Historical Jesus: The unchanging reality of the New Testament record.

[NYcarbineer]

What about the stories of Jesus having been married and having kids?

History?

 

[NYcarbineer]

So when the Koran says that Mohammed actually saw God,

which historically factual God did he see?

 

[Foxfyre]

The canonical gospels themselves, which in their present form, do not appear in the historical record until sometime between 170-180 AD/CE, and they were all found to be written in Greek, which is not the native language(s), Aramaic/Hebrew, of the area of the purported events in the bible. Their pretended authors, the apostles (Matthew, Mark, Luke & John), give sparse histories and genealogies of Jesus that contradict each other and themselves in numerous places.The birth date of Jesus is depicted as having taken place at different times. His birth and childhood are not mentioned in "Mark", and although he is claimed in "Matthew" and "Luke" to have been "born of a virgin," his lineage is traced to the House of David through Joseph, so that he may "fulfill prophecy." Christ is said in the first three (Synoptic) gospels to have taught for one year before he died, while in "John" the number is around three years. "Matthew" relates the Jesus delivered "The Sermon on the Mount" before "the multitudes," while "Luke" says it was a private talk given only to the disciples. The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly form each other, and no one states how old he was when he died. In addition, in the canonical gospels, Jesus himself makes many illogical contradictions concerning some of his most important teachings.

If you depend on the (usually pathetic) attempts by the Christian haters to discredit the New Testament, you get some of the stuff you posted here. If you read the scriptures through the eyes of those who wrote and edited together the texts that we have, you get a much different perspective. I highly recommend that you do the latter.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Christians who say jesus didn't want the rich to give away their useless wealth...

Their wealth is useless if you can't get your grubby hands on it. There was no command to live in poverty. And none to create a government that takes from one and gives to another.

Jesus said that there's a better chance of a camel going through a needle into heaven then a rich man.. Along with a bunch of other things. Their wealth is useless? Good to know. No command to live in poverty? Of course, Jesus wanted everyone cared for. This is what Christianity has become, do you honestly think Jesus would oppose programs that help poor people?

You aren't God so somebody else's salvation isn't something that should concern you. If programs turn people into lazy dependents then yes, Jesus would overturn their tables and whip them back to their socialist hellholes.

The money changers weren't socialist; they were entrepreneurs.

 

[Iceweasel]

The money changers weren't socialist; they were entrepreneurs.

They were ripping people off with the blessings of temple. To you a burglar is an entrepreneur.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Everybody knows that Jesus was a republican. He paid no taxes for one thing. He headed up an organization that was financially supported by lesser men. He never once advocated health insurance for the poor. Like David Vitter, he hung out with prostitutes. Of course, he was also the first victim of the democrats' war on Christmas....

 

[Iceweasel]

Everybody knows that Jesus was a republican. He paid no taxes for one thing. He headed up an organization that was financially supported by lesser men. He never once advocated health insurance for the poor. Like David Vitter, he hung out with prostitutes. Of course, he was also the first victim of the democrats' war on Christmas....

If Jesus was a Republican, Satan was a Democrat. Lying and offering false promises to get what he wants. Occupying bodies that didn't belong to him. Turning everything he touches into shit. And being a master of disguise to worm his way into your door.

 

[AudeSapere]

How is that telling? Paul never met Jesus except by a vision. How could he provide any history? Gnostics were all over the map theologically speaking. They borrowed from Christianity and Christianity may have borrowed from them.

How could Paul provide any history? From James.
Paul is alleged to have met Jesus by a vision and there's no historical proof that this actually happened. As you probably know Paul wasn't one of the apostles of Jesus, but Paul is alleged to have met James in Jerusalem.

Paul makes visits to Jerusalem to meet with the leadership of the Jerusalem Council and the only name mentioned is James. Other than the letter attributed to James, he is only mentioned three times in all of the NT.
The reason for this discussion on James, Paul, and the Jerusalem Council is to understand the struggle of the early church with respect to the issue of the Gentile believers.

It was Christianity that borrowed some from the Essenes (Gnostics) as they predated Christianity by hundreds of years and not the other way around.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I have always had questions about the resurrection, too. One has to wonder if Jesus' first act when he left the tomb was to look for Easter eggs.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Everybody knows that Jesus was a republican. He paid no taxes for one thing. He headed up an organization that was financially supported by lesser men. He never once advocated health insurance for the poor. Like David Vitter, he hung out with prostitutes. Of course, he was also the first victim of the democrats' war on Christmas....

Actually it was the Puritans who started the "War on Christmas" back in 1659. That officially makes it America's longest running war ever.

 

[Iceweasel]

How is that telling? Paul never met Jesus except by a vision. How could he provide any history? Gnostics were all over the map theologically speaking. They borrowed from Christianity and Christianity may have borrowed from them.

How could Paul provide any history? From James.
Paul is alleged to have met Jesus by a vision and there's no historical proof that this actually happened. As you probably know Paul wasn't one of the apostles of Jesus, but Paul is alleged to have met James in Jerusalem.

Paul makes visits to Jerusalem to meet with the leadership of the Jerusalem Council and the only name mentioned is James. Other than the letter attributed to James, he is only mentioned three times in all of the NT.
The reason for this discussion on James, Paul, and the Jerusalem Council is to understand the struggle of the early church with respect to the issue of the Gentile believers.

It was Christianity that borrowed some from the Essenes (Gnostics) as they predated Christianity by hundreds of years and not the other way around.

Hearing and repeating second hand accounts isn't exactly proof. And what evidence do you have that the Essenes were gnostics?

 

[AudeSapere]

Hearing and repeating second hand accounts isn't exactly proof. And what evidence do you have that the Essenes were gnostics?

You accept hearing and repeating second hand accounts for the entire Bible practically. Many people hear and repeat second hand accounts of Paul supposedly seeing Jesus in a vision and you accept that on faith or evidence?

When I wrote " Essenes (Gnostics)" that should have been Essenes & Gnostics and both religious sects predate Christianity.

 

[AudeSapere]

The canonical gospels themselves, which in their present form, do not appear in the historical record until sometime between 170-180 AD/CE, and they were all found to be written in Greek, which is not the native language(s), Aramaic/Hebrew, of the area of the purported events in the bible. Their pretended authors, the apostles (Matthew, Mark, Luke & John), give sparse histories and genealogies of Jesus that contradict each other and themselves in numerous places.The birth date of Jesus is depicted as having taken place at different times. His birth and childhood are not mentioned in "Mark", and although he is claimed in "Matthew" and "Luke" to have been "born of a virgin," his lineage is traced to the House of David through Joseph, so that he may "fulfill prophecy." Christ is said in the first three (Synoptic) gospels to have taught for one year before he died, while in "John" the number is around three years. "Matthew" relates the Jesus delivered "The Sermon on the Mount" before "the multitudes," while "Luke" says it was a private talk given only to the disciples. The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly form each other, and no one states how old he was when he died. In addition, in the canonical gospels, Jesus himself makes many illogical contradictions concerning some of his most important teachings.

If you depend on the (usually pathetic) attempts by the Christian haters to discredit the New Testament, you get some of the stuff you posted here. If you read the scriptures through the eyes of those who wrote and edited together the texts that we have, you get a much different perspective. I highly recommend that you do the latter.

The New Testament discredits itself by all the contradictions, inconsistencies, and anachronistic history. OK, I'll edit some scriptures together and you tell me what perspective I am suppose to glean from them. Help me out here.

Explain these contradictions in the resurrection story. This is going to be somewhat lengthy and I apologize for the length, but I feel I need to do it to make my point.

1. Matthew 28:1 states two women (Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary) came to the tomb; Mark 16:1 states it was three women (Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome); Luke 24:10 agrees it was three women but gives a different list of three than Mark (Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James); John 20:1 states it was only Mary Magdalene.

2. Mark 16:2 states "the sun had risen" at the time of this visit, while John 20:1 states "it was still dark."

3. Matthew 28:2 says "an angel" "came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it"; Mark 16:5 says the women encountered "a young man sitting at the right" of the tomb (rather than upon the stone); Luke 24:4 says they saw "two men" who "suddenly stood near them in dazzling clothing"; in John 20:1, Mary Magdalene saw nothing other than a moved stone.

4. There is also a discrepancy as to whatever dialogue occurred between this angel(s) or man (men) and the women: Matthew 28:5-7 and Mark 16:6-7 generally agree the women were told that Jesus had risen, and instructed to advise the disciples that "He has risen from the dead; and behold, He is going ahead of you into Galilee, there you will see Him" (Matthew 28:7), and ; Luke 24:6-7 contains no instruction to advise the disciples about an appearance by Issa in Galilee.

5. To whom did Jesus appear first: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary as Matthew 28:9 claims? Mary Magdalene only as Mark 16:9 claims? Cephas (Peter) and then the other disciples, as 1 Corinthians 15:5 claims? Matthew 28:9 claims that Jesus appeared before the women even had reported to the disciples what they found (or didnt) at the tomb. Also in Mark 16:9 the appearance to Mary Magdalene was before Mary made any report to the disciples. However, John and Luke report no appearance before the women reported an empty tomb to the disciples.

6. Which disciples went to the tomb: Peter alone (Luke 24:12)? Peter and John (John 20:2-8)? Did the disciples believe the reports of the women (or woman) and proceed to Galilee, as Matthew 28:16 claims? Or did they disbelieve these reports as Mark 16:11 and Luke 24:11 claim?

7. In appearing to the disciples, to whom did Jesus first appear: All eleven together (Matthew 28:17-18)? Two of them on the road, then to all eleven together (Mark 16:12-14 and Luke 24:13-31)? To ten of the eleven (minus Thomas) together (John 20:19-24)? To Peter, then the others (1 Corinthians 15:5)? The story recounted in John 20:25-29 is all premised on an appearance of Jesus before the disciples at which Thomas was not present! Matthew 28:17-18, Mark 16:12-14 and Luke 24:13-31 all disagree with John about any such meeting taking place in the absence of Thomas!

8. In Acts and the Gospel of Luke, the disciples were commanded to stay in Jerusalem and, in fact, met Jesus (peace be upon him) there (see Acts 1:4 and Luke 24:33, 47, 49). In Matthew 28:10 and Mark 16:6-7, the disciples are commanded to go to Galilee, and in Matthew 28:16-18, we are told they see Jesus there, not in or near Jerusalem!

9. Mark says that after appearing before the eleven disciples together in Gallilee, Jesus ascended to Heaven (Mark 16: 14, 19). Luke says Jesus ascended to Heaven at Bethany after walking with the disciples some time (Luke 24:50-51). John says Jesus (peace be upon him) appeared to the disciples at three times and that some of these appearances were near the Sea of Gallilee (Lake Tiberias) (John 21:1, 14). According to Acts the disciples were at Mt. Olivet, a days journey from Jerusalem, when the ascension occurred (Acts 1:9-12).

10. In 1 Corinthians 15:5-8, it is claimed that Jesus appeared to more than five hundred witnesses before his ascent to heaven, a claim directly contradicted at least by Mark, who says the ascension occurred immediately after an appearance before the eleven disciples (Mark 16: 14, 19).

If these books were truly authored and inspired by the One and Only Divine Author, GOD Almighty, then we wouldn't see:

1- Third-party narrations narrated by mysterious authors.

2- Ridiculous variations and contradictions as clearly seen above. Some Christians claim that these variations "compliment" each others. This is absurd to say the least, because the contradictions of missing characters, events, and/or places are obvious, and the so-called "variations" only create confusion and further prove that they weren't authored by One Author (GOD Almighty), because we don't know based on the narrations above what really took place! Different versions, different events and different contradicting accounts.

 

[AudeSapere]

While I know some delightful and great people who happen to be Muslim, I have seen zero evidence that people's lives are made better or that people are made better by following the Qu'ran. I have seen massive evidence that people's lives are made better and that people are made better by allowing the Christ into their lives. So believing the Gospel is a whole lot easier for me than believing the Qu'ran.

The Gospels were edited together decades after the actual events, but almost certainly contained material that had been written down in notes or reported in the oral tradition long before. Even a cursory reading of the Gospels makes it clear that they were not written as one cohesive document but were rather compiled from a number of different sources.

Why does no one find it strange that even though Jesus was obviously educated enough to be able to read and write there is zero evidence of him having written anything at all? How about Matthew and Luke? They were also educated but there is no evidence of them actually having written anything at all?

On the other hand we apparently have plenty of letters from Paul (called the Man of the Lie by James, the brother of Jesus) who never actually met Jesus in person.

James the Brother of Jesus

Seems odd that for someone who was allegedly a well known and educated preacher of his time as Jesus is purported to have been that not a single remnant of anything he ever wrote can be found. We have all kinds of other documents from before, during and after that period that were preserved but nothing at all from Jesus himself.

Actually, we don't have "all kinds of other documents" you moron. Writing was a very rare talent and not a common activity back then. People did not routinely "write things down"...and we have as much evidence of the existence of Christ as we do of the existence of any historical figure..including Julius Caesar, Plato, Cleopatra....

But it's a waste of time. There's no point in talking to imbecilic rabble like you. You love and embrace your ignorance. I just wish you had the good sense to quit advertising it.

So now you are denying that Paul wrote all those epistles that you believe to be the "Word of God"?

It is very telling that the earliest Christian documents, the epistles attributed to "Paul", never discuss a historical background of Jesus but deal exclusively with a spiritual being who was known to "Gnostic" sects for years. The few "historical" references to an actual life of Jesus cited in the epistles are evidently interpolations and forgeries, as are, according to various scholars, the bulk of the epistles themselves, as they were not written by "Paul".

Nice try but no cigar for you. The six of Paul's letters that we are certain can be attributed to Paul reference the historical Jesus and facts about him in numerous places. The Gnostics had become a problem teaching a false gospel--much as you have done here--and Paul does deal with them in some of his writings. But there is no question that Paul was very aware of and taught of the historical Jesus.

(The other five letters attributed to Paul may or may not have had his direct input, but many theologians believe they are more likely to have been penned by disciples of Paul. At that time in history, it was common for disciples of teachers to write under their teacher's name.)

Are the New Testament gospels history? Where's the proof?

 

[Foxfyre]

The canonical gospels themselves, which in their present form, do not appear in the historical record until sometime between 170-180 AD/CE, and they were all found to be written in Greek, which is not the native language(s), Aramaic/Hebrew, of the area of the purported events in the bible. Their pretended authors, the apostles (Matthew, Mark, Luke & John), give sparse histories and genealogies of Jesus that contradict each other and themselves in numerous places.The birth date of Jesus is depicted as having taken place at different times. His birth and childhood are not mentioned in "Mark", and although he is claimed in "Matthew" and "Luke" to have been "born of a virgin," his lineage is traced to the House of David through Joseph, so that he may "fulfill prophecy." Christ is said in the first three (Synoptic) gospels to have taught for one year before he died, while in "John" the number is around three years. "Matthew" relates the Jesus delivered "The Sermon on the Mount" before "the multitudes," while "Luke" says it was a private talk given only to the disciples. The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly form each other, and no one states how old he was when he died. In addition, in the canonical gospels, Jesus himself makes many illogical contradictions concerning some of his most important teachings.

If you depend on the (usually pathetic) attempts by the Christian haters to discredit the New Testament, you get some of the stuff you posted here. If you read the scriptures through the eyes of those who wrote and edited together the texts that we have, you get a much different perspective. I highly recommend that you do the latter.

The New Testament discredits itself by all the contradictions, inconsistencies, and anachronistic history. OK, I'll edit some scriptures together and you tell me what perspective I am suppose to glean from them. Help me out here.

Explain these contradictions in the resurrection story. This is going to be somewhat lengthy and I apologize for the length, but I feel I need to do it to make my point.

1. Matthew 28:1 states two women (Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary) came to the tomb; Mark 16:1 states it was three women (Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome); Luke 24:10 agrees it was three women but gives a different list of three than Mark (Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James); John 20:1 states it was only Mary Magdalene.

2. Mark 16:2 states "the sun had risen" at the time of this visit, while John 20:1 states "it was still dark."

3. Matthew 28:2 says "an angel" "came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it"; Mark 16:5 says the women encountered "a young man sitting at the right" of the tomb (rather than upon the stone); Luke 24:4 says they saw "two men" who "suddenly stood near them in dazzling clothing"; in John 20:1, Mary Magdalene saw nothing other than a moved stone.

4. There is also a discrepancy as to whatever dialogue occurred between this angel(s) or man (men) and the women: Matthew 28:5-7 and Mark 16:6-7 generally agree the women were told that Jesus had risen, and instructed to advise the disciples that "He has risen from the dead; and behold, He is going ahead of you into Galilee, there you will see Him" (Matthew 28:7), and ; Luke 24:6-7 contains no instruction to advise the disciples about an appearance by Issa in Galilee.

5. To whom did Jesus appear first: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary as Matthew 28:9 claims? Mary Magdalene only as Mark 16:9 claims? Cephas (Peter) and then the other disciples, as 1 Corinthians 15:5 claims? Matthew 28:9 claims that Jesus appeared before the women even had reported to the disciples what they found (or didnt) at the tomb. Also in Mark 16:9 the appearance to Mary Magdalene was before Mary made any report to the disciples. However, John and Luke report no appearance before the women reported an empty tomb to the disciples.

6. Which disciples went to the tomb: Peter alone (Luke 24:12)? Peter and John (John 20:2-8)? Did the disciples believe the reports of the women (or woman) and proceed to Galilee, as Matthew 28:16 claims? Or did they disbelieve these reports as Mark 16:11 and Luke 24:11 claim?

7. In appearing to the disciples, to whom did Jesus first appear: All eleven together (Matthew 28:17-18)? Two of them on the road, then to all eleven together (Mark 16:12-14 and Luke 24:13-31)? To ten of the eleven (minus Thomas) together (John 20:19-24)? To Peter, then the others (1 Corinthians 15:5)? The story recounted in John 20:25-29 is all premised on an appearance of Jesus before the disciples at which Thomas was not present! Matthew 28:17-18, Mark 16:12-14 and Luke 24:13-31 all disagree with John about any such meeting taking place in the absence of Thomas!

8. In Acts and the Gospel of Luke, the disciples were commanded to stay in Jerusalem and, in fact, met Jesus (peace be upon him) there (see Acts 1:4 and Luke 24:33, 47, 49). In Matthew 28:10 and Mark 16:6-7, the disciples are commanded to go to Galilee, and in Matthew 28:16-18, we are told they see Jesus there, not in or near Jerusalem!

9. Mark says that after appearing before the eleven disciples together in Gallilee, Jesus ascended to Heaven (Mark 16: 14, 19). Luke says Jesus ascended to Heaven at Bethany after walking with the disciples some time (Luke 24:50-51). John says Jesus (peace be upon him) appeared to the disciples at three times and that some of these appearances were near the Sea of Gallilee (Lake Tiberias) (John 21:1, 14). According to Acts the disciples were at Mt. Olivet, a days journey from Jerusalem, when the ascension occurred (Acts 1:9-12).

10. In 1 Corinthians 15:5-8, it is claimed that Jesus appeared to more than five hundred witnesses before his ascent to heaven, a claim directly contradicted at least by Mark, who says the ascension occurred immediately after an appearance before the eleven disciples (Mark 16: 14, 19).

If these books were truly authored and inspired by the One and Only Divine Author, GOD Almighty, then we wouldn't see:

1- Third-party narrations narrated by mysterious authors.

2- Ridiculous variations and contradictions as clearly seen above. Some Christians claim that these variations "compliment" each others. This is absurd to say the least, because the contradictions of missing characters, events, and/or places are obvious, and the so-called "variations" only create confusion and further prove that they weren't authored by One Author (GOD Almighty), because we don't know based on the narrations above what really took place! Different versions, different events and different contradicting accounts.

If you think those are the only 'contradictions' in the Bible, you aren't searching enough anti-Christian sites to copy and paste from.

It is the very contradictions that give the New Testament authenticity. If the purpose was to defraud and mislead people, wouldn't you think those smart enough to write all that 'fraud' would have been smart enough to take out the contradictions? The fact that the New Testament was written by a myriad number of writers, each with his own recollections, personal testimony and experience, is what makes it credible.

Again you have to read the Scriptures through the eyes of those who wrote them to understand their significance. Those who seem so desperate to discredit the Scriptures and those who benefit from them are not likely to be persuaded differently. I don't know if their motives are from fear, or desperation, or pure meanness, but the Bible itself tells us such people will exist.

But again the truth of the scriptures cannot be discerned other than by the power of the Holy Spirit. The scriptures themselves inform us that to everybody else they are foolishness.

And I suppose that's the way it is.

 

[Iceweasel]

Hearing and repeating second hand accounts isn't exactly proof. And what evidence do you have that the Essenes were gnostics?

You accept hearing and repeating second hand accounts for the entire Bible practically. Many people hear and repeat second hand accounts of Paul supposedly seeing Jesus in a vision and you accept that on faith or evidence?

When I wrote " Essenes (Gnostics)" that should have been Essenes & Gnostics and both religious sects predate Christianity.

I don't accept anything on faith, that's why I asked. I had never heard the Essenes called gnostics before. I do believe the Hellinization of the Hebrews brought about gnosticism in its' various forms.

But what happened to the earlier accounts of the NT books being other than Greek?

 

[AudeSapere]

It is the very contradictions that give the New Testament authenticity

That's absurd. How do contradictions give the New Testament authenticity? That's like saying contradicting accounts from the prosecutions' witnesses in a criminal case lend it credibility in a court case. You couldn't convict with that line of reasoning (or lack thereof).

The fact that the New Testament was written by a myriad number of writers, each with his own recollections, personal testimony and experience, is what makes it credible.

The gospels weren't written by writers that lived during the era that Jesus is purported to have lived. The "myriad" of writers of the gospels were anonymous, which detracts from their credibility, and the names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were assigned to these anonymously written gospels. Historians/Chroniclers that lived during the time that Christ is purported to lived, like Philo of Alexandria, who traveled to Jerusalem a number of times, doesn't write a thing about Jesus. Why? Is it because the story about Jesus is a concoction written at a later time? I believe it is and if you believe that that a myriad of anonymous writers lends credibility to the gospels and NT in general then you have warped reasoning.

Again you have to read the Scriptures through the eyes of those who wrote them to understand their significance. Those who seem so desperate to discredit the Scriptures and those who benefit from them are not likely to be persuaded differently

You're engaging in logical fallacies in an attempt to make your argument. It's called special pleading and what you wrote is a perfect example.

Special pleading is a formal logical fallacy where a participant demands special considerations for a particular premise of theirs. Usually this is because in order for their argument to work, they need to provide some way to get out of a logical inconsistency, in a lot of cases, this will be the fact that their argument contradicts past arguments or actions. Therefore, they introduce a "special case" or an exception to their rules.

Then there's Inconsistency: asserting that contrary or contradictory statements are both true.

Historical Documentation shows that the original beliefs, customs and concept of Christianity was vastly different than it is today. The Christian Dilemmas three part series traces the changes and examines the conflicts that have caused concern for religious scholars and followers of the faith

Christian Dilemmas Part 1

 

[Foxfyre]

It is the very contradictions that give the New Testament authenticity

That's absurd. How do contradictions give the New Testament authenticity? That's like saying contradicting accounts from the prosecutions' witnesses in a criminal case lend it credibility in a court case. You couldn't convict with that line of reasoning (or lack thereof).

The fact that the New Testament was written by a myriad number of writers, each with his own recollections, personal testimony and experience, is what makes it credible.

The gospels weren't written by writers that lived during the era that Jesus is purported to have lived. The "myriad" of writers of the gospels were anonymous, which detracts from their credibility, and the names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were assigned to these anonymously written gospels. Historians/Chroniclers that lived during the time that Christ is purported to lived, like Philo of Alexandria, who traveled to Jerusalem a number of times, doesn't write a thing about Jesus. Why? Is it because the story about Jesus is a concoction written at a later time? I believe it is and if you believe that that a myriad of anonymous writers lends credibility to the gospels and NT in general then you have warped reasoning.

Again you have to read the Scriptures through the eyes of those who wrote them to understand their significance. Those who seem so desperate to discredit the Scriptures and those who benefit from them are not likely to be persuaded differently

You're engaging in logical fallacies in an attempt to make your argument. It's called special pleading and what you wrote is a perfect example.

Special pleading is a formal logical fallacy where a participant demands special considerations for a particular premise of theirs. Usually this is because in order for their argument to work, they need to provide some way to get out of a logical inconsistency, in a lot of cases, this will be the fact that their argument contradicts past arguments or actions. Therefore, they introduce a "special case" or an exception to their rules.

Then there's Inconsistency: asserting that contrary or contradictory statements are both true.

Historical Documentation shows that the original beliefs, customs and concept of Christianity was vastly different than it is today. The Christian Dilemmas three part series traces the changes and examines the conflicts that have caused concern for religious scholars and followers of the faith

Christian Dilemmas Part 1

Well I've made my arguments. And I have lived with them for enough years to be very secure with them. I won't try to convince you.

There is nothing of pure Christianity that has changed since the beginning but only the way that fallible people understand and respond to it. Christianity is not a 'religion' like other religions. It is a relationship with the living God. And that is something that has to be experienced to be understood.

 

[BluePhantom]

The canonical gospels themselves, which in their present form, do not appear in the historical record until sometime between 170-180 AD/CE, and they were all found to be written in Greek, which is not the native language(s), Aramaic/Hebrew, of the area of the purported events in the bible. Their pretended authors, the apostles (Matthew, Mark, Luke & John), give sparse histories and genealogies of Jesus that contradict each other and themselves in numerous places.The birth date of Jesus is depicted as having taken place at different times. His birth and childhood are not mentioned in "Mark", and although he is claimed in "Matthew" and "Luke" to have been "born of a virgin," his lineage is traced to the House of David through Joseph, so that he may "fulfill prophecy." Christ is said in the first three (Synoptic) gospels to have taught for one year before he died, while in "John" the number is around three years. "Matthew" relates the Jesus delivered "The Sermon on the Mount" before "the multitudes," while "Luke" says it was a private talk given only to the disciples. The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly form each other, and no one states how old he was when he died. In addition, in the canonical gospels, Jesus himself makes many illogical contradictions concerning some of his most important teachings.

If you depend on the (usually pathetic) attempts by the Christian haters to discredit the New Testament, you get some of the stuff you posted here. If you read the scriptures through the eyes of those who wrote and edited together the texts that we have, you get a much different perspective. I highly recommend that you do the latter.

The New Testament discredits itself by all the contradictions, inconsistencies, and anachronistic history. OK, I'll edit some scriptures together and you tell me what perspective I am suppose to glean from them. Help me out here.

Explain these contradictions in the resurrection story. This is going to be somewhat lengthy and I apologize for the length, but I feel I need to do it to make my point.

1. Matthew 28:1 states two women (Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary) came to the tomb; Mark 16:1 states it was three women (Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome); Luke 24:10 agrees it was three women but gives a different list of three than Mark (Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James); John 20:1 states it was only Mary Magdalene.

2. Mark 16:2 states "the sun had risen" at the time of this visit, while John 20:1 states "it was still dark."

3. Matthew 28:2 says "an angel" "came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it"; Mark 16:5 says the women encountered "a young man sitting at the right" of the tomb (rather than upon the stone); Luke 24:4 says they saw "two men" who "suddenly stood near them in dazzling clothing"; in John 20:1, Mary Magdalene saw nothing other than a moved stone.

4. There is also a discrepancy as to whatever dialogue occurred between this angel(s) or man (men) and the women: Matthew 28:5-7 and Mark 16:6-7 generally agree the women were told that Jesus had risen, and instructed to advise the disciples that "He has risen from the dead; and behold, He is going ahead of you into Galilee, there you will see Him" (Matthew 28:7), and ; Luke 24:6-7 contains no instruction to advise the disciples about an appearance by Issa in Galilee.

5. To whom did Jesus appear first: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary as Matthew 28:9 claims? Mary Magdalene only as Mark 16:9 claims? Cephas (Peter) and then the other disciples, as 1 Corinthians 15:5 claims? Matthew 28:9 claims that Jesus appeared before the women even had reported to the disciples what they found (or didnt) at the tomb. Also in Mark 16:9 the appearance to Mary Magdalene was before Mary made any report to the disciples. However, John and Luke report no appearance before the women reported an empty tomb to the disciples.

6. Which disciples went to the tomb: Peter alone (Luke 24:12)? Peter and John (John 20:2-8)? Did the disciples believe the reports of the women (or woman) and proceed to Galilee, as Matthew 28:16 claims? Or did they disbelieve these reports as Mark 16:11 and Luke 24:11 claim?

7. In appearing to the disciples, to whom did Jesus first appear: All eleven together (Matthew 28:17-18)? Two of them on the road, then to all eleven together (Mark 16:12-14 and Luke 24:13-31)? To ten of the eleven (minus Thomas) together (John 20:19-24)? To Peter, then the others (1 Corinthians 15:5)? The story recounted in John 20:25-29 is all premised on an appearance of Jesus before the disciples at which Thomas was not present! Matthew 28:17-18, Mark 16:12-14 and Luke 24:13-31 all disagree with John about any such meeting taking place in the absence of Thomas!

8. In Acts and the Gospel of Luke, the disciples were commanded to stay in Jerusalem and, in fact, met Jesus (peace be upon him) there (see Acts 1:4 and Luke 24:33, 47, 49). In Matthew 28:10 and Mark 16:6-7, the disciples are commanded to go to Galilee, and in Matthew 28:16-18, we are told they see Jesus there, not in or near Jerusalem!

9. Mark says that after appearing before the eleven disciples together in Gallilee, Jesus ascended to Heaven (Mark 16: 14, 19). Luke says Jesus ascended to Heaven at Bethany after walking with the disciples some time (Luke 24:50-51). John says Jesus (peace be upon him) appeared to the disciples at three times and that some of these appearances were near the Sea of Gallilee (Lake Tiberias) (John 21:1, 14). According to Acts the disciples were at Mt. Olivet, a days journey from Jerusalem, when the ascension occurred (Acts 1:9-12).

10. In 1 Corinthians 15:5-8, it is claimed that Jesus appeared to more than five hundred witnesses before his ascent to heaven, a claim directly contradicted at least by Mark, who says the ascension occurred immediately after an appearance before the eleven disciples (Mark 16: 14, 19).

If these books were truly authored and inspired by the One and Only Divine Author, GOD Almighty, then we wouldn't see:

1- Third-party narrations narrated by mysterious authors.

2- Ridiculous variations and contradictions as clearly seen above. Some Christians claim that these variations "compliment" each others. This is absurd to say the least, because the contradictions of missing characters, events, and/or places are obvious, and the so-called "variations" only create confusion and further prove that they weren't authored by One Author (GOD Almighty), because we don't know based on the narrations above what really took place! Different versions, different events and different contradicting accounts.

Dude stop copying and pasting websites. That entire post comes from here: Contradictions In the Resurrection Story in the BibleContradictions In the Resurrection Story in the Bible I notice you took the part out right at the end where the true author identifies himself.

You did the same thing here: Refuting Fear Based Motivation for Christian Morality Page 3 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum where you copied and pasted from here and attempted to pass it off as your own argument: https://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/doc_view/11-the-forged-origins-of-the-new-testament

Provide the sources you are plagiarizing from please...or better yet try creating your own arguments instead of ripping off other people

 

[Foxfyre]

The canonical gospels themselves, which in their present form, do not appear in the historical record until sometime between 170-180 AD/CE, and they were all found to be written in Greek, which is not the native language(s), Aramaic/Hebrew, of the area of the purported events in the bible. Their pretended authors, the apostles (Matthew, Mark, Luke & John), give sparse histories and genealogies of Jesus that contradict each other and themselves in numerous places.The birth date of Jesus is depicted as having taken place at different times. His birth and childhood are not mentioned in "Mark", and although he is claimed in "Matthew" and "Luke" to have been "born of a virgin," his lineage is traced to the House of David through Joseph, so that he may "fulfill prophecy." Christ is said in the first three (Synoptic) gospels to have taught for one year before he died, while in "John" the number is around three years. "Matthew" relates the Jesus delivered "The Sermon on the Mount" before "the multitudes," while "Luke" says it was a private talk given only to the disciples. The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly form each other, and no one states how old he was when he died. In addition, in the canonical gospels, Jesus himself makes many illogical contradictions concerning some of his most important teachings.

If you depend on the (usually pathetic) attempts by the Christian haters to discredit the New Testament, you get some of the stuff you posted here. If you read the scriptures through the eyes of those who wrote and edited together the texts that we have, you get a much different perspective. I highly recommend that you do the latter.

The New Testament discredits itself by all the contradictions, inconsistencies, and anachronistic history. OK, I'll edit some scriptures together and you tell me what perspective I am suppose to glean from them. Help me out here.

Explain these contradictions in the resurrection story. This is going to be somewhat lengthy and I apologize for the length, but I feel I need to do it to make my point.

1. Matthew 28:1 states two women (Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary) came to the tomb; Mark 16:1 states it was three women (Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome); Luke 24:10 agrees it was three women but gives a different list of three than Mark (Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James); John 20:1 states it was only Mary Magdalene.

2. Mark 16:2 states "the sun had risen" at the time of this visit, while John 20:1 states "it was still dark."

3. Matthew 28:2 says "an angel" "came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it"; Mark 16:5 says the women encountered "a young man sitting at the right" of the tomb (rather than upon the stone); Luke 24:4 says they saw "two men" who "suddenly stood near them in dazzling clothing"; in John 20:1, Mary Magdalene saw nothing other than a moved stone.

4. There is also a discrepancy as to whatever dialogue occurred between this angel(s) or man (men) and the women: Matthew 28:5-7 and Mark 16:6-7 generally agree the women were told that Jesus had risen, and instructed to advise the disciples that "He has risen from the dead; and behold, He is going ahead of you into Galilee, there you will see Him" (Matthew 28:7), and ; Luke 24:6-7 contains no instruction to advise the disciples about an appearance by Issa in Galilee.

5. To whom did Jesus appear first: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary as Matthew 28:9 claims? Mary Magdalene only as Mark 16:9 claims? Cephas (Peter) and then the other disciples, as 1 Corinthians 15:5 claims? Matthew 28:9 claims that Jesus appeared before the women even had reported to the disciples what they found (or didnt) at the tomb. Also in Mark 16:9 the appearance to Mary Magdalene was before Mary made any report to the disciples. However, John and Luke report no appearance before the women reported an empty tomb to the disciples.

6. Which disciples went to the tomb: Peter alone (Luke 24:12)? Peter and John (John 20:2-8)? Did the disciples believe the reports of the women (or woman) and proceed to Galilee, as Matthew 28:16 claims? Or did they disbelieve these reports as Mark 16:11 and Luke 24:11 claim?

7. In appearing to the disciples, to whom did Jesus first appear: All eleven together (Matthew 28:17-18)? Two of them on the road, then to all eleven together (Mark 16:12-14 and Luke 24:13-31)? To ten of the eleven (minus Thomas) together (John 20:19-24)? To Peter, then the others (1 Corinthians 15:5)? The story recounted in John 20:25-29 is all premised on an appearance of Jesus before the disciples at which Thomas was not present! Matthew 28:17-18, Mark 16:12-14 and Luke 24:13-31 all disagree with John about any such meeting taking place in the absence of Thomas!

8. In Acts and the Gospel of Luke, the disciples were commanded to stay in Jerusalem and, in fact, met Jesus (peace be upon him) there (see Acts 1:4 and Luke 24:33, 47, 49). In Matthew 28:10 and Mark 16:6-7, the disciples are commanded to go to Galilee, and in Matthew 28:16-18, we are told they see Jesus there, not in or near Jerusalem!

9. Mark says that after appearing before the eleven disciples together in Gallilee, Jesus ascended to Heaven (Mark 16: 14, 19). Luke says Jesus ascended to Heaven at Bethany after walking with the disciples some time (Luke 24:50-51). John says Jesus (peace be upon him) appeared to the disciples at three times and that some of these appearances were near the Sea of Gallilee (Lake Tiberias) (John 21:1, 14). According to Acts the disciples were at Mt. Olivet, a days journey from Jerusalem, when the ascension occurred (Acts 1:9-12).

10. In 1 Corinthians 15:5-8, it is claimed that Jesus appeared to more than five hundred witnesses before his ascent to heaven, a claim directly contradicted at least by Mark, who says the ascension occurred immediately after an appearance before the eleven disciples (Mark 16: 14, 19).

If these books were truly authored and inspired by the One and Only Divine Author, GOD Almighty, then we wouldn't see:

1- Third-party narrations narrated by mysterious authors.

2- Ridiculous variations and contradictions as clearly seen above. Some Christians claim that these variations "compliment" each others. This is absurd to say the least, because the contradictions of missing characters, events, and/or places are obvious, and the so-called "variations" only create confusion and further prove that they weren't authored by One Author (GOD Almighty), because we don't know based on the narrations above what really took place! Different versions, different events and different contradicting accounts.

Dude stop copying and pasting websites. That entire post comes from here: Contradictions In the Resurrection Story in the BibleContradictions In the Resurrection Story in the Bible I notice you took the part out right at the end where the true author identifies himself.

You did the same thing here: Refuting Fear Based Motivation for Christian Morality Page 3 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum where you copied and pasted from here and attempted to pass it off as your own argument: https://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/doc_view/11-the-forged-origins-of-the-new-testament

Provide the sources you are plagiarizing from please...or better yet try creating your own arguments instead of ripping off other people

Yes, that is one of those sites that appears to be a pro-Islamic and anti-Christian site. Maybe used to train Islamic terrorists to hate Christians? Who knows?

I don't know him at all so I'll allow AudeSapere benefit of the doubt and won't second guess his agenda. But the Bible itself tells us there will be scoffers and those who will do their damndest to shake the Christians' faith. I do not pretend to understand what drives such people; I just accept that they exist. And my role against it is to just keep posting better information and hope that most are able to discern which is the lie and which is the real deal.