|
Post by rational on Sept 18, 2014 8:12:43 GMT -5
Yet you seem determined to provide 'proof'.Joseph Smith and the Mormons, L.Ron Hubbard and Scientology, just to name a couple. Do you believe something supernatural happened to make all those people followers? Muhammad?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 18, 2014 8:36:22 GMT -5
On the other hand, the atheist who regards Jesus as a complete mythical character (it seems this view is on the increase amongst atheists) presumably has a problem when it comes to the historical accounts outside of the Bible. What does it do with them? Ignore them, gloss over them, discount them as inaccurate or discredit them? I've seen all of the above occur. The atheist who clearly discounts the supernatural side of Jesus but accepts that he was an historical figure also has a challenge. What do they do with Jesus? Do they discount only the supernatural parts of the Bible or do they completely reject the Bible altogether as a complete fraud? What do they do with the Bible? There is obviously a wide divergence of views and much has been written. Atheists, or anyone, doesn't have to do anything about Jesus. The evidence is there and one can accept it as a true story or not. As far as the bible - it can be treated just like any other legend that has been handed down by both oral tradition and in written form, maintained primarily my a group that has a vested interest in telling a story that supports their point of view. Sure there could have been the earthquake written about in Matthew but do you you think that the dead were walking about the city and no one took notice? Sadly for the christian the extra-biblical accounts are few and far between and many (most?) have questionable provenance. What are 'christian values' that are not being taught in schools? Are you equating the demand for a voucher system with the demand for faith-based schools? No and most of the ideals he expressed predate him. Humans can actually come up with wonderful guidelines without throwing a paranormal being into the mix as an enforcer.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Sept 18, 2014 11:29:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Sept 18, 2014 12:13:22 GMT -5
I will not suggest to you that you should ever abandon your faith, faune. However, there is nothing here that inspires me to have faith in the Bible or to "have faith in Jesus Christ."
|
|
|
Post by faune on Sept 18, 2014 13:49:20 GMT -5
I will not suggest to you that you should ever abandon your faith, faune. However, there is nothing here that inspires me to have faith in the Bible or to "have faith in Jesus Christ." Matisse ~ And, that's perfectly O.K. with me, as I realize faith in God is a personal choice and not everyone is inclined to belief in the supernatural. Also, I think no less of any person who doesn't share my point of view in this area, because its solely a matter of faith after all.
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Sept 18, 2014 14:12:13 GMT -5
I will not suggest to you that you should ever abandon your faith, faune. However, there is nothing here that inspires me to have faith in the Bible or to "have faith in Jesus Christ." Matisse ~ And, that's perfectly O.K. with me, as I realize faith in God is a personal choice and not everyone is inclined to belief in the supernatural. Also, I think no less of any person who doesn't share my point of view in this area, because its solely a matter of faith after all. I knew we could come to a point of agreement!
|
|
|
Post by faune on Sept 18, 2014 14:19:11 GMT -5
I really enjoyed these biblical references to the resurrection of Jesus, nevertheless. Along with the list of Jesus' followers is a long list of hostile witnesses to Jesus' existence recorded in history, too. This excerpt is taken from this link in references to this "great cloud of witnesses" left on record regarding Jesus' life along with his resurrection appearances.
www.str.org/articles/is-there-any-evidence-for-jesus-outside-the-bible#.VBswsE10xjp
Is There Any Evidence for Jesus Outside the Bible?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 18, 2014 15:13:33 GMT -5
DMG ~ I believe I did tell you earlier that the resurrection cannot be verified by historical evidence, but is believed to be true as a matter of faith that Jesus was who he claimed to be from scripture and that he was resurrected from the dead. Otherwise, how could one explain his following today if something supernatural didn't happen back in time?
However, you have been spending post after post with many links to apologetic sites + multiple verses in an attempt to do just that, -verify the resurrection actually happened.
You have yet another long post above trying to do the same.
Even your statement, "how could one explain his following today if something supernatural didn't happen back in time?" does the same.
It is one more attempt to verify the resurrection.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Sept 18, 2014 15:29:25 GMT -5
DMG ~ I believe I did tell you earlier that the resurrection cannot be verified by historical evidence, but is believed to be true as a matter of faith that Jesus was who he claimed to be from scripture and that he was resurrected from the dead. Otherwise, how could one explain his following today if something supernatural didn't happen back in time?
However, you have been spending post after post with many links to apologetic sites + multiple verses in an attempt to do just that, -verify the resurrection actually happened.
You have yet another long post above trying to do the same.
Even your statement, "how could one explain his following today if something supernatural didn't happen back in time?" does the same.
It is one more attempt to verify the resurrection.
DMG ~ Perhaps you're right, "it's one more attempt to verify the resurrection" in spite of the lack of historical evidence regarding the same from this time in history? However, perhaps you should remember the title of this thread and its central focus, and I feel you will understand the reason for my continued postings ~ "Proof of Jesus Existence from Sacred Texts."
After all, Christians do read my threads and share in the input here, too! Also, the purpose of my last posting was to bring to the reader's attention the long list of "hostile witnesses" to Jesus' existence at this particular time in history. This was not covered in much detail earlier, but I feel definitely backs up His historical presence in history perhaps better than the friendly followers, since they have "no ax to grind" and are basically more interested in discrediting Jesus and his ministry. In addition, it's all the more proof to Jesus' actual existence in history and not just some concocted myth connected to the mystery religions also prevalent at this time.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 18, 2014 15:32:25 GMT -5
Of course, another way of looking at it is that the vast majority of Christians believe the complete account of Jesus as recorded in the Bible. They don't accept some parts (eg his teaching) and not accept other parts (eg his divinity) based on what they want to believe. They accept the Bible and also accept that the historicity of Jesus is supported by accounts outside of the Bible. On the other hand, the atheist who regards Jesus as a complete mythical character (it seems this view is on the increase amongst atheists) presumably has a problem when it comes to the historical accounts outside of the Bible. What does it do with them? Ignore them, gloss over them, discount them as inaccurate or discredit them? I've seen all of the above occur. The atheist who clearly discounts the supernatural side of Jesus but accepts that he was an historical figure also has a challenge. What do they do with Jesus? Do they discount only the supernatural parts of the Bible or do they completely reject the Bible altogether as a complete fraud? What do they do with the Bible? There is obviously a wide divergence of views and much has been written. Where does that leave the Christian? It would seem in quite a good space - the Bible is a significant and remarkable series of books written over many thousands of years by different people yet from OT to NT combines to tell an amazing account of God's plan in the world and for humanity. We don't have to "prove" the life, death and resurrection of Christ - it is clearly articulated in a book that is readily available for us to read. And if we needed non-Bible accounts to vouch his historicity they are there. And the remarkable thing about it is that even if one didn't accept the divinity of Jesus but lived by His teachings our world would be in a much better place than what we have today. In our own country, the demand for church based schools is huge and growing - much of it from non-Christians who want their children to be grounded in Christian values, without necessarily having a living faith in Jesus. Why is this? Jesus can't be that bad after all... Why should an atheist have a problem with Jesus just because there is historical accounts of him outside of the Bible?
Why shouldn't we treat him like we would any other historical person?
We can easily believe that Jesus existed without believing in any supernatural event like a resurrection. Just like we can also believe in one of the Caesars who really lived, however, not believe that Caesar rose from his funeral pyre.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 18, 2014 15:39:29 GMT -5
However, you have been spending post after post with many links to apologetic sites + multiple verses in an attempt to do just that, -verify the resurrection actually happened.
You have yet another long post above trying to do the same.
Even your statement, "how could one explain his following today if something supernatural didn't happen back in time?" does the same.
It is one more attempt to verify the resurrection.
DMG ~ Perhaps you're right, "it's one more attempt to verify the resurrection" in spite of the lack of historical evidence regarding the same from this time in history? However, perhaps you should remember the title of this thread and its central focus, and I feel you will understand the reason for my continued postings ~ "Proof of Jesus Existence from Sacred Texts."
After all, Christians do read my threads, too, and share in the input here. Also, the purpose of my last posting was to bring to the reader's attention the long list of "hostile witnesses" to Jesus' existence at this particular time in history. This was not covered in much detail earlier, but I feel definitely backs up his historical presence in history perhaps better than some friendly witnesses, IMHO?
Yes, the name of the thread is "Proof of Jesus Existence from Sacred Texts."
But you have been trying to prove them through historical texts.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Sept 18, 2014 15:53:41 GMT -5
DMG ~ Perhaps you're right, "it's one more attempt to verify the resurrection" in spite of the lack of historical evidence regarding the same from this time in history? However, perhaps you should remember the title of this thread and its central focus, and I feel you will understand the reason for my continued postings ~ "Proof of Jesus Existence from Sacred Texts."
After all, Christians do read my threads, too, and share in the input here. Also, the purpose of my last posting was to bring to the reader's attention the long list of "hostile witnesses" to Jesus' existence at this particular time in history. This was not covered in much detail earlier, but I feel definitely backs up his historical presence in history perhaps better than some friendly witnesses, IMHO?
Yes, the name of the thread is "Proof of Jesus Existence from Sacred Texts."
But you have been trying to prove them through historical texts.
DMG ~ I agree! But, it's also the historical references to hostile witnesses outside of Christianity that really adds credibility to Jesus' existence and ministry along with his crucifixion. Although I have not found any such historical references yet outside the Bible to the resurrection itself, I feel the Bible does give ample evidence that this was believed and accepted as fact and probably accounted for the large number of converts to Christianity that followed afterward? In fact, do you remember from Acts 2:21-44, in which Peter witnessed to Jews about Jesus' resurrection from all around the region gathered at the Feast of Pentecost, in which there were added about 3,000 converts to the Christian faith afterward? If the resurrection wasn't believed to be an actual event and if there weren't people who could attest to it, do you really feel that many people would have chosen Christianity under the threat of persecution and death for such a choice, in which caused most of Jesus' followers to go into hiding immediately after the crucifixion? What do you think changed things for the disciples from being in hiding to boldly proclaiming the gospel message of Jesus Christ? Perhaps you will find your answer below?
|
|
|
Post by xna on Sept 18, 2014 16:22:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by faune on Sept 18, 2014 17:07:18 GMT -5
Xna ~ Actually, the term was taken from an archives site that deals with sacred text on another of different subjects, and not just relating to the Christian faith. But, since I do use a number of scriptural references throughout this thread, I feel the use of the word "sacred texts" was appropriate here. In fact, my opening paragraph referred the reader to this site and the letters of Pilate and Herod in relation to Jesus and the crucifixion.
professing.proboards.com/thread/21027/proof-jesus-existence-sacred-texts
www.sacred-texts.com/bib/lbob/lbob29.htm
However, I believe this following article does provide some historical evidence for the Resurrection in its content, because it seems to tie together many of issues discussed earlier and brings out three major truths that are hard to gloss over regarding the resurrection of Jesus. I realize I may open "Pandora's Box" again by presenting this article, but I feel it makes some legitimate points worthy of consideration here and deserves to be shared.
www.desiringgod.org/articles/historical-evidence-for-the-resurrection Historical Evidence for the Resurrection
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 18, 2014 17:34:10 GMT -5
I really enjoyed these biblical references to the resurrection of Jesus, nevertheless. Along with the list of Jesus' followers is a long list of hostile witnesses to Jesus' existence recorded in history, too. This excerpt is taken from this link in references to this "great cloud of witnesses" left on record regarding Jesus' life along with his resurrection appearances.
www.str.org/articles/is-there-any-evidence-for-jesus-outside-the-bible#.VBswsE10xjp
The above link, (Stand to Reason) is just another of the Christian apologist site.
Why should we believe it anymore than any other apologist site?
|
|
|
Post by faune on Sept 18, 2014 17:47:34 GMT -5
I really enjoyed these biblical references to the resurrection of Jesus, nevertheless. Along with the list of Jesus' followers is a long list of hostile witnesses to Jesus' existence recorded in history, too. This excerpt is taken from this link in references to this "great cloud of witnesses" left on record regarding Jesus' life along with his resurrection appearances.
www.str.org/articles/is-there-any-evidence-for-jesus-outside-the-bible#.VBswsE10xjp
The above link, (Stand to Reason) is just another of the Christian apologist site.
Why should we believe it anymore than any other apologist site? DMG ~ Perhaps for the same reason you, as an atheist, chose to believe the arguments found on atheists' apologetic sites, in which they claim to present tangible evidence to back up their own conclusions? Both are scholars trained in their specific area, IMHO? In fact, I just added a new site that might be of interest to you a few moments ago in my response to Xna and introduced a preview to its contents.
www.desiringgod.org/articles/historical-evidence-for-the-resurrection Historical Evidence for the Resurrection
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Sept 18, 2014 18:21:33 GMT -5
The above link, (Stand to Reason) is just another of the Christian apologist site.
Why should we believe it anymore than any other apologist site? DMG ~ Perhaps for the same reason you, as an atheist, chose to believe the arguments found on atheists' apologetic sites, in which they claim to present tangible evidence to back up their own conclusions? Both are scholars trained in their specific area, IMHO? In fact, I just added a new site that might be of interest to you a few moments ago in my response to Xna and introduced a preview to its contents.
www.desiringgod.org/articles/historical-evidence-for-the-resurrection Historical Evidence for the Resurrection
This is Christian fantasy and wishful thinking, not any kind of credible evidence of a resurrection from the dead of anyone. The only job atheists may have in the question of a resurrection is to attempt to keep Christians honest about their complete lack of any firm, credible evidence. The Christian apologists, imo, are a slippery bunch.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Sept 18, 2014 18:31:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by faune on Sept 18, 2014 18:32:10 GMT -5
DMG ~ Perhaps for the same reason you, as an atheist, chose to believe the arguments found on atheists' apologetic sites, in which they claim to present tangible evidence to back up their own conclusions? Both are scholars trained in their specific area, IMHO? In fact, I just added a new site that might be of interest to you a few moments ago in my response to Xna and introduced a preview to its contents.
www.desiringgod.org/articles/historical-evidence-for-the-resurrection Historical Evidence for the Resurrection
This is Christian fantasy and wishful thinking, not any kind of credible evidence of a resurrection from the dead of anyone. The only job atheists may have in the question of a resurrection is to attempt to keep Christians honest about their complete lack of any firm, credible evidence. The Christian apologists, imo, are a slippery bunch. Matisse ~ Do you feel the same way about the atheist' apologists sites that Ross proved to DMG actually existed earlier in this thread? DMG seemingly found it interesting and left a comment pertaining to a quote she enjoyed on 9/13/2014 on this same thread in a response to me on the same subject matter.
www.atheistapologist.com/
|
|
|
Post by xna on Sept 18, 2014 18:35:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 18, 2014 18:44:29 GMT -5
The above link, (Stand to Reason) is just another of the Christian apologist site.
Why should we believe it anymore than any other apologist site? DMG ~ Perhaps for the same reason you, as an atheist, chose to believe the arguments found on atheists' apologetic sites, in which they claim to present tangible evidence to back up their own conclusions? Both are scholars trained in their specific area, IMHO? In fact, I just added a new site that might be of interest to you a few moments ago in my response to Xna and introduced a preview to its contents. Scholars or Apologists?
William Lane Craig's products are available at the Biola Apologetics Web Store. (Apologetics is part of his web site)
James Porter Moreland is an American philosopher, theologian, and Christian apologist. (Moreland is actually listed as an "apologist.")
Gary Habermas is a historian employed by the Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia.
Although Habermas isn't actually listed as an apologist here is part of his bio:
Habermas is employed by the Liberty University , founded as Lynchburg Baptist College in 1971 by Jerry Falwell.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Sept 18, 2014 18:44:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by faune on Sept 18, 2014 18:56:26 GMT -5
2nd try Faune ~ Do you find "relics" (human remains of saints in churches) strengthens your faith or is proof of the bible? Xna ~ Not really, but perhaps Catholics do?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 18, 2014 19:01:29 GMT -5
Why should an atheist have a problem with Jesus just because there is historical accounts of him outside of the Bible?
Why shouldn't we treat him like we would any other historical person?
We can easily believe that Jesus existed without believing in any supernatural event like a resurrection.
Just like we can also believe in one of the Caesars who really lived, however, not believe that Caesar rose from his funeral pyre.
Given that the Bible is a body of work where it is not possible to separate the natural from the supernatural then if one rejects the supernatural, the atheist has to reject the Bible as essentially fiction. The bible is NOT one body of work. It is many different books, -even different genres, -even some poetry. It certainly is possible to separate the natural from the supernatural. (Jonah in the belly of the whale? )
As an a atheist I certainly refuse to accept some of the lack of morality displayed bible as ethical, -but I don't doubt much of it did happen.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Sept 18, 2014 19:06:30 GMT -5
I really enjoyed these biblical references to the resurrection of Jesus, nevertheless. Along with the list of Jesus' followers is a long list of hostile witnesses to Jesus' existence recorded in history, too. This excerpt is taken from this link in references to this "great cloud of witnesses" left on record regarding Jesus' life along with his resurrection appearances.
www.str.org/articles/is-there-any-evidence-for-jesus-outside-the-bible#.VBswsE10xjp
The above link, (Stand to Reason) is just another of the Christian apologist site.
Why should we believe it anymore than any other apologist site? DMG ~ Well, I noticed you seemed to enjoy the atheist apologist site I pointed out to you earlier on Page 11 of this thread? Perhaps it's all about who writes the articles, huh?
professing.proboards.com/thread/21027/proof-jesus-existence-sacred-texts?page=11
|
|
|
Post by faune on Sept 18, 2014 19:08:56 GMT -5
Xna ~ Not particularly, but I'm sure Catholics do! Did you note the new thread by Bob Williston pertaining to the increased adoration of Mary by Pope Francis where she is now elevated in importance above Jesus and his place in the Trinity? The excerpt below comes from that article which Bob displayed on his thread in the opening paragraph. The comments have been interesting, too! In fact, I can remember some apologist saying in the past that he didn't think it would be long after she was declared Co-Redemptrix that she would be right up there with Jesus and the Trinity. Honestly, like Bob said in his comment, I wonder what the RCC did with the Holy Spirit as a result of this elevated status of Mary? In fact, I believe this same subject was discussed much earlier in this thread, as it does come to mind? It was also brought up on this other thread referenced below. I quoted Snow's comment earlier and added a few references regarding Mary's elevation in status over the years.
professing.proboards.com/thread/22148/thing-shakes-faith?page=23 professing.proboards.com/thread/22374/mary-second-trinity
www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/year-of-faith-to-be-marked-by-exposition-of-st-peter-relics/
|
|
|
Post by xna on Sept 18, 2014 19:12:24 GMT -5
2nd try Faune ~ Do you find "relics" (human remains of saints in churches) strengthens your faith or is proof of the bible? Xna ~ Not really, but perhaps Catholics do? I never did either. Also many christians faith was strengthened by the passion of christ movie. I see that a cheap way to manipulate people 's emotions. I guess we are all different. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 18, 2014 19:15:08 GMT -5
The above link, (Stand to Reason) is just another of the Christian apologist site.
Why should we believe it anymore than any other apologist site? DMG ~ Perhaps for the same reason you, as an atheist, chose to believe the arguments found on atheists' apologetic sites, in which they claim to present tangible evidence to back up their own conclusions? Both are scholars trained in their specific area, IMHO? In fact, I just added a new site that might be of interest to you a few moments ago in my response to Xna and introduced a preview to its contents. As I have told you before, faune, I don't need an atheists' apologetic site. Christians are the ones that must try & prove miracles, resurrection & such.
NOT believing in something like miracles due to there being no evidence of such does not require me to do anything!
|
|