Christoph

What kind of confirmation do you need? Historical references?

It's interesting that there's not "enough" evidence of Jesus' death and ressurrection available in history; however, there's nothing I know of that contradicts what is available to us regarding Jesus.

The historical account of the resurrection makes us decide whether resurrection is possible, but it is nonetheless indicated in history to have happened.

However, if you've already decided that there is no God, that there is only what we can evaluate with our five senses and concepts that we can understand in our own brain, there will never be enough evidence of the existence of God.

Hans

Christoph

I thought since Christians have not only concluded that their god exists but have also concluded that their god is as Jesus claims he is, that they would share how it is they reached this conclusion.

I'm personally baffled as to how one reaches this conclusion.

Christoph

You're right.

Jesus died for your sins and mine. He suffered, died, and was buried. He resurrected on the third day, then appeared in front of 500 witnesses.

This is well established history.

I was under the impression that most unbelievers assume that this is not true because of their belief that nothing exists that we don't have access to (supernatural things).

Do you have any questions?

Mageth

This is well established history.

How so?

Christoph

First of all, the Bible, which is a historical document, indicates that that did happen. There were plenty of powerful, motivated people who most definitely would have discredited it, if it weren't true. These things make me think it's well-documented. I don't know of any historical documents that are as widely accepted as the Bible that say these things didn't happen.

That's historical evidence. You may not call it "proof", but it's a good reason to believe.

Do you think it's not true?

hezekiah jones

Things that you don't know and things that aren't and what people didn't do is historical evidence??

[ April 05, 2002: Message edited by: hezekiahjones ]</p>

Christoph

You've lost me. Can you clarify?

Mageth

Examining the Bible, I've discovered that 1) the gospels were written long after the events of that fateful passover week; and 2) the several descriptions of the events vary in several important details. Not exactly the earmarks of a reliable historical text.

Further, there is an appalling lack of contemporary accounts from Roman and Jewish records for the alleged events surrounding the death and resurrection of Christ. While you claim that the lack of denouncements of the claimed events is evidence for the factualness of the events, I claim that the lack of corroborating accounts of the events from sources other than those written at least 40 years later by obviously biased "believers" casts serious doubt upon the "historical" claims of the New Testament.

In particular, it seems odd that there is no record outside the bible of: Jesus, a man supposedly known to be dead, walking around the countryside for 40 days (or, for that matter, the other dead that supposedly rose from the grave on his crucifiction - someone should have noticed, and recorded, a horde of formerly dead people invading the city); the temple curtain being rent; earthquakes; strange darkening of skies at noon; etc. No one but the writer(s) of the gospels seems to have noticed these astounding events.

Christoph

Even more odd, then, is the fact that there are no widely accepted historical documents from that time that refute what the gospels say.

Pomp

Christoph,

Even more odd, then, is the fact that there are no widely accepted historical documents from that time that refute what the gospels say.

Why would you expect such documents to exist? Do we have surviving documents that refute the religious literature of the pagan Roman religions?

Edit: Actually, if you want to discuss the relability of the Gospels as historical accounts, I'd sugest that you spend some time in our <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum&f=51" target="_blank">Biblical Criticism & Archaeology</a> forum. We have quite a few intelligent and knowledgable posters (on both sides of the issue) who frequent that forum.

[ April 05, 2002: Message edited by: Pompous Bastard ]</p>