Zone1 The Best Evidence For The Resurrection

[Meriweather]

Two problems with the Bible Geneologies. The first is that they exist specifically to link Jesus to David. That was part of the bona fides to make him the Messiah. But they couldn't agree on who those ancestors were, and they both traced their genealogies through Joseph. As Maury Pauvich would have said, "You're NOT the father"

In Biblical times, the adoptive father was the father. People of Matthew's day knew this.

It's also now what Matthew said. He did say, "Sad people saw dead relatives", he said, "Saints rose from their graves and were seen by many people".

My point in my account was to dismiss the idea of zombies.

Did you ever pay attention in religion class? Certainly you should be cognizant that Matthew saw the Old Testament as a foreshadowing of what was to come. He saw his account as an overlay of what had become before. Possibilities why we don't hear about this from other writers, is that they may not have known/heard about these stories or the people who experienced them. John notes that many things happened that he did not record.

Personally, I see Matthew's account as an overlay of what was written by either Ezekiel and/or Daniel. While some people reported seeing holy people, most probably assumed they were a little hysterical or troubled by the earthquake. Matthew, with his knowledge of the Old Testament, may have seen an entirely different meaning.

 

[BreezeWood]

No. It couldn't.

Actually they honored the traditions of the first Christians. You are barking up the wrong tree.

- but rather jesus for their own self centered agenda they wittingly claim is based on faith than any proof or truth as being necessary

what traditions ...

- after the crucifixion those you claim - the first christians - are those liest likely to have participated in the 1st century events, pilgrimage of jesus the repudiation of judaism false commandments, hereditary idolatry, religion of apartheid et al.

as they not jesus worshiped a false messiah that never existed and rather to absorb judaism into their new religion than the liberation theology, self determination those true events represented for a flicker of time as being heavenly ordained.

 

[JoeB131]

In Biblical times, the adoptive father was the father. People of Matthew's day knew this.

Right, and Joseph Had Two Daddies... that was kind of progressive of them.

My point in my account was to dismiss the idea of zombies.

I agree. Zombies are a silly idea. So why does Matthew mention them?

Did you ever pay attention in religion class? Certainly you should be cognizant that Matthew saw the Old Testament as a foreshadowing of what was to come. He saw his account as an overlay of what had become before. Possibilities why we don't hear about this from other writers, is that they may not have known/heard about these stories or the people who experienced them. John notes that many things happened that he did not record.

Sure I paid attention.

But Sr. Mary Butch didn't tell us about the Zombies. We'd have all thought that was cool.

She didn't tell us about Jephthah or Elisha's bears or any of the other cool stories that made God/Jesus look less than cool.

 

[ding]

what traditions ...

Lot's of them.

 

[ding]

Right, and Joseph Had Two Daddies... that was kind of progressive of them.



I agree. Zombies are a silly idea. So why does Matthew mention them?


Sure I paid attention.

But Sr. Mary Butch didn't tell us about the Zombies. We'd have all thought that was cool.

She didn't tell us about Jephthah or Elisha's bears or any of the other cool stories that made God/Jesus look less than cool.

Such tolerance.

 

[BreezeWood]

Lot's of them.

gee - in only 3 years those that betrayed jesus already had traditions - was that to do nothing while their leader is being crucified and then claim they rose from the dead to greet them ... the new, party on - desert dwellers.

 

[Hypatia415]

Imagine your favorite book. It contains the best advice and wisdom you have ever read - you live your entire life using what you learned from the book - and it helped you live an exceptional life.

One day someone comes to you and says, "John Smith" the author of that book isn't what you think he is.


Not sure about you but I would look at him with watery eyes - and explode - not from tears but from joyous laughter.

What every naysayer has been judged ignorant of understanding is that you could say that Rudolph The Red nosed Raindeer wrote the book and it would not move an atom of my love, faith and understanding of it.

It is and always has been about the Word. The Word comes from the Light begotten of the Source.

I hope that helps you understand.

Are you including divinely ordained genocides?

 

[Hypatia415]

The gospels were literally written as an historical event.

No they were not. To start with they contradict one another. Did Jesus tell his disciples not to take a staff or did he tell them to take a staff?

Mark: And he called the twelve and began to send them out two by two, and gave them authority over the unclean spirits. 8 He charged them to take nothing for their journey except a staff—no bread, no bag, no money in their belts— 9 but to wear sandals and not put on two tunic

Matthew: Take no gold, or silver, or copper in your belts, 10 no bag for your journey, or two tunics, or sandals, or a staff, for laborers deserve their food.

One of the most glaring contradictions is to be found in the two birth narratives. Both cannot be correct.

Matthew: In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea,

Luke: In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered.


There is at least a ten year gap between the end of the reign of King Herod and the census of Quirinius.

You haven't even attempted to explain how this is so if it is not nor why are when Jesus first began being worshipped as God.

I have touched briefly on the early history of your religion. You do not want to accept that.

The gospels explain the why and when perfectly and are corroborated by independent sources.

You keep mentioning independent sources but never produce any. So, I ask again, where are these independent sources?

 

[Hypatia415]

Nope. Tons of corroborating evidence and you dismiss it all because you can't accept that with God anything is possible.

What you are citing is not evidence.

Using Christian traditions and texts to prove those Christian traditions and texts is a circular argument

I'm guessing you are an atheist.

To use a phrase, "Blimey have you just realised?"

 

[SweetSue92]

Right, and Joseph Had Two Daddies... that was kind of progressive of them.



I agree. Zombies are a silly idea. So why does Matthew mention them?


Sure I paid attention.

But Sr. Mary Butch didn't tell us about the Zombies. We'd have all thought that was cool.

She didn't tell us about Jephthah or Elisha's bears or any of the other cool stories that made God/Jesus look less than cool.

Posts like this remind me of what happened with Pharaoh.

Pharaoh hardened his own heart against God for so long, so many times, that God then gave him over to it and also helped harden Pharaoh's heart.

God can, and sometimes does, give you exactly what you want. Sometimes that's tragic.

 

[SweetSue92]

No they were not. To start with they contradict one another. Did Jesus tell his disciples not to take a staff or did he tell them to take a staff?

Mark: And he called the twelve and began to send them out two by two, and gave them authority over the unclean spirits. 8 He charged them to take nothing for their journey except a staff—no bread, no bag, no money in their belts— 9 but to wear sandals and not put on two tunic

Matthew: Take no gold, or silver, or copper in your belts, 10 no bag for your journey, or two tunics, or sandals, or a staff, for laborers deserve their food.

One of the most glaring contradictions is to be found in the two birth narratives. Both cannot be correct.

Matthew: In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea,

Luke: In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered.


There is at least a ten year gap between the end of the reign of King Herod and the census of Quirinius.



I have touched briefly on the early history of your religion. You do not want to accept that.

You keep mentioning independent sources but never produce any. So, I ask again, where are these independent sources

You don't even seem to be aware that the recording of the sending of the disciples are from two different events. We all tailor what we pack to where we are going, for what purpose.

 

[SweetSue92]

Are you including divinely ordained genocides?

Well to use that logic....God can and will "murder" you, and He will "murder" me.

But of course it's not murder. He who created life alone can take it, anytime for any purpose, as the sculptor can destroy his creation.

 

[SweetSue92]

What you are citing is not evidence.

Using Christian traditions and texts to prove those Christian traditions and texts is a circular argument

To use a phrase, "Blimey have you just realised?"

Since you're European:

Why don't you argue against Islam rather than Christianity? Isn't Islam your biggest political/social threat in Europe? What are the Christians doing to you these days?

 

[norwegen]

You don't even seem to be aware that the recording of the sending of the disciples are from two different events. We all tailor what we pack to where we are going, for what purpose.

I think they're the same event, different than when Jesus sends out the 72.

But in both accounts, Jesus is telling them the same thing: take their sandals and staff and little more. They don't need to acquire any sandals, staffs, money, etc. They should appreciate the food and lodging they're offered and nothing more.

 

[ding]

gee - in only 3 years those that betrayed jesus already had traditions - was that to do nothing while their leader is being crucified and then claim they rose from the dead to greet them ... the new, party on - desert dwellers.

Who said anything about 3 years? I didn't. Paul's epistles do a good job of documenting the beliefs and traditions of the early Christians. Despite what some may believe, Paul's epistles are a historical record based upon historical facts and make perfect sense in light of the resurrection of Christ.

 

[ding]

No they were not. To start with they contradict one another. Did Jesus tell his disciples not to take a staff or did he tell them to take a staff?

Mark: And he called the twelve and began to send them out two by two, and gave them authority over the unclean spirits. 8 He charged them to take nothing for their journey except a staff—no bread, no bag, no money in their belts— 9 but to wear sandals and not put on two tunic

Matthew: Take no gold, or silver, or copper in your belts, 10 no bag for your journey, or two tunics, or sandals, or a staff, for laborers deserve their food.

One of the most glaring contradictions is to be found in the two birth narratives. Both cannot be correct.

Matthew: In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea,

Luke: In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered.


There is at least a ten year gap between the end of the reign of King Herod and the census of Quirinius.



I have touched briefly on the early history of your religion. You do not want to accept that.

You keep mentioning independent sources but never produce any. So, I ask again, where are these independent sources?

The gospels are THE historical record of the life, ministry, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The gospels are THE historical record of the great commission. Paul's epistles are THE historical record of the early church.

 

[Meriweather]

No they were not. To start with they contradict one another. Did Jesus tell his disciples not to take a staff or did he tell them to take a staff?

Scholars have studied this. They note that what is interesting about the Greek translation is that it could have been translated either way. Additionally, while 'staff' is a weapon of defense and authority, a walking stick is a simple stick used for support, balance while walking. The meaning of both passages remains: Take nothing, trust God for what is needed.

There is at least a ten year gap between the end of the reign of King Herod and the census of Quirinius.

True. However, recall Luke does associate King Herod with the birth of John the Baptist--and Jesus and John were born within months of each other.

 

[ding]

What you are citing is not evidence.

Using Christian traditions and texts to prove those Christian traditions and texts is a circular argument

To use a phrase, "Blimey have you just realised?"

It is 100% evidence. The gospels and Paul's epistles explain perfectly why Christianity began. The first Christians witnessed the miracles performed by Christ, heard the teaching from Jesus and witnessed his resurrection from the dead. The first Christians were instructed by Christ to spread the good news and they did. Why else do you believe Christianity began?

 

[Hypatia415]

It is 100% evidence. The gospels and Paul's epistles explain perfectly why Christianity began.

Paul's gospel which is the one that he spread to the gentiles was hardly unique in its salvic ideas. The contemporary Graeco-Roman world teemed with various religious cults and esoteric philosophies that promised salvation of various kinds.

The first Christians witnessed the miracles performed by Christ

The ancient world believed in miracles. Nor was Jesus of Nazareth the only charismatic Jew who was believed to perform miracles.

, heard the teaching from Jesus and witnessed his resurrection from the dead.

What this hallucination/experience meant to those men and women who knew Jesus of Nazareth remains unknown.

The first Christians were instructed by Christ to spread the good news and they did. Why else do you believe Christianity began?

The catastrophic impact of the First Jewish War put an end to the messianic sect that surrounded Jesus of Nazareth and the gospel of Paul along with various later interpretations and additions to his ideas, also by men from the Hellenised world had, as it were, a clear field.

 

[Hypatia415]

Scholars have studied this.

What scholars might these be? Do you have any texts from which you can quote?

They note that what is interesting about the Greek translation is that it could have been translated either way. Additionally, while 'staff' is a weapon of defense and authority, a walking stick is a simple stick used for support, balance while walking. The meaning of both passages remains: Take nothing, trust God for what is needed.

I do enjoy the way some Christians desperately try to reconcile evidently contradictory texts.

True. However, recall Luke does associate King Herod with the birth of John the Baptist--and Jesus and John were born within months of each other.

Are you now trying to contend that Mary's pregnancy lasted for more than ten years right up until 6 CE?