It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why was Jesus' Resurrection not convincing?

page: 9
7
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2013 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by akushla99
reply to post by vethumanbeing
 


Not a Roman Teat (that Art History dog again) never fails to rear its ugly memorable belly (should have been a sow). Andrew Lloyd and the Timster Rice Can could not get the whole JCS concept/musical to fit in a 14.2 OZ Christmas can? I KNOW! unbelievable; and with what is done with the musical birthday cards these days. Joe Six Pack was an antiquated Robert Hall "Hallmark" greeting card kind of guy. The IT did happen without PROOF or the Did NOT happen UTUBE brigade what chance do you think anything 2000 years ago would be accepted as true. I can see it all now, many camera phone identees documenting the plight of the leprositic crowds. Jesus (THE COUNTRY BUMPKIN), begging someone (KURT COBAIN) you should have/were supposed to have been me you narcisistic GRUNGE-heroin blooded Man (SAVEY BEATLES LOVER) , YOU WERE ME, lets get in the time machine and exchange our lives/places---Aberdeen WA for Nazareth. Both of them killed themselves ultimately, one by a self inflicted shot gun blast to the face one by a total ignorance of "who are those Roman Centurian guards and what in the world is their intention with that cross and those nails?" situation.

Amazed also that Millsy&Boonsy haven't given it a go...could be turned into a beautiful love story kind of thing...😉
The musical birthday card would be perfect...

...compression of memory, short attention span, loss of memory...pharma effect, sleight of hand, infant cosplay...wondrous that there are any questions in that fog...

Of course...same - same...(jc/cob) and who will chart better? "Wise men say..."

There seems to be many 'kings'...perhaps some could be dug up...

A99


More of a 'Dancing With The Stars', Hitler with Sirius A, Jesus with Sirius B, Robert Oppenhiemer with Betelgeuse. The compression holds the key. Smaller and infantesmally smaller, all but the pure thought form stripped away so as to negate, nuetralize the negative (got to pinpoint its arrival in time and squish it before it has time to manefest). Time travel involved, but to coordinate it exactly is the real sleight of hand. Pharma kills its loving trusting humans and there is an irony here, keep them alive long enough to pay, time bomb pills; groups of people taking said medications (combinations) will start dropping dead at 76, 77...based upon their prescription un-needs.

I have the shovels 'king worthy' forged in solid gold to start digging have a (blessed backhoe as well). Where do we begin, the local Pet Cemetary.
edit on 27-2-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 27 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by sacgamer25
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Maybe I should make this clear. I actually appreciate the debate with you. If anyone could poke a hole in the interpretation in my head it would be someone like you. This is why I always ask for people to tell me what concept they don't agree with rather than directly attacking the bible. The bible is easy to attack; but it is the concept that is most important. You help me define my concepts, and yes I know by now you have seen them all. So most of my replies to you are more of a debate that strengths me.

Thanks for the time, hope you haven't mined, you really have been a great help.

P.S. Maybe someday I will be brave enough to take you on a trip down the OT. No time soon just thinking.


edit on 27-2-2013 by sacgamer25 because: (no reason given)


The only reason the Bible is an easy target is because it (it trys very hard to become bipedal with opposable thumbs/animated) contradicts itself. Hey, Id love to trip with you, Richardson HWY, 56 mile trek, Glen Ellen Alaska to Valdez Harbor (Sacajawea, Red Cloud, Cochise, Crazy Horse and Geronimo my special guests). Im buying the beads.
edit on 27-2-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   
I do not have the time to read all the replies, but if no one has mentioned the "witness" argument raised by Hume (how the witness account being false would have to be a bigger miracle then the actual resurrection) I would be glad to outline it for you. It's a bit lengthy so I'll need some time. Just let me know.



posted on Feb, 27 2013 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by akushla99
 


I can sense that you are attempting to convey some degree of skepticism, but regretfully, the specifics of your post are unclear to the point of incoherent mush.

If you would please revise your post for the convenience of all participating members, I would greatly appreciate it.


Well now...it's either one or the other...it either makes sense, or its incoherent mush...

I'll point you to page 3...encapsulates my reply to the OP...it seems you missed it in the 'drive-by volley'...the obsessional way you are targeting my responses is both flattering/disturbing and an indication that you think I have something to say...but as I've said before - if you are colorblind red, I cannot convince you of the color red...

Expansion on page 3 post:
It would be sloppy investigative work to assume that the details of an event so removed in time, could be reconstructed...in a way which describes exactly what 'went down'...and why, and how...
...ergo, the response on page 3...

A99



posted on Feb, 27 2013 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


I understand what you're saying, and I can appreciate the thought you've put into it. My problem, however, can be loosely explained as this: Jesus, in the Bible, has always been portrayed as an advocate of conditional love. There are certain things you might do, things which occurred as a result of opportunity presented by the very entity who determined that you would be tempted, that will result in damnation.

I have seen love before. I have seen women continuously flutter back to a man who has abused them, and I have see men continuously fall for women who have used them. And yet they will never ever condemn the object of their love, because love will never ever judge them for being who they are. They understand where those cruel behaviors come from, even though they are not omniscient. They can withstand such treatment, even though they are not omnipotent. So how can a god who created imperfection not withstand the presence of it? Why does a god who invented evil condemn the existence of it? Why does a god judge its creations for the design he himself devised?

Who is more guilty? The puppet or the mastermind? Conceivably, such a being cannot be trusted because it would be so easy to force an essentially peaceful person to commit an atrocity, then replace their memories with all the images and thoughts of someone who would have willingly done that deed. That's just one example of how such a being might be dangerous.

Let's take it a step further. I think we have established that "God" and Jesus experienced human emotions. Joy, wrath, jealousy, grief...is it too farfetched to think that "God" might reach down and control events to suit his own agenda? Is it too farfetched to think that at any given time, "God" might violate the gift of free will with impunity? How are we to say otherwise?

That is why no one entity should have all the power. It is too easy for that entity, especially one known to be prey to human emotions, to decide that the salvation of mankind falls to it and it alone, and to decide that the many must sacrifice their rights for the preservation of everything that entity deems to be good and holy. Especially when it becomes obsessed with the idea of protection. How far to go? What lines to draw? What boundaries to cross? What codes to make or break? Protection is a very fickle duty, and only much more so when absolute power is involved.

If you doubt my words, watch I Robot starring Will Smith. That is a perfect example of how a system intended to protect can easily become a system intent upon oppression. Where does love end and tyranny begin? Can you answer me that? Can you explain a clearly defined line between love and tyranny? One that we can all agree with?

That's what I want to know. Jesus' resurrection is nothing if his love is corrupt.


There is no other way of replying to this post than in reposting in Entirety.

JESUS'S RESURRECTION IS NO THING IT WAS NEVER ANYTHING HAPPENING SPECIAL: HIS LOVE IS NOT OF A CORRUPT NATURE IT IS MORE OF THE TRUE NATURE OF CONTEMPT TOWARD ALL HUMAN BEINGS (hes holding the baseball ticket to the big game, knowing the game would be Thrown). We all resurrect, that is what we do, soul spirit leaves the body, regroups with its Oversoul and reincarnates. This is a known.

There is something worth telling, Jesus only reincarnated again a few years ago AND HAS NO IDEA WHO HE IS. Judas as well. Brethren together in this time frame whom have actually met each other not having a clue as to what they were.
edit on 27-2-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2013 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Maybe you can answer the questions I posed above? So far, it looks as though no one has really deemed my post worthy of a quality response.


Sorry, I admit I didn't read it. It was addressed to sac anyways.



posted on Feb, 27 2013 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


So you admit again that you never read the book itself. You've admitted here and in the other thread. So when you claimed you had read the material I asked you to that was by definition a lie. None of what you mentioned that you did included reading the book. You asked me in the other thread to read something you linked and stated that it would be only fair since you in turn read what I asked you to read. Which is not the truth.

Don't get upset with me for pointing out that you weren't telling the truth when you weren't telling the truth.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by vethumanbeing

Originally posted by sacgamer25
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Maybe I should make this clear. I actually appreciate the debate with you. If anyone could poke a hole in the interpretation in my head it would be someone like you. This is why I always ask for people to tell me what concept they don't agree with rather than directly attacking the bible. The bible is easy to attack; but it is the concept that is most important. You help me define my concepts, and yes I know by now you have seen them all. So most of my replies to you are more of a debate that strengths me.

Thanks for the time, hope you haven't mined, you really have been a great help.

P.S. Maybe someday I will be brave enough to take you on a trip down the OT. No time soon just thinking.


edit on 27-2-2013 by sacgamer25 because: (no reason given)


The only reason the Bible is an easy target is because it (it trys very hard to become bipedal with opposable thumbs/animated) contradicts itself. Hey, Id love to trip with you, Richardson HWY, 56 mile trek, Glen Ellen Alaska to Valdez Harbor (Sacajawea, Red Cloud, Cochise, Crazy Horse and Geronimo my special guests). Im buying the beads.
edit on 27-2-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)


The bible does not contradict itself, Only what you have been told it says contradicts itself. The church is wrong thier is a better, a true, interpretaion. It does not contradict itself. If you want to debate it create a thread.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by sacgamer25
 


Good. I'm glad that we were able to reach a point of understanding each other. We just use different names for the same thing.

Life is a roller-coaster, but I believe that I will buy another ticket, stand in line and ride this ride again! Eternity begins as soon as you realize it. There is nothing but the future, and it goes on forever.


I can only exept eternity of this if I can have the promise that I always "Wake Up" at some point in that life. So that I can actually live.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by sacgamer25

Originally posted by vethumanbeing

Originally posted by sacgamer25
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Maybe I should make this clear. I actually appreciate the debate with you. If anyone could poke a hole in the interpretation in my head it would be someone like you. This is why I always ask for people to tell me what concept they don't agree with rather than directly attacking the bible. The bible is easy to attack; but it is the concept that is most important. You help me define my concepts, and yes I know by now you have seen them all. So most of my replies to you are more of a debate that strengths me.

Thanks for the time, hope you haven't mined, you really have been a great help.

P.S. Maybe someday I will be brave enough to take you on a trip down the OT. No time soon just thinking.


edit on 27-2-2013 by sacgamer25 because: (no reason given)


The only reason the Bible is an easy target is because it (it trys very hard to become bipedal with opposable thumbs/animated) contradicts itself. Hey, Id love to trip with you, Richardson HWY, 56 mile trek, Glen Ellen Alaska to Valdez Harbor (Sacajawea, Red Cloud, Cochise, Crazy Horse and Geronimo my special guests). Im buying the beads.
edit on 27-2-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)


The bible does not contradict itself, Only what you have been told it says contradicts itself. The church is wrong thier is a better, a true, interpretaion. It does not contradict itself. If you want to debate it create a thread.


I AM ON IT its Called "The AGE OLD QUESTION" Where is God and who is it talking to? You told me this 2 months ago as the very mysterious "Foresight Calling" in a dream. Check it out, in fact I will drag the thing up for you. Give me a minute Hang on.
edit on 28-2-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I would greatly appreciate your input on the subject. Would you be so kind as to go back, read my post, and then respond with your thoughts in the matter? I would love to have a quality answer, regardless of the source. Closure is all I'm looking for, a few solid reasons to believe that half of America is not worshipping a tyrant. After all, if we're worshipping a tyrant, then how can we ever expect to claim true freedom here on earth?

Anyway, your answer is more than welcome. I look forward to it.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


Sure. It may take a few. Im heading out for work, and I work on the road, but Ill read it and respond this week on my off time.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

Fine, then don't get upset with me for pointing out that YOU are not telling the truth about the crucifixion, that YOU DONT KNOW the truth, and that you are spreading an exaggerated, fringe picture of it.

I told you from the get-go how I responded to your request. I admitted I did not read the book. There, you satisfied? I'm a liar and a hypocrite.

In my opinion, looking at the man's online presence, and watching his video pitching the very book you are talking about (I was in a check-it-out NOW mood - so I settled on his own description of what's in the book he was hawking), when I wanted to continue the dialogue without waiting to buy a chump's cash-cow book, was ADEQUATE. I chose not to select that title to read.

Not good enough for you? Whatever. I'm satisfied that I looked DEEPLY ENOUGH into it to know that I wasn't interested in buying, let alone reading his subjective, shallow story - just like I don't accept Fox News as my go-to source. And I told you so. You claim to "DESPISE RELIGION", well, I despise having my time wasted by snake-oil salesmen posing as valid sources. Do you believe Alex Jones? I don't. Nor do I pay attention to Howard Stern, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, or any other modern day loud-mouth of ANY school of thought.

So, what is your real reason for not looking at Karen Armstrong - ANYTHING regarding her - video, critique, book, article, whatever. Spite? Fear that you will diiscover your theory is easily shot down? Stubborn clinging like a baby's blanket or pacifier?
I guess you found "Strobel's answer" as "good enough", and then stopped looking, correct? IS THAT CORRECT?

You are deflecting, not answering any of the challenges posed to you. Does that make you feel happy and righteous?

Are you willing to look at the weaknesses in your own argument and beliefs? Or ARE YOU NOT?

Are you even able to conceive that you are quite possibly laboring under a sensationalized, dramatized version of actual facts? Theologians, Christian and otherwise, have said that Mel Gibsons' "Passion of the Christ" was a Hollywood exaggeration. That could be said of Mr Strobel as well - both "stories" led to riches for the producer.

Part of my answer to the OP, "Why was Jesus' Resurrection not convincing" is because:
People like you, who market it but don't do exhaustive research and consider a cross-section of ideas by acknowledged experts, are not convincing.

Ms Armstrong blows the doors off of Lee Strobel. Fact. But, whatever, NuT, clearly you are still frothing at the mouth and gnashing your emotional teeth, while deflecting from the topic at hand.

Defend your position with multiple, interdiscipinary, thorough and scholarly "authorities" works, or admit that it's speculation.
Lee Strobel is not an authority.
The Passion of the Christ movie was a sensationalized Hollywood product.
Fantasy autopsies prove nothing, especially in the face of modern medical FACT.

I might as well read Jack Chick tracts and take it as gospel, as believe this salesman's pitch or your version of things.

I don't know if the OP has run screaming from ATS due to the ugly turn of this thread, but that's my answer to her.
IT IS NOT CONVINCING BECAUSE IT'S THE LEAST PROBABLE TRUTH and is supported only by those who WANT TO BELIEVE IT beyond all reason.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Here, have a beer. You sound as though you could use one. Not that I disagree with you, but WOW! That was an intense post. I had to hold onto my hat with one hand and my chair with the other.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 

Yeah, he got under my skin. Stupid me..
I apogolize to the board for losing my cool.

I was gonna let it go, but it's ridiculous (IMO) how he continues to evade the meat of the matter.

I AM having a beer, after writing, rewriting, and losing an improvement to the one that is posted - at least I didn't lose the above "edit", so it will have to do.
Whew.

Thanks for the compassion!


EDIT: Now you prolly wanna take back your earlier kind remark.....
well, I'm only human. Doh!

edit on 28-2-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 



EDIT: Now you prolly wanna take back your earlier kind remark.....
well, I'm only human. Doh!


Never. You've made every effort to be reasonable and understanding. The way I see it, if we can't be honest with each other on this website, we're doing no better than the two-faced sharks fighting over scraps from the Congressional table.



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


heh....
or gathering up crumbs from under the proverbial "Nicene Christian Creed" table of God -- of which "we are not worthy".
Bollocks.

Anyway.....*deep breath*.
It is astounding to me that people choose to simply accept it - or any other biased, MSM premise (of which the church is but one) - without investigation.

edit on 28-2-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 



Fine, then don't get upset with me for pointing out that YOU are not telling the truth about the crucifixion, that YOU DONT KNOW the truth, and that you are spreading an exaggerated, fringe picture of it.


Yeah, Im so sorry for relying on the testimony of those present at the scene, extra-biblical accounts of the method and application of crucifixion, and the historical record of the most-documented death in human history.

What was I thinking?



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by wildtimes
 



Fine, then don't get upset with me for pointing out that YOU are not telling the truth about the crucifixion, that YOU DONT KNOW the truth, and that you are spreading an exaggerated, fringe picture of it.


Yeah, Im so sorry for relying on the testimony of those present at the scene, extra-biblical accounts of the method and application of crucifixion, and the historical record of the most-documented death in human history.

What was I thinking?

That you know everything and everyone else is stupid. That's what you were apparently thinking.
Now, NuT, I really am done "debating" with you. It's a hopeless mess. Bon voyage on your job and your life and its aftermath. God bless.

Oh, and "well done you".

edit on 28-2-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 





Yeah, Im so sorry for relying on the testimony of those present at the scene, extra-biblical accounts of the method and application of crucifixion, and the historical record of the most-documented death in human history.


LOL! The most documented death in history? There you go again! How can a death be documented while there is NO BODY!? LOL

7 Fatal Injuries (That People Somehow Survived)







 
7
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join