How to debunk the resurrection?...

[solja247]

Leviticus is a Jewish book from the torah why would a xtian be quoting it???

Levitcus is very important. After all, most Christians would of been keeping the Mosaic law, so from a historical point of view, its very important and also to understand Christian theology. Paul quotes a lot of the OT. I dont see how anyone can be a NT Christian and forget about the OT

It is a book of the the clan Levi....and clearly demonstrates that it was written by a primitive stone age humanoid who didn't know a bat was a mammal...this might help YOU.

Have you ever read it? In some ways the book of leviticus was light years ahead, untill about the 19th century.

The resurrection is a direct plagiaristic leitmotif stolen from pagans who recognised that the sun in the northern hemisphere "dies" @ Winter solstice and "hovers" for three days on the horizon before 'RISING AGAIN"....I mean REALLY kiddies!

I wonder if in the future, the history of the 21st century is going to become invalid, because we had some weird beliefs?
This is ad hominem.

Normally, a good point. However, the "Word of God" is supposed to be flawless. It's held to a higher standard. One error is all it takes to bring it down.

Not at all. If it was written by God, then yes one error would ruin its credibility. However, this was written by falliable men. I dont believe the Bible is without error, perhaps it does have some historical errors. However, this does not change the fact the Jesus died and rose again...

Disagree with the gospels. However, 1 Corinthians 15, validates a lot of what the gospels say. Although, I dont know why the women who first saw Jesus were not mentioned, perhaps because the people he was writing to, did not respect the testimony of women?

So they continued in the religious rituals of the former Roman religions during the transition to a fully established church that laid down firmer dogmas. How is it that the very fact that Christians have never and can never agree on even some of the simplest of beliefs, transubstantiation for example, is overlooked as a major religious hole?

Have you heard of the Indian proverb; the four blind men and the elephant?

Everyone has their own interpretation of the bible and God, and their relationship with the spiritual realm....well all that really implies is no one has any idea what is going on and we make stuff up that makes us feel better. No religion has lasted in a pure form for more than a few decades, and never unified, in the history of mankind, why doesn't this problem bug any theists out there?

Indeed. Religion is made by man, but man cant grasp the concept of God, all we can say about God, is the He is the creator, that is all we can really grasp of Him.

"God is not what you imagine or what you think you understand. If you understand you have failed." Saint Augustine

[krazedkat]

Normally, a good point. However, the "Word of God" is supposed to be flawless. It's held to a higher standard. One error is all it takes to bring it down.

I agree If it's so perfect than why so many contradictions?

[theVOID]

Levitcus is very important. After all, most Christians would of been keeping the Mosaic law, so from a historical point of view, its very important and also to understand Christian theology. Paul quotes a lot of the OT. I dont see how anyone can be a NT Christian and forget about the OT

Paul also says the keeping of the law is irrelevant and that acceptance of Jesus was the only contingency for salvation...

[Watson]

And then you have to ask yourself, VOID; "what does it really mean to 'accept' Jesus?"

[solja247]

Paul also says the keeping of the law is irrelevant and that acceptance of Jesus was the only contingency for salvation...

Where?

Last time I read Romans, which was a 30 minuets ago, it doesnt say anything like that. Paul, a Jew, telling people to not keep the law? Thats like say Obama is a muslim.

[DeistPaladin]

I dont see how anyone can be a NT Christian and forget about the OT

I'd venture the vast majority of self-labeled Christians have never even bothered to read it, never mind forget about it.

How anyone could consider a book to be the Word of God and yet never bothered to make the time to read it is beyond me.

Not at all. If it was written by God, then yes one error would ruin its credibility. However, this was written by falliable men. I dont believe the Bible is without error, perhaps it does have some historical errors.

Then the Bible is no more relevant to our modern society than the Iliad. It's a collection of myths written by people who were trying to understand the mind of God and failing miserably. Either it's the Word of God or not. All or nothing. There is no middle ground.

However, this does not change the fact the Jesus died and rose again...

How do you come by your knowledge of such a "fact"?

Disagree with the gospels. However, 1 Corinthians 15, validates a lot of what the gospels say.

Setting aside the problem of using the Bible to prove the Bible... In the chapter you cite, Paul explicitly denies that Jesus had lived within his lifetime.

1Cor 15:8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

Last time I read Romans, which was a 30 minuets ago, it doesnt say anything like that.

How closely did you read Romans? Virtually the entire book is dedicated to the idea that faith is what saves. Re-read chapter 3 in particular.

[Watson]

All or nothing. There is no middle ground.

Why, and on who's authority?

[DeistPaladin]

All or nothing. There is no middle ground.

Why, and on who's authority?

How would you propose that there could possibly be a middle ground? Make up any hypothetical scenario you like.

If God sent a little inspiration to the authors, we have no way of knowing what, if any, parts that they wrote are divine and what parts are their own superstitions.

If God dictated to the authors but didn't watch over them closely to be sure they jotted everything down faithfully, we have no way of knowing what, if any, parts they wrote are divine and what parts are their own liberties.

If God monitored the prophets faithfully, to make them good stenographers but didn't watch how the Bible was compiled at Nicaea, than we have no way of knowing what, if any, books are divine and what parts are just mythology.

If God watched over the compilation of the Bible but not the translations, we have no idea what, if any, translations faithfully preserve this original revelation, especially since we have no original manuscripts.

Ditto for the copyists. Did God watch over them too? If not, you get the idea.

Consequently, either you must believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, who dictated and closely supervised the compilation, copying and translation so that the final product you can read faithfully preserves the divine revelation that the prophets themselves received,

-or-

It's just a book, nothing more.

There is no sorta-kinda the Word of God.

[Watson]

You misunderstand the Word of God completely, and show it in your ignorant black and white view of the Bible right now.

I've gone through this before, and it never seems to sink in with anyone. The term 'inspired Word of God' does not mean that God put every single exact thought that went into the Bible into the respective author's heads. The term 'inspired Word of God' is said as such because the men who wrote the Bible were inspired by the will of God and His nature that they observed around them- in real life. How do we know it isn't all just mythology? Because teh same things those men observed and wrote about in the Bible are evident in present time, there for us to observe and learn about. God is independent of the Bible, we don't absolutely need it, but it is a huge and incredibly accurate influence on us(by us I mean Christians.)

[Minimalist]

Thats like say Obama is a muslim.

Lots of idiot xtians think that.