Why I Shouldn't Believe in the Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth

by XJW4EVR 127 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • AllTimeJeff
    AllTimeJeff

    When Gene Wilder said "It's Alive!" in Young Frankenstein, he wasn't being abstract.

    Being alive has got to mean something.

    If Jesus is alive, so is Santa, and every charecter in Lord of the Rings.

    The issue as I see it isn't Jesus being alive. (is he? Where???) It is the intellectual honesty that insists upon arguing upon a matter where no evidence exists.

    Thank god we no longer live in the 16th century, though clearly we still have 16 century level thinkers who are willing to believe (as is there right) and yet also insist that they are correct (which is another matter entirely)

  • XJW4EVR
    XJW4EVR

    AllTimeJeff said:

    My point is, you won't consider contrary evidence, so why should I consider the bible (again) for the 20th time?

    Well, I have yet to see any contrary evidence. All I have read here is unsubstantiated assertions and name-calling when people's silly arguments are exposed.

    Secondly, I am not asking anyone to consider the bible. I am asking for evidence against the resurrection. I don't think I can be any clearer, but if someone can help me make this clear to the free-thinkers and "brights" on this board then please assist.

  • J. Hofer
    J. Hofer

    i have yet to see one "silly argument" you "exposed".

  • bohm
    bohm

    TWAT4EVR: " I don't think I can be any clearer"

    i guess not. you have exposed yourself as a person who like to ask self-verifying questions, ignore answers, and declare himself as a winner. Congratulations, you are being delusional. If there was a special olympics for retarded conversation, the judge would have a hard time holding back a laugh right now.

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento
    that's the core that survived, yeah. but it's documented, that as early as marcion (~85-160) many (in some parts of the world the majority of) christians didn't believe in the resurrection story.

    There was a reason that Marcion was viewed as a heretic and went on the create his own "church" and that wa sbecause his viewes were NOT shared by the majority of Christians.

    The resurrection IS Christianity, without it there is no Christianity.

    Paul makes his case by saying for those that doubt to question the eye witnesses to Christ being alive and there were quiet a few according to Him:

    1Corinthians 15:

    15 Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters, a of the good news b that I proclaimed to you, which you in turn received, in which also you stand, 2 through which also you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message that I proclaimed to you—unless you have come to believe in vain.

    3 For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, 4 and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters c at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. d 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them—though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. 11 Whether then it was I or they, so we proclaim and so you have come to believe.

    Paul is basically saying, find out for yourself if you don't believe me, ask those that saw and were there.

  • designs
    designs

    PSac-

    Paul's statement in verse 3 shows he really does not understand Judaism or the Torah and Talmud. There is no concept of 'being born into a state of sin', a person can repent on his or her own of some wrong and be forgiven by God. Messianic hopes and expectations are very different in Judaism and Paul does not present them.

  • SweetBabyCheezits
    SweetBabyCheezits

    XJW4EVR, that's a great name! Reminds me of a t-shirt I had when I was 12. Awesome.

    As has already been stated, extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. Or do you also believe Joseph Smith's experiences were real? After all he was a real man. He had 11 eye-witnesses to the golden plates. The events were recorded in writing. Lots of people believe it today. Why do you demand more evidence, o ye of little faith?

    If you want to demonstrate intellectual integrity, you'll scrutinize your own cherished views just as thoroughly as you scrutinize LDS and others. OR, for the sake of consistency, you'll accept others' claims to miracles just as readily. But only an idiot would do that, right? And you're no idiot. Right?

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento
    PSac-
    Paul's statement in verse 3 shows he really does not understand Judaism or the Torah and Talmud. There is no concept of 'being born into a state of sin', a person can repent on his or her own of some wrong and be forgiven by God. Messianic hopes and expectations are very different in Judaism and Paul does not present them.

    Verse 3 states that:

    For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures...

    A sacrifice for forgiveness of sins was commonplace in Judaisim, from the very beginning in fact.

  • designs
    designs

    Ask your Rabbi old friend, those were animals killed for personal sins not a Human tossed on a fire, direct contact with the Almighty was the Jewish way. This was but one of the many Ooops in Pauline quasi-Jewish arguments.

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    What Jesus did was NOTHING like a typical atonement sacrifice so its not an issue of comparison.

    As a matter of fact, one of my first discussion with my friends Rabbi Uncle was Paul ( I was never a big fan of his because I tend to focus on the crap Paul said as opposed to the good stuff) and he said that Paul's understanding of Judaisim showed serious "contamination" and whether that came BEFORE Christ ( which he doubts) or AFTER his vision ( which he believes to be the case) is unknown.

    As he pointed out to me, even within judaisim in the 1st century, there were different views on death, sin and so forth and even within the Pharisees sect, not everyone agreed and Saul seems to be a very "zealous" pharisees, extremist even and that may mean his views were also not mainstream.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit