RE: Naturalistic explanation for the resurrection of Jesus
February 23, 2011 at 1:04 am
(This post was last modified: February 23, 2011 at 1:08 am by reverendjeremiah.)
(February 22, 2011 at 4:50 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: You are most welcome
I would then say that this would not be the case. They write about Jesus being very active, even fasting in the desert for FORTY DAYS and FORTY NIGHTS and surviving, which is a bit extreme to put it lightly. Why would a god need to fast? Anyways. I never bought into the "naturalistic" reasons for Jesus. I even saw a video where they described a drug that could make you seem like you were dead for about 2 days, and they were trying to say Jesus did that. Honestly... when will the historians stop trying to get on the good side of the religionists and be very honest...that they have given the Jesus story WAY more leniency than they would other stories..say like Hercules or Thor. This is all about popularity and grants. Not about honest research. If Jesus had plenty of evidence to support his historicity, it would be ALL OVER THE NET. But sadly, there is only a small few 2nd and 3rd person writtings about him, most of which after he was dead.
HERE..let me give you a BIG clue that this Jesus story is utter bullshit:
Matthew 27:50-53
50And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit.
51And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split.
52The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised;
53and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.
You would think MANY a historian would have written about the dead Jews and Hebrews digging themselves out of tombs and walking the streets for christs sake! Another thing that SCREAMS "THIS IS JUST MADE UP SHIT!" is that was all that was written about this happening. "and appeared to many" yet not a single other writting of something of this magnitude from ANYONE during that time period. Merely 5 sentences in the bible. Dont you think the Greeks and Romans would have noticed? Dont you think the Jewish scholars would have scribbled SOMETHING down about it? Even apologists skim over this like "The fact is that once their function as witnesses was fulfilled, they were of no interest to the apostle Matthew. Let us remember that their resurrection was due to Jesus. It was all about Jesus, not about the resurrected saints. " Yeah..because seeing dad and grandad walking the street after being dead for 40 years or more wasnt about them, but about Jebus. I have heard some apologists say that the jews would dig up their ancestors and tell them good news that Jesus was the messiah...honestly.
Jebus story screams FAKE.
