dead, right?
The Church was built in 330 CE. Prior to that it's anybody guess whether it was the actual tomb or not. You'd guess the Christians, hot to convert the pagans, would have built a shrine there from the get-go but no such luck. You'd also think all sorts of spectacular miracles would go on where Jesus rose from the dead but....nope. Nada. Just an ordinary hole in a cave like thousands in that area except this one has had a church built around it. Far as the shroud goes, it is controversial, just like everything associated with Christianity. When they produce a blood sample from the shroud that shows only 23 chromosomes instead of 46 then I may dredge up a modicum of belief it's Christ's burial cloth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike
If there were any written accounts other than the books of the New Testament, they have apparently not survived.
God apparently fell asleep at the switch. Wasn't he supposed to preserve all this evidence?
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike
Many writings are designed to convert people to certain beliefs - religious and otherwise. That fact alone does not discredit any particular writing. What matters is if the claims made are true or not. It is our responsibility to evaluate these things and find Truth. I have found nothing in the Christian Scriptures that I would consider problematic; certainly nothing that would call the Faith into question.
So the fact "Jesus the Christ who rose from the dead" is not mentioned anywhere outside church writings is not problematic for you?
The Veda claims Krishna rose from the dead and ascended bodily to Goloka where he resides to this day. Is that the truth?
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.
