The Resurrection of Jesus is historically probable

Originally posted by MamaJ
IF Jesus died on the wood/cross....

Transformation and or ressurection happening on the third day ( if true), happens to all of us in my opinion. 3 is such a beautiful number because we are soul, mind and spirit.

His spirit was seen in the eyes of many leaving this world is more probable to me.

Why would all of those people write about something in which they believed and sacrificed them self for him or the idea is the same exact reason jihad exists and the same reason why many ancients sacrificed them self, family, kids, animals and so on. This is what " cults" do.

The thing is that early Christianity was a cult. That isn't a dig at Christians, simply historical fact. And at some point in their histories, the same could be said for all other religions. For example, Roman persecutions weren't against Christianity, they were against the "Cult of Christianity", seen as endangering the Empire.

To me, if he existed, he was a good guy with good ideas that subsequently morphed into the monster we have today. He provided basic ground rules for living a good life - and that is worthy of respect whatever your beliefs.

Originally posted by Flavian

Originally posted by MamaJ
IF Jesus died on the wood/cross....

Transformation and or ressurection happening on the third day ( if true), happens to all of us in my opinion. 3 is such a beautiful number because we are soul, mind and spirit.

His spirit was seen in the eyes of many leaving this world is more probable to me.

Why would all of those people write about something in which they believed and sacrificed them self for him or the idea is the same exact reason jihad exists and the same reason why many ancients sacrificed them self, family, kids, animals and so on. This is what " cults" do.

The thing is that early Christianity was a cult. That isn't a dig at Christians, simply historical fact. And at some point in their histories, the same could be said for all other religions. For example, Roman persecutions weren't against Christianity, they were against the "Cult of Christianity", seen as endangering the Empire.

To me, if he existed, he was a good guy with good ideas that subsequently morphed into the monster we have today. He provided basic ground rules for living a good life - and that is worthy of respect whatever your beliefs.

I totally agree!! :-)

All ancient texts Im familiar with believed in a God/ Gods and an underworld. Everything else in between is so distorted and barbaric I cant even comprehend living back in those days prior to Jesus much less in the days of Jesus.

Humanity has come a long way though and I think we may be reaching a tipping point as far as the amount of people inhabiting the planet and the different beliefs. Its chaotic! Its confusing and it seems as there is no one person in the higher ups now or back then who can be trusted.

I cant prove Jesus existed but the idea I can indeed accept. I trust the idea and the love he supposedly shared and taught. I welcome it in my life as it is the only thing ( love) I trust. Jesus is the only man, I trust with my heart and soul. I do love buddha too..... Buddhism teaches love and karma and I love and hold onto those ideas as well.

reply to post by MamaJ

Transformation and or ressurection happening on the third day ( if true), happens to all of us in my opinion. 3 is such a beautiful number because we are soul, mind and spirit.

It is a beautiful number, lovely symbolism and a wonderful allegory. But, it seems to me, in trying to make the story of Jesus' death and his resurrection into godhood conform to the many fractured belief systems, they fudged the facts.

Jesus was, apparently, crucified on Friday. the High Sabbath began at sunset, and therefore, there was a rush to get Jesus down from the cross, so as not to defile themselves or Jesus' body during High Sabbath. So, if he died on Friday and arose on Sunday at day break, that's not 3 days. It's a day and a half.

Some argue that he must've been crucified on Thursday, but that leaves the question of why the rush to take his body down. And, still it doesn't really fulfill the 3's of 3 days and 3 nights. It's 2 days and 3 nights, which interrupts the beauty of the trinity symbolism.

There are many other question that come to my immediate mind, like why was Jesus dressed like a gardener, in disguise. Was he hiding from the "fuzz?"

Why did he tell Mary, who went to hug him, at the tomb, "Touch me not, for I have not yet gone to my father."? Was it because he was still weak and in pain from his ordeal, and he said, "OUCH! Don't touch me!" And, "Hey, I'm not dead yet!"?

Then, when he went into town and saw his friends, who were shocked to see him, he says "Have you anything to eat?" They gave him fish and honeycomb! I've never heard of ghosts eating! Did his resurrected body need to use the stool too?

Anyway, this was discussed to "death" here, www.abovetopsecret.com... for anyone who might like to peruse that thread.

Carry on.

bibledefender

But right now it is quitting time and my weekend is beginning! Woo hoo!!! I will be back Sunday (that starts our work week over here).

OK, enjoy your weekend. Thank you for the good wishes; you, too.

When you get back Sunday, please do consider answering my question to you:

Thee: Well then what about the testimony of the witnesses to the resurrection?

Me: What witnesses?

That's a straight question, asking you to clarify something which you brought up, and not a rabbit hole. I followed it with a brief summary of the witness situation as I understand it to be. I certainly hope that there was nothing new there. My sources are almost two thousand years old .

none of it is historically accurate, because you have to prove jesus existed in the first place.

reply to post by windword


Its very confusing and the reasoning I come up with is because " man" is involved.

Tranformation is something I believe we all do. The concept is very very old!

This life teaches us what we need to do or work on in the next life. In time, we will evolve and be christ like.

Jesus being the son of God and the son of man says to me and many others that Jesus came over and over again throughout our history. The Bible shows us his transgressions to " Christhood" which is the evolution each soul is trying to pertain.

The image of God, the first man( and the last he says) was Adam. Adam made a boo boo. It caused death becuase the tree of knowledge was wanted and or desired over life.

The evolved soul, Jesus has fulfilled the law in order for " man" to not die and have ever lasting knowledge? No.... Everlasting LIFE. The tree of life is NOW attainable through Jesus, The Christ. The evolved one. :-)

Am I right? Probably not but it makes sense to ME.

I saw santa claus resusrrected once!!....looks like a zombie!!!......see how crazy this sound??....

Originally posted by rocha123
I saw santa claus resusrrected once!!....looks like a zombie!!!......see how crazy this sound??....

Depends on the mind set of the one you are asking. Lol

reply to post by MamaJ


I completely agree.

Jesus represents the potential of humanity. He is the alpha and the omega, the representation of the great journey of the soul, from Fool to Aeon.





I too believe in reincarnation and that Jesus taught it. I think the story of the resurrection is the reflection of those teachings.

reply to post by windword


You need to fit The Hanged Man in there somewhere. At least according to fundamental Christian beliefs. But the interesting thing about the Fool is that it's not only the first but also the last card. When you finally find clarity, you become like a child again, which the fool also represents. Children are closer to the truth than most adults are. They see the world in wonder and don't discriminate against it. So you come full circle and realize there was nothing to realize.

reply to post by windword


reply to post by MamaJ


You two are awesome, Ladies!

I haven't read through the entire thread yet, but saw on page 1 that it was no "debate" as the OP described (and wanted, apparently...too bad, would have been interesting). Will go back and read through it now.

~wild

Originally posted by bibledefender

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by bibledefender

 

Proof for me would be witnessing something "supernatural" and having no doubts there wasn't a rational explanation for it. For example, someone walking on water - i would have to be certain it wasn't trickery (such as Dynamo did). That would then open me up to the possibility of the supernatural actually being based in reality.

Basically, i want to see something and then make sure science can't explain it in alternative ways. Does that make sense? I mean, to me, if someone thousands of years ago saw something shooting across the sky they would be thinking on the lines of the gods moving about (or whatever). Nowadays, we would be thinking comet. I realise this isn't the best example to illustrate my point but hopefully you get where i'm coming from! Basically, my point is that if the bible is based in fact, it has entirely become mumbo jumbified (new word - go with it!

) as the years have gone on.

Well then what about the testimony of the witnesses to the resurrection? Paul was an enemy of Christians. He claimed to have seen Jesus after his death. THe same could be said of the rest of his disciples. They believed that the resurrection would happen at the end of history. They didn't believe the women's report of seeing Jesus until they themselves saw him.

As far as embellishment is concerned, claims like that must be backed up with evidence.

So again, it seems that you are making a-priori judgements without first weighing the evidence fairly.

You're using this testimony, which was made after they became Christians, as a secular source.

As Judge to the people I declare in favor of mrksman. All the evidence provided by the bible defender is indeed just circumstantial evidence. Nothing brought forth to the jury and myself can be deemed factual evidence. Case closed.

reply to post by HawkeyeNation

As Judge to the people I declare in favor of mrksman. All the evidence provided by the bible defender is indeed just circumstantial evidence. Nothing brought forth to the jury and myself can be deemed factual evidence. Case closed.

Awesome judgment! Thanks for taking up the mantle of truth....

Next??

reply to post by windword


Check this thread out where I just went into a little more detail about reincarnation! I love this stuff!!


www.abovetopsecret.com...

Resurrection to me is reincarnation. We all do it....

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by windword

 

reply to post by MamaJ

 

You two are awesome, Ladies!

I haven't read through the entire thread yet, but saw on page 1 that it was no "debate" as the OP described (and wanted, apparently...too bad, would have been interesting). Will go back and read through it now.

~wild

edit on 16-8-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

Awe! Wildtimes you know by now I LOVE YOUR THINKING... It reminds me why I love to continue to seek becuase had I stopped waaay back when I would be stuck.... And not happy. Xoxox

In all of this, I just don't understand how you can attempt to use the Bible as proof of what is contained in the Bible. How can you use the document to prove itself?

All it takes is for someone to prove that the document has been changed and edited multiple times throughout centuries, in addition to most stories contained, including the gospels, being written out of memory by old men, decades after the story is alleged to have happened -- and all the so called 'facts' become nothing more than myth.

I get very confused when people try to defend the Bible using the Bible.

Originally posted by Rekrul
none of it is historically accurate, because you have to prove jesus existed in the first place.

Columbia PhD in Ancient History Richard Carrier says that Jesus NEVER existed.

This "debate" appears to be a one-sided debate.

Bibledefender presented a good case. The other guy didn't bother to engage in debate. His posts "prove it" were very disappointing and seemed particularly childish.

This was a debate, not a court of law.

I believe there are enough non-Biblical historical writings that discuss Jesus to prove that He did exist.

There are plenty of Jewish religious texts that prophesy a Jewish Messiah, prohesies which Jesus fulfilled, to indicate Jesus was that Messiah.

All-in-all, we will all know the truth eventually.

Someone puts a gun to your head and asks u a question; did you see Santa Claus. if you say yes he pulls the trigger, if you say no, you can go.

That is what St. Peter and the early Christians faced.

Except it was the romans asking the question, Jesus was the subject and they weren't using bullets to kill you but horrible crucifixions or throwing you to lions to be eaten alive in front of 70,000 screaming Romans.

They all chose death because to not do so would be a lie.

A con artist, a thief or a liar would never give choose to die if faced with those options.