MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)

[pocaracas]

Ah... yes... I seem to remember someone writing that around here a while back... it must have been you.
So then, you believe there was a Jesus that died.... crucified?
Care to explain what parts of the NT you're cherry-picking?... it seems anything pauline should be removed, huh?

To me it's a matter of history, what is probable, and what is reasonable.

All that can be reasonably said with a good degree of certainty about Jesus of Nazareth is the following.

Jesus of Nazareth was crucified by Pontius Pilate.

Aside from a few teachings of his in the gospels, you can take everything else with a grain of salt.

Awesome!

Now, this raises a few tiny questions:
- Who was "Jesus of Nazareth"? (in your view)
- Why would Pontius Pilate have him crucified?
- What evidence gives you such certainty about this event?

[Free]

There was no resurrection. He's dead, and will remain dead, forever.

His_Majesty is wholly indoctrinated. I am not. I do not follow any Christian beliefs, and by Christian I mean Pauline.

I can agree with both of your statements, since church doctrine is certainly Paul rather than Jesus.

But what do you believe in? Why do you think the bible has any value besides being a historical source for ancient traditions? Why do you claim, the teachings of Jesus are in any way unique, if they're entirely based on preexisting myths?

I think, that hasn't been discussed before.

The one thing that most Christians simply do not understand is that you can take all the teachings of Jesus, the Torah, and all other OT books, and break them down to one single sentence from Jesus that covers them all.

The Golden Rule.

Atheists call it the Ethic of Reciprocity.

[dyresand]

So I assume you would also say that Jesus is the son of Joseph then (assuming these people existed)? The virgin birth is certainly not probable or reasonable.

you would have to assume that Joseph raped Mary in her sleep and then never told her about it, because well Joseph would probably get persecuted. So Mary having no idea of this probably just went along with being pregnant. Because most of the woman in the bible....were incredibly dumb.

[Cyberman]

You think I care? How sweet.

Obviously as a moderator forum member, you don't.

Fixed that for you. Want to tell me how to do my job again?

If you feel that you have been treated unfairly by any member, Staff included, you are in fact duty-bound by the Rules to report it. By not doing so you are tacitly acknowledging that you accept the treatment as fair; continued public complaining is thus deemed as petulant whining and will be treated as such.

[Free]

To me it's a matter of history, what is probable, and what is reasonable.

All that can be reasonably said with a good degree of certainty about Jesus of Nazareth is the following.

Jesus of Nazareth was crucified by Pontius Pilate.

Aside from a few teachings of his in the gospels, you can take everything else with a grain of salt.

Awesome!

Now, this raises a few tiny questions:
- Who was "Jesus of Nazareth"? (in your view)
- Why would Pontius Pilate have him crucified?
- What evidence gives you such certainty about this event?

From a historical perspective- which includes my opinion- Jesus of Nazareth was a Nazarene. The Nazarene were a sub-sect of the Essene, as the teachings of Jesus in the gospels demonstrate significant similarities with the description of the Essene given by Josephus.

The town of Nazareth got its name from those who inhabited that locale; the Nazarene. They came first, and then the town was so named after them.

Jesus was a Nazarene Rabbi, who's views on the Torah were completely unorthodox. He demonstrated a great dislike of the Pharisee, Sadducee, and any leaders in Jerusalem. His teachings were geared to empower the people, as opposed to the people empowering the Sanhedrin.

He gained considerable fame in his locale in and around Jerusalem. This fame, however, was his own undoing. Many of his followers began to consider him the Messiah. However, being considered a Messiah means far more than just some kind of savior, because it also denotes a kingship.

The fame of Jesus grew, not because of any ridiculous miracles, but rather because of his popularity with the common people. This fame greatly concerned the Sanhedrin, because since so many of the people regarded him to be a Messiah- which makes him a king- the Sanhedrin feared a war with Rome would break out, since the Jews could not have a rival king in Caesar's kingdom.

The Sanhedrin concocted a plan to take Jesus and arrest him. They had to do it in secret, at night, so his many followers would not defend him as they would be asleep. They trumped up some charges against the man to warrant his arrest, had a "mock" trial, but they could not stone him because it was the Passover.

They had to get rid of Jesus before the Passover went into full swing, so they brought him to Pilate. Pilate, who hated the Jews, initially didn't want to crucify Jesus for one reason only; to piss off the Sanhedrin.

However, the Jewish priests in Pilates court said something to the effect of, "He claims to be a king, and if you let a king go in Caesars kingdom, we will make sure Caesar knows what you did."

Now blackmailed, Pilate crucified Jesus, and placed upon the cross, "Jesus, King of the Jews," not so much as because Jesus was a king, but rather to piss off the Sanhedrin once again by demonstrating how the powerful Romans killed their king.

After that, the life of Jesus was embellished by his followers into what we see today in the gospels.

The evidence is the consistency of the crucifixion and trial, and why Jesus was crucified.

[ThomM]

I can agree with both of your statements, since church doctrine is certainly Paul rather than Jesus.

But what do you believe in? Why do you think the bible has any value besides being a historical source for ancient traditions? Why do you claim, the teachings of Jesus are in any way unique, if they're entirely based on preexisting myths?

I think, that hasn't been discussed before.

The one thing that most Christians simply do not understand is that you can take all the teachings of Jesus, the Torah, and all other OT books, and break them down to one single sentence from Jesus that covers them all.

The Golden Rule.

Atheists call it the Ethic of Reciprocity.

But the golden rule existed on earth LONG before the Jews and EVEN longer before the xtians.

It exists in the Rig Vedas - long before the "tanakh" was written down - was said by Plato - Socrates - and LOTS of others LONG before YOUR mythical christ hijacked it.

And more important - you do not have to believe in the religious myth's in order to live by the "golden rule".

And if you actually READ the bible - from cover to cover - apparently the GOD is exempt from living by the golden rule. Xtians that are Anti - Gay are not living by the golden rule.

[robvalue]

Sure, and the golden rule is hardly original to jesus. So really, he's just a guy.

That leaves the old testament, which is full of utterly ludicrous nonsense, so throw that out. It tells us nothing more than proper history does.

That leaves us with nothing. Cool!

[pocaracas]

Awesome!

Now, this raises a few tiny questions:
- Who was "Jesus of Nazareth"? (in your view)
- Why would Pontius Pilate have him crucified?
- What evidence gives you such certainty about this event?

From a historical perspective- which includes my opinion- Jesus of Nazareth was a Nazarene. The Nazarene were a sub-sect of the Essene, as the teachings of Jesus in the gospels demonstrate significant similarities with the description of the Essene given by Josephus.

The town of Nazareth got its name from those who inhabited that locale; the Nazarene. They came first, and then the town was so named after them.

Jesus was a Nazarene Rabbi, who's views on the Torah were completely unorthodox. He demonstrated a great dislike of the Pharisee, Sadducee, and any leaders in Jerusalem. His teachings were geared to empower the people, as opposed to the people empowering the Sanhedrin.

He gained considerable fame in his locale in and around Jerusalem. This fame, however, was his own undoing. Many of his followers began to consider him the Messiah. However, being considered a Messiah means far more than just some kind of savior, because it also denotes a kingship.

The fame of Jesus grew, not because of any ridiculous miracles, but rather because of his popularity with the common people. This fame greatly concerned the Sanhedrin, because since so many of the people regarded him to be a Messiah- which makes him a king- the Sanhedrin feared a war with Rome would break out, since the Jews could not have a rival king in Caesar's kingdom.

The Sanhedrin concocted a plan to take Jesus and arrest him. They had to do it in secret, at night, so his many followers would not defend him as they would be asleep. They trumped up some charges against the man to warrant his arrest, had a "mock" trial, but they could not stone him because it was the Passover.

They had to get rid of Jesus before the Passover went into full swing, so they brought him to Pilate. Pilate, who hated the Jews, initially didn't want to crucify Jesus for one reason only; to piss off the Sanhedrin.

However, the Jewish priests in Pilates court said something to the effect of, "He claims to be a king, and if you let a king go in Caesars kingdom, we will make sure Caesar knows what you did."

Now blackmailed, Pilate crucified Jesus, and placed upon the cross, "Jesus, King of the Jews," not so much as because Jesus was a king, but rather to piss off the Sanhedrin once again by demonstrating how the powerful Romans killed their king.

After that, the life of Jesus was embellished by his followers into what we see today in the gospels.

The evidence is the consistency of the crucifixion and trial, and why Jesus was crucified.

Cool story! And believable, too!
If there was indeed a Jesus around that time, then that story fits.

But that sounds a bit like the Teacher of Righteousness story... but a few years after. What do you think?

[Free]

From a historical perspective- which includes my opinion- Jesus of Nazareth was a Nazarene. The Nazarene were a sub-sect of the Essene, as the teachings of Jesus in the gospels demonstrate significant similarities with the description of the Essene given by Josephus.

The town of Nazareth got its name from those who inhabited that locale; the Nazarene. They came first, and then the town was so named after them.

Jesus was a Nazarene Rabbi, who's views on the Torah were completely unorthodox. He demonstrated a great dislike of the Pharisee, Sadducee, and any leaders in Jerusalem. His teachings were geared to empower the people, as opposed to the people empowering the Sanhedrin.

He gained considerable fame in his locale in and around Jerusalem. This fame, however, was his own undoing. Many of his followers began to consider him the Messiah. However, being considered a Messiah means far more than just some kind of savior, because it also denotes a kingship.

The fame of Jesus grew, not because of any ridiculous miracles, but rather because of his popularity with the common people. This fame greatly concerned the Sanhedrin, because since so many of the people regarded him to be a Messiah- which makes him a king- the Sanhedrin feared a war with Rome would break out, since the Jews could not have a rival king in Caesar's kingdom.

The Sanhedrin concocted a plan to take Jesus and arrest him. They had to do it in secret, at night, so his many followers would not defend him as they would be asleep. They trumped up some charges against the man to warrant his arrest, had a "mock" trial, but they could not stone him because it was the Passover.

They had to get rid of Jesus before the Passover went into full swing, so they brought him to Pilate. Pilate, who hated the Jews, initially didn't want to crucify Jesus for one reason only; to piss off the Sanhedrin.

However, the Jewish priests in Pilates court said something to the effect of, "He claims to be a king, and if you let a king go in Caesars kingdom, we will make sure Caesar knows what you did."

Now blackmailed, Pilate crucified Jesus, and placed upon the cross, "Jesus, King of the Jews," not so much as because Jesus was a king, but rather to piss off the Sanhedrin once again by demonstrating how the powerful Romans killed their king.

After that, the life of Jesus was embellished by his followers into what we see today in the gospels.

The evidence is the consistency of the crucifixion and trial, and why Jesus was crucified.

Cool story! And believable, too!
If there was indeed a Jesus around that time, then that story fits.

But that sounds a bit like the Teacher of Righteousness story... but a few years after. What do you think?

Yes it does, however if I am correct about Jesus being a Nazarene- sub-sect of the Essene- then those very same teachings, opinions, and doctrines of the Teacher of Righteousness could have been learned by Jesus, since the Teacher of Righteousness is described as an Essene.

[robvalue]

I guess I'm on block. Hot diggity.

Oh well, I'll just debate with myself. Better than that, I'll MASS debate myself!

Refreshing to find someone who can see through jesus, but I assume he's still clinging to the god of the bible or something, I dunno.

---

It's funny how when I start talking about my personal experiences with god, I get put on block by theists. How about that. I must be crazy or lying huh?