Quote:in 2000 years what absolute evidence will there be for anyone save a hand full of prominate world leaders?

Oh, please. Not "The Great Xtian Paradox" again. "Jesus was so important that the the power structure feared him and had to break every rule in their fucking book to hold a trial on passover so they could get the Romans to kill him for them......but at the same time he was so irrelevant that no one bothered to make mention of him at all."

Someone coming back from the fucking dead would have been BIG NEWS in a superstitious world such as the first century Roman Empire. The idea that a criminal executed by a Roman magistrate came back to life would have been seen as a repudiation of the emperor and there is no way that could have been hushed up.

(May 2, 2013 at 3:20 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Someone coming back from the fucking dead would have been BIG NEWS in a superstitious world such as the first century Roman Empire. The idea that a criminal executed by a Roman magistrate came back to life would have been seen as a repudiation of the emperor and there is no way that could have been hushed up.

Matthew 28:

Quote:11 While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. 12 When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, 13 telling them, “You are to say, ‘His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.’ 14 If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” 15 So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.

The Roman punishment for letting a prisoner escape was death. It would have been very much in the guards' and the chief priests' interests to "hush up" the resurrection of Jesus. If a man walking around looks and talks exactly like a dead guy you killed, what are you going to do? Deny that it's him. The magistrate will pretend he's witnessed a clever trick, nothing more. If he attempts to arrest Jesus again, he will have admitted that Jesus rose from the dead, thus inviting a Jewish revolt.

(May 2, 2013 at 6:15 pm)Undeceived Wrote:

(May 2, 2013 at 3:20 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Someone coming back from the fucking dead would have been BIG NEWS in a superstitious world such as the first century Roman Empire. The idea that a criminal executed by a Roman magistrate came back to life would have been seen as a repudiation of the emperor and there is no way that could have been hushed up.

Matthew 28:

Quote:11 While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. 12 When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, 13 telling them, “You are to say, ‘His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.’ 14 If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” 15 So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.

The Roman punishment for letting a prisoner escape was death. It would have been very much in the guards' and the chief priests' interests to "hush up" the resurrection of Jesus. If a man walking around looks and talks exactly like a dead guy you killed, what are you going to do? Deny that it's him. The magistrate will pretend he's witnessed a clever trick, nothing more. If he attempts to arrest Jesus again, he will have admitted that Jesus rose from the dead, inviting a Jewish revolt.

I thought you were going to explain why there is no mention of so many of the dead returning to life and being seen by so many. Care to go into that?

I thought not.

(May 2, 2013 at 6:19 pm)A_Nony_Mouse Wrote: I thought you were going to explain why there is no mention of so many of the dead returning to life and being seen by so many. Care to go into that?

I thought not.

How is this case any different? If dead people come into town professing Jesus as Lord and Savior would you, the magistrate or political scribe, record that?

The scripture under scrutiny, Matthew 27:

Quote:51 The earth shook, the rocks split 52 and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53 They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

54 When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, “Surely he was the Son of God!”

(May 2, 2013 at 6:15 pm)Undeceived Wrote: The Roman punishment for letting a prisoner escape was death.

Who told you that and why did you believe them? NOTE that LETTING means personally permitting it NOT happens on your watch.

Quote: It would have been very much in the guards' and the chief priests' interests to "hush up" the resurrection of Jesus. If a man walking around looks and talks exactly like a dead guy you killed,

Were they passing around a photo of him to show "exactly looked like?" I find it sort of incredible people can't get back to the real world barely a century ago try to apply it to thousands of years ago.

Quote:what are you going to do? Deny that it's him. The magistrate will pretend he's witnessed a clever trick, nothing more. If he attempts to arrest Jesus again, he will have admitted that Jesus rose from the dead, thus inviting a Jewish revolt.

I think the obvious is, I have no idea what he looked like, would be the simplest explanation. What are you imagining, wanted posters?

---

(May 2, 2013 at 6:27 pm)Undeceived Wrote:

(May 2, 2013 at 6:19 pm)A_Nony_Mouse Wrote: I thought you were going to explain why there is no mention of so many of the dead returning to life and being seen by so many. Care to go into that?

I thought not.

How is this case any different? If dead people come into town professing Jesus as Lord and Savior would you write that down?

Not only would I write it down I would proclaim it to the world EXACTLY as the gospel writer did. To claim people would not do it is claiming the gospel writer would not do it.

Quote:The scripture under scrutiny, Matthew 27:

Quote:51 The earth shook, the rocks split 52 and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53 They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and[e] went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

54 When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, “Surely he was the Son of God!”

No it did not. Why do you make it up? I can cite Mark, Luke and John to show you are making it up.

Mutually conflicting stories can have at most one truth teller and the rest are liars. AT MOST only one. Are you calling Mark, Luke and John liars. And before you try the obvious, I mean IN TOTO not just the little bit you chose to quote.

(May 2, 2013 at 6:27 pm)A_Nony_Mouse Wrote:

(May 2, 2013 at 6:15 pm)Undeceived Wrote: The Roman punishment for letting a prisoner escape was death.

Who told you that and why did you believe them? NOTE that LETTING means personally permitting it NOT happens on your watch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_milit...unishments

Quote:Fustuarium or bastinado — Following a court-martial sentence for desertion or dereliction of duty, the soldier would be stoned, or beaten to death by cudgels, in front of the assembled troops, by his fellow soldiers, whose lives had been put in danger.

http://www.milism.net/romanarmy.htm

Quote:The Roman army also believed in punishment. If a guard was found asleep at or left his post then he would be stoned or beaten for putting fellow soldiers at risk. The outcome of that was usually death. Even entire legions can be punished.

This also comes up in Acts 16:

Quote:27 The jailer woke up, and when he saw the prison doors open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself because he thought the prisoners had escaped. 28 But Paul shouted, “Don’t harm yourself! We are all here!”

(May 2, 2013 at 6:27 pm)A_Nony_Mouse Wrote: Were they passing around a photo of him to show "exactly looked like?" I find it sort of incredible people can't get back to the real world barely a century ago try to apply it to thousands of years ago.

Thanks for pointing that out. You demonstrate that it is even easier for political officials to ignore Jesus' resurrection than I made a case for.

---

Quote:No it did not. Why do you make it up? I can cite Mark, Luke and John to show you are making it up.

Mutually conflicting stories can have at most one truth teller and the rest are liars.

What is "it"? Where do the four Gospels conflict?

(May 2, 2013 at 6:44 pm)Undeceived Wrote:

(May 2, 2013 at 6:27 pm)A_Nony_Mouse Wrote: Who told you that and why did you believe them? NOTE that LETTING means personally permitting it NOT happens on your watch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_milit...unishments

Quote:Fustuarium or bastinado — Following a court-martial sentence for desertion or dereliction of duty, the soldier would be stoned, or beaten to death by cudgels, in front of the assembled troops, by his fellow soldiers, whose lives had been put in danger.

http://www.milism.net/romanarmy.htm

Quote:The Roman army also believed in punishment. If a guard was found asleep at or left his post then he would be stoned or beaten for putting fellow soldiers at risk. The outcome of that was usually death. Even entire legions can be punished.

If there were a god I would demand to know why I am cursed by the likes of you. One that link I searched on the word prison which found only this.

"Another punishment in the Roman Military only applied to people involved in the prison system; this rule was that if a prisoner died due to the punishment inflicted by Roman legionnaires, unless he was given the death penalty, then the leader of the troops would be given the same punishment."

Can you quote what I missed? Can you agree you made it up? Can you agree that LETTING has the plain English meaning that would apply to Rome and in letting for a bribe or some such? Take your time. I have all year.

Quote:This also comes up in Acts 16:

Quote:27 The jailer woke up, and when he saw the prison doors open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself because he thought the prisoners had escaped. 28 But Paul shouted, “Don’t harm yourself! We are all here!”

Again I read nothing remotely like your original assertion.

Quote:

(May 2, 2013 at 6:27 pm)A_Nony_Mouse Wrote: Were they passing around a photo of him to show "exactly looked like?" I find it sort of incredible people can't get back to the real world barely a century ago try to apply it to thousands of years ago.

Thanks for pointing that out. You demonstrate that it is even easier for political officials to ignore Jesus' resurrection than I made a case for.

Yet it also shitcans your claim that the original intention was to ignore.

It still leaves you to explain your original implication that no one would report meeting the walking dead while the gospel writer did. Please address all the issues not just the ones for which you think you have a clever answer.

(May 2, 2013 at 6:15 pm)Undeceived Wrote: The Roman punishment for letting a prisoner escape was death.

But they weren't guarding an imprisoned man; they were guarding a DEAD BODY, presumably so that his disciples would not abscond with it during the night and claim that he had risen from the dead. Why would they expect not to be punished if they reported that A CORPSE DISAPPEARED, when that was almost certainly the reason they were posted?

And think about it, this is what the soldiers reported to the priests:

Matthew 28:2-4 Wrote:2 There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. 4 The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.

How do the priests react to the report of an appearance by AN ANGEL OF GOD? By offering the soldiers a bribe and telling them to lie about it, even though the lie would probably cause them to be punished. And apparently, the appearance of a fucking messenger of god, which caused them to faint in terror, had no other effect on them once they came to and had a few coins in their hands.

How can THAT story make sense????

(May 2, 2013 at 7:28 pm)Tonus Wrote:

(May 2, 2013 at 6:15 pm)Undeceived Wrote: The Roman punishment for letting a prisoner escape was death.

But they weren't guarding an imprisoned man; they were guarding a DEAD BODY, presumably so that his disciples would not abscond with it during the night and claim that he had risen from the dead. Why would they expect not to be punished if they reported that A CORPSE DISAPPEARED, when that was almost certainly the reason they were posted?

Which gets us back to the proof angels exist and the Gabriel stone. If in fact the Christian claim is correct, that no one would expect a resurrection and therefore it must be true, why would anyone guard against what no one would expect?

Quote:Matthew 28:

A classic example of how later xtian writers had to edit their earlier shit to deal with claims that the body was stolen by his "followers."

I realize you fall for this shit hook line and sinker but try to understand that the rest of us see it for what it is.

Horseshit.