He definitely suffered but many con men come to bad ends. I'm not saying what he was, only that we will never know for sure.
Calling Out Alang1216: The God of Abraham is a myth
- Thread starter ding
- Start date
I agree with Ehrman but even if Paul wrote them, we don't know how honest Paul was, we only have his words. We know there are conflicts between his accounts and those in Acts. Does that matter? I don't know.
And you can't prove it by ignoring history and human nature.
- Thread starter
- #564
We know what he wrote. We know he had nothing to gain and everything to lose.
- Thread starter
- #565
What conflicts exist regarding the resurrection?
- Thread starter
- #567
It’s the history of the worshipping Jesus as God after he rose from the dead which corroborates the NT.
You don't think he accepted donations to further his missionary work?
You meant what agreements exist regarding the resurrection? Except for the resurrection itself, what detail is found in every gospel?
Only if you ignore any history to the contrary.
- Thread starter
- #571
I think you are being dumb if you think that’s why he risked everything.
- Thread starter
- #572
Let’s start with you backing up the claim you made? What conflicts exist regarding the resurrection?
- Thread starter
- #573
Can you walk me through that history starting with the resurrection?
Are there any televangelists in our time that have done exactly that? Plenty. Got to have a private jet to travel and minister.
First, take the appearance to Paul. This seems to be the one case in which we have direct eyewitness testimony, i.e. somebody that actually had a vision of the risen Jesus is telling us, in his own words, about that vision. This is not, it would seem, a story we are receiving second hand. But was Paul's vision a vision of the resurrected Jesus? The details given to us are sketchy. Paul mentions that he was 'untimely' or 'abnormally' born (translations vary). This suggests that his vision occurred out of sequence with the other post-resurrection appearances. What's more, he talks only about hearing Jesus's voice and (maybe) seeing a bright light. He did not see the post-resurrection body, nor would he have been able to recognize it if he did since he never met Jesus in his lifetime. On the whole, there is little to distinguish Paul's experience from the many other experiences of Jesus, recounted by religious believers up to the present day. On top of this, Paul references appearances that are not mentioned elsewhere in the Gospel texts. For instance, the appearance to James and the 500. If Jesus's brother really did see the post-resurrection body, and if 500 people saw it at the same time, one would expect this to be mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament. The silence on this matter is not dispositive but it is suggestive.
Early Christian views of the divinity of Jesus varied.
Alternative Early Christian Christologies:
- Adoptionism:
A belief that Jesus was a man who was later "adopted" by God, often at his baptism, and given divine power and status.
- Gnosticism:
Early Gnostic groups had diverse views, with some believing Jesus was a divine being who was only an illusion or a non-divine human who attained enlightenment.
- Ebionism:
This early group viewed Jesus as a man, denying both his divinity and his virgin birth.
- In AD 325, the Council of Nicaea formally addressed and clarified the doctrine of the Trinity, defining Jesus as both fully God and fully man.
- This council was crucial in solidifying the proto-orthodox belief in Jesus's divinity against competing views, like Arianism.
A good friend of mine died a few months back. Last night I had a dream that he and I were talking, just like old times. For whatever reason, it was a very vivid and memorable dream. Now I don't hold much weight in dreams but many today do and the ancients certainly did. Wouldn't be much of a stretch for me to believe I was visited by the spirit of my old friend and I might tell others as I'm telling you. If you told someone my story they might believe I saw my old friend in the flesh, especially if one language needed to be translated into another. Bingo, a resurrection myth. No conspiracy needed.
This scenario certainly fits the only eyewitness to tell his own story, Paul. Not proof by any means but a plausible explanation and all the resurrection details, like the details in the birth narratives, could be filled in over time.
HaShev
Platinum Member
- Jun 19, 2009
- 19,210
- 8,629
- 925
Around 1902, a mysterious, wealthy man named Jacques St. Germain arrived in New Orleans. He was described as, urbane, and strangely ageless, mirroring descriptions of the original 18th-century Count.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Theosophical Society promoted the idea that the Count was still alive and an "Ascended Master".
In the early 80's some cultist Elizabeth Clare Prophet was making money off the legend and controlling people through her and this legend farce.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Theosophical Society promoted the idea that the Count was still alive and an "Ascended Master".
In the early 80's some cultist Elizabeth Clare Prophet was making money off the legend and controlling people through her and this legend farce.
Last edited:
How many Anastasias have there been? We're way more advanced now, we can create fake accounts on social media.
HaShev
Platinum Member
- Jun 19, 2009
- 19,210
- 8,629
- 925
The story of the followers not recognizing their teacher upon his return is problematic in so many ways.
1) it's written by those not in the story and way after said legend.
2) story sounds like an impersonator con artist or made up liken to the St Germain scam.
3) if you believe the story then that ruins the trinity nonsense cause now you have a 4th and 5th if you await another return which brings us to problem 4.
4) the story claims the return occured already.
5) it leads suspicion into confused christ figures and those in other christ cults not recognizing their figure in the other cult's followed figure.
So does Christian simply mean those who follow a christ, thus Hanotzrim, Yehudites, Nazarenes, and lesser known Benjaminites all become Christians to the Roman new 1 world religion all following their own christs but becoming 1 in a trinity of main characters via Rome's control of the narrative? Hence given the new name IeSous (Esus the tri god).
As followers die out thanks to that same Roman authority, the surviving believers end up thinking they are following the same figure via the generic term Christ and converged generic term for their followers as Christians.
6) we learn from resemblances in history from past similar events to modern day emulations that teach us how these legends become forged into people's realities and how people and their accounts get confused for each other and merged and reinvented and used for profit and or control.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
