Zone1 The Best Evidence For The Resurrection

You are assuming that the texts of the gospels contain verbatim and accurate comments from Jesus of Nazareth. I do hold that some of them may well have been espoused by a charismatic Jew preaching to his fellows Jews that the End Times were at hand and urging them to repent. However, there is also a large amount of later Christian gloss.
Where did I assume that?
 
Apart from the authentic epistles we have from Paul what other attested literary sources are you citing? And please do not reply "Acts".
What more do you want? You are using later sources saying it didn't happen as recorded in the Bible. Why are you considering these "authentic"?
 
That creed came about in the late fourth century. It was not being used by observant Jews in the first few decades of the first century.
Why are you supposing the Creed wasn't used in its earliest days?
 
This is a primary example of using a personal opinion to dismiss what was. Simply say it wasn't.
Jesus of Nazareth lived and died an observant Jew.
No he did not. If the man returned today he would be attending his nearest synagogue not a Christian church and would be appalled that he had been deified by Christians as such an action defies the first two commandments.
 
What more do you want? You are using later sources saying it didn't happen as recorded in the Bible. Why are you considering these "authentic"?
Paul does not equate his Christ Jesus/Lord of Glory with the Almighty. You are free to give me the NT verses that contain the Apostolic Creed as it appears here.

I believe in God,
the Father almighty,
Creator of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died and was buried;
he descended into hell;
on the third day he rose again from the dead;
he ascended into heaven,
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty;
from there he will come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and life everlasting.

Amen.

 
Why are you supposing the Creed wasn't used in its earliest days?
The disciples were all observant Jews as was Jesus of Nazareth. There was no such thing as an overarching Christian church in the first three decades of the first century. All that came about much later.
 
Your language that I was tearing into the Christian religion is an overreaction as I have not attacked without restraint or caution as my remarks have been quite restrained.
Then change the word to whatever you want. Perhaps 'criticize' works better for you? The same question remains. Why is someone who has never practiced Christianity criticizing and faith and questioning its origins? What is your purpose?
 
I look at the historical context not the theological beliefs. And church teachings as you call them developed over several centuries. Once toleration was granted in the early fourth century, Christianity gained inordinate temporal power and through its influence with various emperors could have what has since become regarded as orthodoxy enforced by Imperial edicts. To use a phrase "believe this, or else".

Later under Justinian there was also enforced conversion.
I've also done a great deal of research and study that you mention. All had a motive. What is your motive?
 
No he did not. If the man returned today he would be attending his nearest synagogue not a Christian church and would be appalled that he had been deified by Christians as such an action defies the first two commandments.
And you know this how?
 
Then change the word to whatever you want. Perhaps 'criticize' works better for you? The same question remains. Why is someone who has never practiced Christianity criticizing and faith and questioning its origins? What is your purpose?
To discuss the origins of the Christian religion within its known historical context and to draw the distinction between a first century itinerant Galilean peasant charismatic Jewish preacher and exorcist with a later theological construct.
 
However, that Jesus was crucified indicates his crimes (real or suspected) were not religious.

oh, king of the jews is sectarian ... wasn't there a kiss for the romans to know who to arrest and that was paid for by who.

their explanation in the 4th century christian bible is exactly what roman ordinance was disobeyed for them to murder jesus and the retribution against rome was - what.

you are lost as to who and what and the meaning for - jesus of nazareth.
 
15th post
The disciples were all observant Jews as was Jesus of Nazareth. There was no such thing as an overarching Christian church in the first three decades of the first century. All that came about much later.
Christian assemblies (i.e. churches) gathered together to give thanks and break bread on the first day of the week.
 
What was yours?
I never wrote against any position. I was interested in different perspectives. I am a practicing Christian/Catholic. I have been following Biblical teachings--particularly the New Testament--all of my life. I was interested in the reasons why people do not.
 
Back
Top Bottom