FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-07-2008, 08:13 PM   #41
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 1/2 mile west of the Rio sin Grande
Posts: 397
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland
All I know is that it scares me when I read about an organization whose first response to the witchcraft hysteria in Africa is not to point out that witches don't exist but that you need Jesus to combat them.
Ask yourself what both approaches have in common — a belief, perhaps unstated, in magic.
mens_sana is offline  
Old 07-07-2008, 08:51 PM   #42
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

At least three others resurrected before your man Jesus ...

Quote:
Fragments of the Heresey of Marcellus of Ancyra

12) Notes
Marcellus focuses his attention on the phrase
“firstborn from the dead,”
which Paul applied to Christ in Colossians.

The question that naturally arises is:
Why is Christ called the firstborn from the dead
if others were raised from the dead before him?


As Marcellus correctly points out,
there are at least three other instances in the Bible
where people came back to life before Christ’s resurrection
(2 Kgs. 4.32-35; John 11.43f; Matt. 27.52f).

It is important to note that, unlike Christ,
these people died a second time after their resurrection,
so that Christ’s resurrection is unique.

Nevertheless, the question remains as to why
he is called “firstborn from the dead.”
Marcellus’s answer, found in this fragment,
is that “firstborn from the dead” actually
means “firstborn of all creation.”

[Rather, the one who rose through Elisha the prophet (2 Kgs. 4.32-35) rose before him. Lazarus also rose before Jesus’ resurrection (John 11:43f.), and in the time of the Passion “many bodies of those who had fallen asleep” were raised (Matt. 27.52f.).]
Best wishes,


Pete
mountainman is offline  
Old 07-07-2008, 09:04 PM   #43
Iasion
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aChristian View Post
No, in one case, a boy's fingertip was restored after a doctor had to amputate it. It is in some medical records book that I don't know the name of.
Ah,
you claim the evidence exists, but yet you can't post it.

Very convincing.


Iasion
 
Old 07-08-2008, 06:31 PM   #44
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Marion
Posts: 114
Default

AA5874 wrote: "I have stated before and will do it again. The NT does NOT contain a RESURRECTION scene. No-one saw Jesus come to life in the NT."
This is an excellent historical comment. I don't know what side of the debate your on... but this is a true comment.
stonewall1012 is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 06:45 PM   #45
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 33
Default

Does it matter if anyone saw Jesus's resurrection? 500 people saw him walking again. Same thing, no?
skunker is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 07:22 PM   #46
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,348
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skunker View Post
Does it matter if anyone saw Jesus's resurrection? 500 people saw him walking again. Same thing, no?
Actually, Paul claims that 500 people saw the risen Jesus, yet Paul named none of the them. We do not have the testimony of any of those 500.
Deus Ex is offline  
Old 07-08-2008, 07:47 PM   #47
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Discussions of faith should be carried out in a different forum. This forum specializes in analysis of texts and history.

Thanks.
Toto is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 12:39 AM   #48
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

The digression into the discussion of faith has been split off here and will be moved to GRD.
Toto is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 05:31 PM   #49
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Marion
Posts: 114
Default

DEU EX:
"Actually, Paul claims that 500 people saw the risen Jesus, yet Paul named none of the them. We do not have the testimony of any of those 500."

What does that mean... your correct that we don't have any of those names...So does it automatically mean that Paul is lying? that he exagerated was it an interpolation into the text.... what is your analysis of that claim?

Mountain man claimed that Jesus wasn't the first "resurrection scene"
Great point what does it mean that Jesus wasn't the first resurrection scene?
I'm asking the ... so what question... what does it prove that there are other accounts of resurrection in other texts?
stonewall1012 is offline  
Old 07-09-2008, 05:42 PM   #50
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,348
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stonewall1012 View Post
DEU EX:
"Actually, Paul claims that 500 people saw the risen Jesus, yet Paul named none of the them. We do not have the testimony of any of those 500."

What does that mean... your correct that we don't have any of those names...So does it automatically mean that Paul is lying? that he exagerated was it an interpolation into the text.... what is your analysis of that claim?
Should we take Paul's word for it that five hundred people saw the risen Jesus? We have no names, nor independent testimony, from any of them. Not that I know of anyway. As far as I can tell, Paul never even saw Jesus 'in the flesh'.
Deus Ex is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:01 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.