There is archeolgical artifacts from the early second century of crucifed men. I'm not asking the impossible.
Stop stop...I can't take it anymore 
News Item!! The Biblical NT story has been PROVEN to be a hoax!!
by Jack C. 26 Replies latest jw friends
-
poopsiecakes
-
Ucantnome
What has always seemed strange to me is that when such a scenario is presented to most any Christian they seem to find it almost impossible to defend their faith without the biblical crutch
A Christian is one who believes in Jesus Christ and the resurrection the new covenant ect.
Heb. 9:15
15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.
16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17 because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. 18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19 When Moses had proclaimed every command of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20 He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.” 21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him. (NIV)
Having said that the basis for the Christian hope, if there were to be irrefutable evidence that what was written here and the accounts of Jesus life, ministry and resurrection, were all a hoax. It seems as if your asking a Christian to be Christian without Christ.
Believing in God is one thing.
19 You believe that God is one; you do well. So do the demons believe and shudder [in terror and horror such as make a man's hair stand on end and contract the surface of his skin]! (AMP)
If the situation existed that we had no Bible but we could still believe in a God I think we would still wonder if that belief were enough and we would seek to find him as we ponder our own mortality.
-
Qcmbr
Very simple: Produce the dead body of Jesus of Nazareth and I will become an atheist. No other religions founders handled man's problem, death, like he did.
Your faith seems rather weak if that's all it would take to deconvert you. I suspect you'll rely on modern scientific studies to confirm the method of death, age of the bones, dna structure and or am I wrong and will you need it to be a priest who confirms they are indeed Jesus' bones.
-
wobble
The cult of Jesus was alive and spreading fast long before the first Gospel was written, Paul's christology vied with others for a good while. The making of the relgion the official one of the Roman Empire is late in the develpoment of the cult, and various branches, the Coptic for instance , were not exactly subsumed.
Faith in Christ was not really heavily joined to the N.T writings until the literalist schools of the late 19th and early 20th century came along. Luther in his time had advocated "Sola Scritura" but this was to stop the excesses of the RC church, charging for "Indulgences" etc.
Faith in Christ was spread initially by word of mouth, as the common people were, in the main, illiterate throughout the subsequent centuries this remained the main method.
Christians like "A Guest" on here do not rely on the N.T to have a living faith.
The JW's would be the least affected, what the Bible actually says has been ignored by them for so long that its demotion to pure fiction, if that were to ever happen, would not matter, their faith is in the Governing Body that they worship.
-
AK - Jeff
People don't follow religion because of evidence, proof or logic - they do it because of traditions, upbringing, superstitions and for it's "opiate" effect.
Well stated, Simon.
Though the inverse might be true on occasion - that some will leave off belief in these things when, at the right moment in their life journey, evidence and logic overcome the tradition, upbringing, superstitions to which they are held captive. Though admittedly, for most, this will not happen quickly, but over time and with a preponderance of weight that becomes impossible to ignore. Sadly, most never will.
Edited to state that my statements may not in fact be precisely the inverse of Simon's suggestion [someone is sure to correct that and derail the primary point of this thread] - but you get the point.
Jeff
-
Fernando
Hey Jack C.
"How many relevant esoteric conversations have you ever had with believers without the use of the bible?"
I imagine that any believer who has fully understood, embraced and yielded to the priceless and full "unabridged gospel" would be able to sustain a heartfelt conversation for several hours non-stop without the use of the Bible.
-
elderelite
Actually, I have a bigger issue with a presuposed concept of the op than the op itself. THe very idea that the NT is somehow "proven" to be true as it stands today is rediculious. A man who can raise the dead, read minds, walk on water, turn water into wine etc etc etc...? and we accept this as unvarnished truth.... because?
In the minds of some it is historically accurate and in minor details true, therefore the whole thing is true.... its much like watching titanic and accepting the story of Jack dawson as true just becuase there was a ship named titantic that sunk by hitting an ice burg. its historical fiction.
a far more note worthy item would be "News flash!!! The Biblical NT story proven TRUE" would make far more sense.
edited to add : oh and his even more powerfull daddy needed him to die so he could 'forgive' people 'sins' they had no control over, but he didnt actually die he just let him sleep a few days then magically brought he himself back to life. ITs as foolish as believing that the muslium prophet rode to heaven on a horse with wings, something no christian would give a moments thought to.