(May 23, 2016 at 10:52 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:(May 23, 2016 at 9:54 pm)Godschild Wrote: Everyone needs to forget the recanting and understand these people died for their belief in who Jesus was, the Messiah. That means they believed in the virgin birth, his life lived sinless on earth, his death and resurrection and that He is the Son of God. So with this said, yes they believed in his resurrection.
There is only one place Jesus life is recorded, the Bible and that is where we have to start and end, the rest spoken here and by others over the ages and around the world are only speculation, and everyone admits they are speculation. No evidence has ever been offered to these speculation and it's certainly true no facts have been produced for them. So why do people accept single accounts about history and claim them as truth when no facts or evidence are produced. Shouldn't the records of the NT be accepted as the other history, but then the atheist would have to believe right, right. So people dismiss the NT so they can reject God, now this is a logical conclusion a true statement.
All the different speculations given in this thread are childish at best, why, because they do not consider the NT account to be true, none of it, yet there is no proof given that the biblical account is not the truth, only speculations. Most of the speculation twist what the Bible says so those people can speculate, is this the honesty we should expect from anyone, no, this is a moving moral standard to satisfy those who have no desire to believe.
GC
Your point is generally valid with one nitpick. The bible is not one source. There are 4 Gospel accounts and these are four sources. Even if the synoptics are grouped together John is still an independent tradition. That makes it a minimum of 2 sources. But like I said. Atheist have no other reason to reject the gospels than the fact that they record miracles. If they had no miracles they would be accepted without question.
Wrong the bible is, at best, two sources, the synopics which are plagirisms of Matthew and John which is a book which clearly distorts the earlier messages for religio-political puroses (John is probably the genesis for much of christian anti-semitism and the first acknowedement of the break between the cult of Jesus and judaism).
And because we cannit find any independent verifiable evidence for, and we can find a lot of obviously false bullshit in the bible, it is hard to take any of the Jesus myth to be (bad pun intended) gospel.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Home