Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(April 4, 2012 at 3:18 am)Phil Wrote: Judging by this thread, either your mind is so open your brain fell out or you have open mind confused with gullible.
That you for making it clear that you have no intention of having a respectful conversation.
Conversation? With you? Maybe when you stop acting so damn condescending and you start utilizing reason but until then....not a chance, you are beneath contempt and deserving of nothing but derision.
I did nothing to provoke your personal attack, but I do understand how my response could be taken as condescending. I'm sorry.
Many of the biblical scholars you mentioned were part of the Jesus Seminar. That group leans very heavily to the liberal side. I considered them a biased source.
April 4, 2012 at 11:10 am (This post was last modified: April 4, 2012 at 11:11 am by Phil.)
(April 4, 2012 at 11:07 am)ChadWooters Wrote:
(April 4, 2012 at 10:35 am)Phil Wrote:
(April 4, 2012 at 10:16 am)ChadWooters Wrote:
(April 4, 2012 at 3:18 am)Phil Wrote: Judging by this thread, either your mind is so open your brain fell out or you have open mind confused with gullible.
That you for making it clear that you have no intention of having a respectful conversation.
Conversation? With you? Maybe when you stop acting so damn condescending and you start utilizing reason but until then....not a chance, you are beneath contempt and deserving of nothing but derision.
I did nothing to provoke your personal attack, but I do understand how my response could be taken as condescending. I'm sorry.
Many of the biblical scholars you mentioned were part of the Jesus Seminar. That group leans very heavily to the liberal side. I considered them a biased source.
Yet your personal story is not? See why I say you are beneath contempt and worthy of nothing but derision?
April 4, 2012 at 4:32 pm (This post was last modified: April 4, 2012 at 5:14 pm by Godscreated.)
(April 4, 2012 at 3:18 am)Phil Wrote:
(April 2, 2012 at 3:51 pm)oxymoron Wrote:
(April 2, 2012 at 3:46 pm)Godschild Wrote: but how do you get past the simple solution that the priest had to put away Jesus once and for all by opening the tomb.
You get past it by remembering (duh) that the whole thing is not a historical treatise but a synthesised, copied, edited story with absolutely no external validation from legitimate, contemporary sources?
Besides that it seems that GC doesn't even know his idol (the bible). It was not a priest that rolled the stone away from the tomb. Bible says it was Joseph of Arimithea (or Joseph apo Mathias which is the exact Greek used in the passage from Josephus I cited above).
hock: I do not know the scriptures. I did not say the priest rolled away the stone in front of the tomb, I asked the question, why did the priest not take the opportunity to open the tomb and show everyone the body, this would have put an end to the whole deal. No one has yet given an answer to this except to deny that Christ never existed, and if one believes this then why argue the empty tomb.
Now let's get to your knowledge of the stone sealed in front of the tomb, where in scripture does it say that Joseph of Arimathea rolled away the stone for the resurrection?
(April 4, 2012 at 2:35 am)FallentoReason Wrote:
Godschild Wrote:Jesus appeared to 500 people during the 40 days after the resurrection to the ascending.
Acts 1:2-3,9 explicitly explains how his ascension was after 40 days. What would John say about this!
John 20:26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
8 days.
Mark and Luke?
Mark 16:9-19 Wrote:Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
...
After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.
...
Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
...
So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
Luke 24:1-51 Wrote:Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them. And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.
...
And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. ...
And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus....
...
And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together....
...
And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
...
And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.
The same day as the resurrection.
To believe Acts or not to believe. That is the question.
Just because John and Luke do not describe the 40 days Christ was with them after the resurrection, does not prove He ascended the same day.
There are others of history that have had their lives revealed by more than one source, those sources were used to get a better picture, because one source alone did not reveal all the facts of ones life.
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
Godschild Wrote:No one has yet given an answer to this except to deny that Christ never existed, and if one believes this then why argue the empty tomb.
Exactly.
Quote:Just because John and Luke do not describe the 40 days Christ was with them after the resurrection, does not prove He ascended the same day.
What do you mean? John, Mark and Luke are explicitly describing the story saying it hadn't been 40 days.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle
Godschild Wrote:No one has yet given an answer to this except to deny that Christ never existed, and if one believes this then why argue the empty tomb.
Exactly.
Quote:Just because John and Luke do not describe the 40 days Christ was with them after the resurrection, does not prove He ascended the same day.
What do you mean? John, Mark and Luke are explicitly describing the story saying it hadn't been 40 days.
No they are not, you need to read the accounts again. They actually never mention a time line from resurrection to ascending.
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
hock: I do not know the scriptures. I did not say the priest rolled away the stone in front of the tomb, I asked the question, why did the priest not take the opportunity to open the tomb and show everyone the body, this would have put an end to the whole deal. No one has yet given an answer to this except to deny that Christ never existed, and if one believes this then why argue the empty tomb.
