Freethought & Rationalism Archive

arnoldo · 03-18-2008, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenesisNemesis

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Of course it will do since Jesus Christ is a historical person.

However, His miracles may not be necessarily historical.

If Jesus didn't rise from the dead then it's all a pack of lies.

arnoldo · 03-18-2008, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WWJD4aKlondikeBar

LOL!! This thread reminds me of how scared xians act whenever I see them encounter the number 666. "My lunch costs $6.66?!? I'd like to add a bag of chips!" Then I tell them how Greek scribes who hated Nero (but couldn't say anything about him without being killed for it) had changed the number of the beast from 616 and that the number that they should fear is 616, not 666.

Can a blank stare be priceless?

Uhhh. the book of revelation was written after the reign of Nero (54-68 AD), try again.

arnoldo · 03-18-2008, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshonq

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

You're quite right, but surely we can only work from what we know to what we do not?

The problem with that point of view is that you want to have it both ways.

First you acknowledge that the earliest mss date from the 3rd or 4th centuries. So far, so good.

But then you want to pretend that a 4th century copy is equivalent to the autographs, merely because we don't have anything else to work from. And then you proceed to ascribe to the 4th century copy all the certainty and strong affirmative declarations that could only be made about actual autographs.

That will not do.

I guess you have a point, the NT that exists today is probably totally different from the autograph

Johnny Skeptic · 03-18-2008, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

If Jesus didn't rise from the dead then it's all a pack of lies.

Not at all. First of all, I would not be surprised if a alien race is able to raise people from the dead. Second of all, virtually all historians agree that King Nebuchadnezzar was a real person.

blastula · 03-18-2008, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The only evidence that the NT is from a divine source is the fact the Jesus rose from the dead.

Then the changes added to the last chapter of the earliest copies of the earliest gospel Mark is very relevant, don't you think?

-Jay- · 03-18-2008, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

Roger has made the claim of obscurantism before, specifically against Bart Ehrman, yet I don't recall having seen him provide details of what it is about Ehrman's approach makes him him that way (please correct me if I'm wrong). In fact, I seem to recall from one recent thread that the implication was that Roger hasn't read Ehrman's works (again, please correct me if I'm wrong).

I've wondered the same things. These would seem to be yes-or-no questions.

regards,

NinJay

The only evidence that the NT is from a divine source is the fact the Jesus rose from the dead.

You do realize, don't you, that there is absolutely no extra-biblical evidence to support the assertion that Jesus rose from the dead? You're assuming your conclusion here. Circular, much?

Try again, sport.

regards,

NinJay

arnoldo · 03-18-2008, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blastula

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The only evidence that the NT is from a divine source is the fact the Jesus rose from the dead.

Then the changes added to the last chapter of the earliest copies of the earliest gospel Mark is very relevant, don't you think?

It is very irrelevant.

Mark 16:1-8 clearly show the resurrection

Quote:

1 And the sabbath having past, Mary the Magdalene, and Mary of James, and Salome, bought spices, that having come, they may anoint him, 2 and early in the morning of the first of the sabbaths, they come unto the sepulchre, at the rising of the sun, 3 and they said among themselves, 'Who shall roll away for us the stone out of the door of the sepulchre?' 4 And having looked, they see that the stone hath been rolled away -- for it was very great, 5 and having entered into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right hand, arrayed in a long white robe, and they were amazed. 6 And he saith to them, 'Be not amazed, ye seek Jesus the Nazarene, the crucified: he did rise -- he is not here; lo, the place where they laid him! 7 and go, say to his disciples, and Peter, that he doth go before you to Galilee; there ye shall see him, as he said to you.' 8 And, having come forth quickly, they fled from the sepulchre, and trembling and amazement had seized them, and to no one said they anything, for they were afraid.

Mark 16:9-20 has a note in some bibles which states "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20"

Quote:

9 And he, having risen in the morning of the first of the sabbaths, did appear first to Mary the Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven demons; 10 she having gone, told those who had been with him, mourning and weeping; 11 and they, having heard that he is alive, and was seen by her, did not believe.

12 And after these things, to two of them, as they are going into a field, walking, he was manifested in another form, 13 and they having gone, told to the rest; not even them did they believe.

14 Afterwards, as they are reclining (at meat), he was manifested to the eleven, and did reproach their unbelief and stiffness of heart, because they believed not those having seen him being raised; 15 and he said to them, 'Having gone to all the world, proclaim the good news to all the creation; 16 he who hath believed, and hath been baptized, shall be saved; and he who hath not believed, shall be condemned. 17 'And signs shall accompany those believing these things; in my name demons they shall cast out; with new tongues they shall speak; 18 serpents they shall take up; and if any deadly thing they may drink, it shall not hurt them; on the ailing they shall lay hands, and they shall be well.'

19 The Lord, then, indeed, after speaking to them, was received up to the heaven, and sat on the right hand of God; 20 and they, having gone forth, did preach everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word, through the signs following. Amen.

As you can plainly see the resurrection is portrayed in the undisputed text of Mark 16:1-8 thus you point is irrelevant.

-Jay- · 03-18-2008, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenesisNemesis

However, His miracles may not be necessarily historical.

If Jesus didn't rise from the dead then it's all a pack of lies.

Nonsense. It could just as easily be very sincere, but incorrect, folklore, crafted with no intent to deceive. Not everything that isn't true is automatically a lie.

The false dichotomy you present here is a very shopworn one.

regards,

NinJay

arnoldo · 03-18-2008, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The only evidence that the NT is from a divine source is the fact the Jesus rose from the dead.

You do realize, don't you, that there is absolutely no extra-biblical evidence to support the assertion that Jesus rose from the dead? You're assuming your conclusion here. Circular, much?

Try again, sport.

regards,

NinJay

You do realize that the rotting corpse of Jesus or his tomb has never been found, right? Besides if it's all a fairytale why do you waste your time even debating it? Do you waste your time debating if little red riding hood was real also?

-Jay- · 03-18-2008, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

You do realize, don't you, that there is absolutely no extra-biblical evidence to support the assertion that Jesus rose from the dead? You're assuming your conclusion here. Circular, much?

Try again, sport.

regards,

NinJay

You do realize that the rotting corpse of Jesus or his tomb has never been found, right? Besides if it's all a fairytale why do you waste your time even debating it? Do you waste your time debating if little red riding hood was real also?

Does that mean that because we haven't found the rotting corpse of, oh, Indiana Jones, or his tomb that he rose from the dead, too?

The reason, arnoldo, that people who don't believe in the Christian mythologies spend time debating them is because true or not they have had, and continue to have, a profound influence on cultures and civilizations around the world. If nothing else, there is value in understanding why that is the case.

Not everything is black and white.

regards,

NinJay

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.