CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Gospels are eye witness accounts and actual biography.
Most historians confirm this.
The question for the skeptic really lies in the belief of Resurection and other miracles.
But as a Biography, that isn't disputable by any reasonable argument.
And there also has been forensic analysis done that would make the 4 gospels written collaborating the detailed stories impossible.
If you take 2 executives, brainy people of modern day, and they set out a conspiracy, (without luxury of government coverups - as in Hillary) But just executives frauding people, and caught and under investigation, a series of questions would detail inconsistencies that are indications of lies in testimony.
So just 2 people in short term with details of 1 thread of events would likely unravel.
And that's not the case with the 4 gospels, a forensic would confirm it, many have. 1 in particular has, and he started as a passionate atheist, and after months of review determined these were true eyewitness accounts.
Here is a quick clips from an atheist turned Christian through investigation.
Gospels are eye witness accounts and actual biography.
Written decades after the person who they were about died.
Most historians confirm this.
That isn't true.
But as a Biography, that isn't disputable by any reasonable argument.
You ignoring the reasonable arguments don't make them unreasonable.
And there also has been forensic analysis done that would make the 4 gospels written collaborating the detailed stories impossible.
No way this is true.
If you take 2 executives, brainy people of modern day, and they set out a conspiracy, (without luxury of government coverups - as in Hillary) But just executives frauding people, and caught and under investigation, a series of questions would detail inconsistencies that are indications of lies in testimony.
There are inconsistencies in the Bible. You just claim they are ok because it is a collection of accounts.
So just 2 people in short term with details of 1 thread of events would likely unravel.
Like the Bible.
And that's not the case with the 4 gospels, a forensic would confirm it, many have.
False.
1 in particular has, and he started as a passionate atheist, and after months of review determined these were true eyewitness accounts.
Here is a quick clips from an atheist turned Christian through investigation.
That guy has been thoroughly disputed since he completely ignores many possible scenarios and treats the Bible as the only evidence we can use for that time period.
Pretend you sat down to write a story about a philosopher/rabbi/political insurrectionist who lived back in the 1980s. Whom you never met. And had only second-hand hearsay accounts of for your background.
Got it! Good. You have just gotten an example of what Luke and then John were facing. As their books were written 35 and 60 years, respectively, AFTER JC died.
Wait are you criticizing the gospels for not being written before the crucifixion?
I have no idea what you are saying, even the link you gave says they were written by the people they are written by. So I don't know what your argument is?
Most of what you read are purposed to steer, end times deceptions! Big time!
Luke is considered to have written Acts an Gospel.
John is the John who wrote as a disciple. Who also wrote letters and Revelations. There are scriptures that indicate this.
The letters are reflective of the Gospel and Revelations. I don't doubt the were the same person.
John is the love bug. He is also the one not marryred. John recorded Jesus telling two disciples their manner of death. Peter and John)
And John ref to himself as the one Jesus loved. Also in the letters he was the one that hammered the oneness message and love message.
Peter dictated to Mark because of the descriptions it seems to be from Peter's prespective, but it is likely he was an eye witness. Jesus also empowered and instructed 70, and these were a group that were more specific than the multitudes.
The New Testament authors repeatedly referred to themselves as eyewitnesses, even if they did not make overt statements including their names. In the last chapter of John’s Gospel, the author tells us he is testifying and his testimony is true.
Language such as this presumes the author has seen something he can describe as eyewitness testimony. In addition, the authors of 1 John and 2 Peter identify themselves as eyewitnesses who directly observed Jesus, and were not inventing clever stories (1 John 1:1,3 and 2 Peter 1:16).
While Luke clearly states he is not an eyewitness to the events in his gospel, he does tell us he is relying on the true eyewitnesses for his information (Luke 1:1). These cumulative statements are consistent with the notion the authors of the Gospels saw themselves as eyewitnesses who were recording history.
13 And He went up on the mountain and *summoned those whom He Himself wanted, and they came to Him.
14 And He appointed twelve, so that they would be with Him and that He could send them out to preach, 15 and to have authority to cast out the demons. 16 And He appointed the twelve: Simon (to whom He gave the name Peter), 17 and James, the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James (to them He gave the name Boanerges, which means, “Sons of Thunder”);
18 and Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Zealot; 19 and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Him.
Luke is considered to have written Acts an Gospel.
Slight correction - the author of Luke is considered to be the author of Acts.
"1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled[a] among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses. and servants of the word. 3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught."
The first eyewitnesses were the prophets of old Testament. He was accounting all the fulfillments of Christ in Jesus from the beginning
1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, 3 it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; 4 so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.
Why do the four gospels attribute three different sentences to Christ as his last? On the same note, Matthew and Mark say that the last words of Christ were, in Hebrew, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" This has traditionally been translated as, "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" However, a more accurate translation would be, "My El, My El, why has thou forsaken me?" El is the name of a specific pagan god. Why would Jesus call out to a pagan god at the moment of his death?
Answer:
The Last Words of Christ
"The Last Words of Christ" weren't all spoken at one time. They were spoken between 9 am (the 3rd hour of the day, 6 am being the "first hour") and 3 pm (the "ninth hour").
But the "last words" you listed aren't His last. Look carefully. I have the four Gospels here. It is the moments before the Lord Jesus "gave up the ghost" that He died:
Matthew:
27:50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
Mark:
15:37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
Luke:
23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.
John:
19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
If there is any real issue, it's not in the words spoken over six hours; it's over the words spoken in the last moments of His earthly life. If you notice, Matthew, Mark and Luke all three say that Jesus "cried with a loud voice"
Luke and John both have words Jesus said before he "gave up the ghost." Two sets of them:
"It is finished" and "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit"
Logically, I can figure which came after which.
First the Lord Jesus said, "It is finished." I have no problem believing that is what He "cried with a loud voice." Can you hear it?
"IT IS FINISHED!!!!"
Then "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." He said this to indicate He was GIVING UP His life. Then the Scripture is understood when it says in all four gospels, "he gave up the ghost" (Greek, ekpneo, to breath out one's last breath, breathe out one's life).
So there is no conflict; the four gospels are complementary. Each complements the others to give a full picture.
"Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?"
This is a statement that has precedent. It is a quote of Psalm 22:1, which begins:
Psalms 22:1 "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?"
The psalm goes on to describe a lot of things that were fulfilled that day on the cross:
Psalms 22:14 "I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels." This describes what happens during crucifixion.
Psalms 22:16 "For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet." Again, this is what happened to the Lord Jesus Christ that day (Luke 24:40; John 20:20, 25).
Psalms 22:18 "They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture." This again was fulfilled that day, by the soldiers near the cross (witnessed in all four gospels: Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34; John 19:24).
And a wonderful point, that God actually had not rejected His Son is revealed in this psalm:
Psalms 22: 23-24 "Ye that fear the LORD, praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel. For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard."
"El" was not the name used, in the sense of a pagan deity. "El" was used instead as the name of God. It is found 235 times in the Hebrew Old Testament. Out of those 235 times, 212 times "El" clearly means the one God.
This example is what as a cold case detective says, it's accidental validation. It's written by the difference of 4 people at the same event.
Where one will focus on one statement, another on other statements. But when you Murchison you see consistency. It's actually further proof of it being accurate, not the opposite.
But nice try!
.
Why do the four gospels attribute three different sentences to Christ as his last? On the same note, Matthew and Mark say that the last words of Christ were, in Hebrew, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"
This has traditionally been translated as, "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" However, a more accurate translation would be, "My El, My El, why has thou forsaken me?" El is the name of a specific pagan god. Why would Jesus call out to a pagan god at the moment of his death?
Answer:
The Last Words of Christ
"The Last Words of Christ" weren't all spoken at one time. They were spoken between 9 am (the 3rd hour of the day, 6 am being the "first hour") and 3 pm (the "ninth hour").
But the "last words" you listed aren't His last. Look carefully. I have the four Gospels here. It is the moments before the Lord Jesus "gave up the ghost" that He died:
Matthew:
27:50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
Mark:
15:37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
Luke:
23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.
John:
19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
If there is any real issue, it's not in the words spoken over six hours; it's over the words spoken in the last moments of His earthly life. If you notice, Matthew, Mark and Luke all three say that Jesus "cried with a loud voice"
Luke and John both have words Jesus said before he "gave up the ghost." Two sets of them:
"It is finished" and "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit"
Logically, I can figure which came after which.
First the Lord Jesus said, "It is finished." I have no problem believing that is what He "cried with a loud voice." Can you hear it?
"IT IS FINISHED!!!!"
Then "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." He said this to indicate He was GIVING UP His life. Then the Scripture is understood when it says in all four gospels, "he gave up the ghost" (Greek, ekpneo, to breath out one's last breath, breathe out one's life).
So there is no conflict; the four gospels are complementary. Each complements the others to give a full picture.
"Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?"
This is a statement that has precedent. It is a quote of Psalm 22:1, which begins:
Psalms 22:1 "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?"
The psalm goes on to describe a lot of things that were fulfilled that day on the cross:
Psalms 22:14 "I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels." This describes what happens during crucifixion.
Psalms 22:16 "For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet." Again, this is what happened to the Lord Jesus Christ that day (Luke 24:40; John 20:20, 25).
Psalms 22:18 "They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture." This again was fulfilled that day, by the soldiers near the cross (witnessed in all four gospels: Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34; John 19:24).
And a wonderful point, that God actually had not rejected His Son is revealed in this psalm:
Psalms 22: 23-24 "Ye that fear the LORD, praise him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him; and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel. For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard."
"El" was not the name used, in the sense of a pagan deity. "El" was used instead as the name of God. It is found 235 times in the Hebrew Old Testament. Out of those 235 times, 212 times "El" clearly means the one God.
Evidence when viewed goes "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt!" Even secular sources like Thallus (52AD)
Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus, his ancient his writings don’t even exist anymore, but Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD, does quote Thallus who previously tried to explain away the darkness occurring at Jesus’ crucifixion:
“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down.
This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.” (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)
.12 - Secular sources independent of and even hostile to Christian faith have other historic texts that make the New Testament all the more reliable and credible as it is confirmed also through non-religious sources.
In support of this evidence - Ancient documentation by Thallus in 52 AD stating it, and also astronomers confirmed there would not have been an eclipse that day. So it is a "supernatural event" or a perfectly timed coincidenceEven more so, secular sources independent of, and even in hostility to Christian faith have ancient historic texts that confirm details in the Gospels, and the New Testament and affirm them all the more reliable and credible, as it is confirmed through varieties of religious and non-religious sources. And through use of a little common sense.
Such as the the strange darkness from the 6th hour to the 9th hour. And then added documentation with scientifical explanation to be not an eclipse, so what manner of coincidence is it?
Summary, there are reasonable and logical conclusions for believing as found in the historical account of the crucifixion, as noted even the Roman Soldiers concluded this, "Surely He was the Son of God."
I conclude by theses points of evidence, Beyond a Reasonable Doubt, that of course the Resurection occurred. It is a God thing to do according to prophesies clear and detailed as found in His Word the Bible, according to His will and purpose and scheduled at His appointed time!
So, direct contradiction proves it is true??? I love that inescapable logic.
How is the reader to believe anything else when they got something so important so vastly different? - one version (the earliest written) says he has been forsaken, the next one (chronologically) just says forgive them, and the last version says this is the fulfillment of prophecy - and we are suppose to ignore this convenient shift?
one will focus on one statement, another on other statements
no, they literally say Jesus said X then died:
"Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."
"It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."
"Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."
"It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."
Are you a 3rd grade reader?
So far I have bitten my lip rather than tell you how atrocious your writing is (as others have already pointed out). Since you seem at least sincere in your belief and not a SaintNow type troll, etc., I figured I would just address the stupidity of your ideas rather than your grammar, but I could certainly deride both if you'd like.
I'm sure you are Slapshot also, but I'm glad to talk to you regardless. I hope Slapshot turns his anger to zeal, and scoffing to faith.
Why do you think we bother with this, talking to people, and sharing our faith?
Is it for us or you? It may feel good, and some argue to win, and it's great to argue.
But here are good reasons why.
1 - we were once lost, and know the difference, and we are in gratitude to those who let us scoff for a while till we also came to realize the truth
2 - we understand the game of life, the winners and the losers, and we know both of their prizes at the end of the game of life
3 - we know God, and we know His will, and we can't be His without also loving to do His will.
4 - we are accountable to cultivate the earth, we are cultivating planting watering and harvesting, just as we were told in the beginning - Genesis 1
5 - God's written His Word on our Hearst and minds, and we know the mark of the beast is written in the forehead of the antichrist, once it's written, your heart turns to stone. The door closes, and these are the days when He is marking, separating, and finalizing His sheep fold
6 - Like the Shepherd we call out to His sheep, all who can hear listen, all who can see look!
7 - for this is following Jesus - we must do as He does, and pick up our crosses also and follow Him, while leading others on the same path.
8 - if the Lord says to the watchman to speak so as to warn and save others, and he does not, the blood would be on our hands
I guess when confronted with a clear, direct, and important biblical contradiction the best course for you is to quickly change the subject - interesting.
I'm sure you are Slapshot
You seem pretty sure about a lot of things without any good reason. I've been on this site > 6 years, SlapShot has been here less than 1. I'm probably about twice his age. And the only debate I remember with SlapShot was when I called him out for plagiarism (ref)
No, they could have heard Him cry out loudly from deeper in the crowd, maybe they weren't closer at that moment.
The words you are speaking of were likely spread out over an hour. His "final hour"
And there is more in the text also that prophetic.
So maybe where the two writers who wrote - He cried out loudly ... maybe they were a little far off, so only those specified words were recorded in their accounts on purpose!
Like take the hours, God has an appointed time for everything down to the hour!
He set all things appointed into our time line, then pronounced it all in prophesy..
The 6th hour, the 9th hour, and the final hour, these are all significant for more than even the crucifixion account. They actually tell more!
What the biblically illiterate fails to understand is the perfect depth of God's Word. In dead on, hands down, by every measure, accurate to the penny, detail of God's Word!
Even these phrases have a prophetic course!
Every utterance of God, every jot and tittle is prophecy, it's speaking what is, even what can't be see. It is!
So He cried out .... 9 th hour 6th hour final hour
Like a Trumpet - 6th hour Final hour - 6th Day - Day of man
6th generation from Cain- Lemach - total depravity
9th hour - 9th generation from Adam a different Lemach to compare! God gives side by side comparisons!
Noah 10th Gen from Adam Lemach, Noah's father - preceded judgement of the flood washing the earth, the dust, the flesh, judgement, the cross He took our flood of judgement, He is our Arc of The Covenant!
Flood baptized, cleansing flood!
9th hour before the cleansing of the flood, 6th hour - He put to death the curse of day 6 - Man.
6000 years day 6. This is our final hour!
Multidimensional is the Word. It is physical, instructional, prophetic. Is as intricate as our Universe, and He has woven Eternity into every word. We could never search the depths of God, or His Word.
John has many details, he seems to be the most sensitive disciple, and also possibly more perceptive of everything around him. And probably very prophetic in his gifts, we all have gifts to use that are a part of us.
And again John talks most about oneness and love, and the others , martyred - John not - Which Jesus foretold. Peter and Paul were work horses, they taught in different style than John.
John was more of a teacher and prophet. And we know he was a Weezer more than the others. And no, he wasn't gay. He was just sweeter and more sensitive. Because in his letters he teaches against the lusts of the flesh, and he says things like if we are in Him we cannot sin, and be perfect as the Father is perfect.
Also John seems to be particularly mindful of fulfilment, so no doubt, these things were coming to his mind, as they were unfolding before his eyes!
He mentions several, attaching fulfillment of prophesy, with him as a witness! John seems to be the most detailed, makes sense sinse he was sitting with Mary Jesus' mother, so He didn't run and hide, he clearly had been in a front seat, likely right at the cross, as close as permitted.
He was close enough to hear what the others did not hear, "I am thirsty"
The people running getting vinegar on a sponge doesn't make sense, unless you were close enough to hear Jesus say I am thirsty!
So two accounts actually recorded Jesus calling out twice, once about Elijah, and a second time they didn't say what was said when He cried out.
But sequence of all 4 show this order.
He cries out, people around those 2 disciples say He is calling for Elijah - they visually see people running around with a drink of vinegar.
John hears - I am thirsty, makes sense since John is the only one close enough, and Jesus was talking to him about Mary, John doesn't mention the 1st cry out. He was close enough that he probably heard other things.
The others only recorded what He cried out, and they didn't quite hear it themselves, they said what others said He said. Why, because they could hear both cries .
One before vinegar and one after, but they were not close enough really to hear either word for word, that's why they are quoting the crowd around them
.
John
14 Now it was the day of preparation for the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. And he said to the Jews, “Behold, your King!”
15 So they cried out, “Away with Him, away with Him, crucify Him!” Pilate said to them, “Shall I crucify your King?”
The chief priests answered, “We have no king but Caesar.”
16 So he then handed Him over to them to be crucified.
17 They took Jesus, therefore, and He went out, bearing His own cross, to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha. 18 There they crucified Him, and with Him two other men, one on either side, and Jesus in between.
19 Pilate also wrote an inscription and put it on the cross. It was written, “JESUS THE NAZARENE, THE KING OF THE JEWS.”
20 Therefore many of the Jews read this inscription, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Latin and in Greek.
21 So the chief priests of the Jews were saying to Pilate, “Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews’; but that He said, ‘I am King of the Jews.’” 22 Pilate answered, “What I have written I have written.”
23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took His outer garments and made four parts, a part to every soldier and also the tunic; now the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece.
24 So they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it, to decide whose it shall be”; this was to fulfill the Scripture: “They divided My outer garments among them, and for My clothing they cast lots.” 25 Therefore the soldiers did these things.
But standing by the cross of Jesus were His mother, and His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus then saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” 27 Then He said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” From that hour the disciple took her into his own household.
28 After this, Jesus, knowing that all things had already been accomplished, to fulfill the Scripture, *said, “I am thirsty.”
29 A jar full of sour wine was standing there; so they put a sponge full of the sour wine upon a branch of hyssop and brought it up to His mouth.
30 Therefore when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished!” And He bowed His head and gave up His spirit.
31 Then the Jews, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies would not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
32 So the soldiers came, and broke the legs of the first man and of the other who was crucified with Him;
33 but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.
35 And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you also may believe. 36 For these things came to pass to fulfill the Scripture, “Not a bone of Him shall be broken.”
37 And again another Scripture says, “They shall look on Him whom they pierced.”
38 After these things Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of Jesus, but a secret one for fear of the Jews, asked Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus; and Pilate granted permission. So he came and took away His body.
39 Nicodemus, who had first come to Him by night, also came, bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds weight.
40 So they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen wrappings with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews. 41 Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid. 42 Therefore because of the Jewish day of preparation, since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there.
.
.
These where His last Words, these are the Words that ripped the veil and shook the earth!
Notice no one is saying He is calling for Elijah, no one is giving Him vinegar to drink?
And also doesn't mention Joseph the rich guy needing courage.
........................
Luke 23
44 It was now about the sixth hour, and darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour, 45 because the sun was obscured; and the veil of the temple was torn in two. 46 And Jesus, crying out with a loud voice, said, “Father, into Your hands I commit My spirit.” Having said this, He breathed His last.
47 Now when the centurion saw what had happened, he began praising God, saying, “Certainly this man was innocent.”
48 And all the crowds who came together for this spectacle, when they observed what had happened, began to return, beating their breasts. 49 And all His acquaintances and the women who accompanied Him from Galilee were standing at a distance, seeing these things.
50 And a man named Joseph, who was a member of the Council, a good and righteous man 51 (he had not consented to their plan and action), a man from Arimathea, a city of the Jews, who was waiting for the kingdom of God;
52 this man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus.
53 And he took it down and wrapped it in a linen cloth, and laid Him in a tomb cut into the rock, where no one had ever lain.
54 It was the preparation day, and the Sabbath was about to begin. 55 Now the women who had come with Him out of Galilee followed, and saw the tomb and how His body was laid. 56 Then they returned and prepared spices and perfumes.
And on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment.
Here we have the same words also the statement, what the people around him said, so maybe they were standing close to each other in the crowd, since they heard the crowd say and do the same thing.
Also one the account says He called out loudly twice, once the phrase which was not His last words, because He cried out a second time, and that was His last words!
Now Matt and Mark tell of the rich guy Joseph who donated his tomb - Mark decided to add the fear Joseph had -
He got up enough courage. Matt doesn't discuss the courage or fear. Maybe Joseph the rich guy wasn't in a conversation with Matt. about trying to get up courage.
You have to realize, they all feared for their lives, yet 10 days later they were bold as lions! Why? What changed?
.................
Mark 15
33 When the sixth hour came, darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour. 34 At the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” which is translated, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”
35 When some of the bystanders heard it, they began saying, “Behold, He is calling for Elijah.”
36 Someone ran and filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on a reed, and gave Him a drink, saying, “Let us see whether Elijah will come to take Him down.”
37 And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed His last.
38 And the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. 39 When the centurion, who was standing right in front of Him, saw the way He breathed His last, he said, “Truly this man was the Son of God!”
40 There were also some women looking on from a distance, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the Less and Joses, and Salome. 41 When He was in Galilee, they used to follow Him and minister to Him; and there were many other women who came up with Him to Jerusalem.
42 When evening had already come, because it was the preparation day, that is, the day before the Sabbath,
43 Joseph of Arimathea came, a prominent member of the Council, who himself was waiting for the kingdom of God; and he gathered up courage and went in before Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus.
44 Pilate wondered if He was dead by this time, and summoning the centurion, he questioned him as to whether He was already dead.
45 And ascertaining this from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph.
46 Joseph bought a linen cloth, took Him down, wrapped Him in the linen cloth and laid Him in a tomb which had been hewn out in the rock; and he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb. 47 Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses were looking on to see where He was laid.Matt
45 Now from the sixth hour darkness fell upon all the land until the ninth hour.
46 About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”
47 And some of those who were standing there, when they heard it, began saying, “This man is calling for Elijah.”
48 Immediately one of them ran, and taking a sponge, he filled it with sour wine and put it on a reed, and gave Him a drink.
49 But the rest of them said, “Let us see whether Elijah will come to save Him.”
50 And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit.
51 And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split.
52 The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; ,
53 and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.
54 Now the centurion, and those who were with him keeping guard over Jesus, when they saw the earthquake and the things that were happening, became very frightened and said, “Truly this was the Son of God!”
55 Many women were there looking on from a distance, who had followed Jesus from Galilee while ministering to Him.
56 Among them was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.
57 When it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who himself had also become a disciple of Jesus.
58 This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate ordered it to be given to him.
59 And Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,
60 and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock; and he rolled a large stone against the entrance of the tomb and went away.
61 And Mary Magdalene was there, and the other Mary, sitting opposite the grave.
62 Now on the next day, the day after the preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered together with Pilate,
63 and said, “Sir, we remember that when He was still alive that deceiver said, ‘After three days I am to rise again.’
64 Therefore, give orders for the grave to be made secure until the third day, otherwise His disciples may come and steal Him away and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead,’ and the last deception will be worse than the first.”
65 Pilate said to them, “You have a guard; go, make it as secure as you know how.”
66 And they went and made the grave secure, and along with the guard they set a seal on the stone.
And that is what is meant by an unintentional fitting of an event.
If we were both at a concert, and you were in the 8th row from the stage, and I was at the far right, You may get splashed with water, or catch a cd thrown out to the crowd.
Maybe I saw something thrown but said, the band threw something out to the crowd. But you say, they were throwing cds into the crowd, and water.
If we were both testifying this statement we both made would be unintentional confirmation.
Because it's a consistency of prespective actually proving the same event.
"Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."
"It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."
If you said the band's last song was Stairway to Heaven, and I said the band's last song was Highway to Hell - which song should people believe actually happened?
Or if it Mark, we know Peter was hiding in the crowd, so then maybe it wasn't heard, clear enough to wrote exact words, or even any of the words.
The better question, is since John had so much detail, if its not eye witness, from prespectives, wouldnt they all say the same as though they were sitting in front with John?????
So its more journal integrity to write these as they were written . It shows literally NO CONSPIRACY. They each were written as they stood from where they stood!
So it seems like you have to look at each and determine what and how they heard! It appears to me, that some of the writers were close enough to hear Him scream loudly, and one was close enough to hear Him whisper!
If your mom is calling to you across the street and a bus just went by, if you couldn't tell me you heard your mom scream something, but couldn't tell me exactly what she said, does it mean you were not there across the street?????????
Ok your either an idiot by accident or an idiot by choice
Your really not reading it, so were ever you got the argument, it's not a good, one or a strong one, it's not even a splinter of an argument. It's actually empty and foolish.
It's just dumb.
So pick a smart argument.
It's frustrating to say my shirt is black and it really be black, and another insist it's white when it's not white.
Which is why apologetic sites try (unsuccessfully) to address it... - ref, ref (notice how you picked John as the obvious last words and they picked Luke...)
It's frustrating to say my shirt is black and it really be black, and another insist it's white when it's not white.
I assume it would be frustrating to find out you are color blind...
I'm just reading it. It's simple and not confusing. So I don't know why you can't,
OH so you are possibly Cartman.
The last line is a Cartman response.
John ????? HELLO, Captain obvious!
You do realize John is sitting right in front of the cross with Mary, right? No one else was. You do realize they were hiding and blending into the crowd to stay close without being detected?
So it's not like they were hanging all eleven, since Judas had hung himself. This was a day of turmoil and drama.
It is written by the place they were, and their prespective, and personality, and writing style.
Look we don't know each other on create debate, but we know each other's prespective, and style, and even personality.
So don't you think it's reasonable that apples to apples this applies also?
Where was Luke and Matt? And Peter and Mark? What were people saying around them.
If you are not bothering reading, jot a note to keep track, then you won't see it by choice, because you havn't even looked!
The crappie blogs you read are people like you at this moment, no matter what is intelligent reasoning, they barely skim and then act like they studied it.
You get an F for reading this. A big fat 0. Because you didn't understand and properly compare and make inferences that should be skills learned in grade school.
The two verses describe watching the last words - not talking to others and being distracted maybe catching some audio now and then. They are supposedly watching the death of the messiah - would they not be paying attention?
Is education that bad these days?
Reading your posts, people would have to conclude that education is indeed very poor for some.
blogs you read
If apologetic sites disagree with your assertion that the words in John are obviously correct, are you wrong, or are they?
Even head position while talking or screaming is in the Gospel text is noted here! And you bozos are still mouths full of nonsense!
If you are beginning to pass out or die while tied in an upright position, and you breath your last breath, and give up your spirit, is your last breath, with I assume head raised face up to sky, because you cant scream when your chin is tuched into you chest, right? Go ahead and try it.
So was Jesus last breath what He callef out loudly?
Or do you bow your head and simply mumble a whispet?
Which sentence would John hear, that the others could not?
Who do you think heard Jesus very last Words? John or Luke?
Luke wrote the last scream, John wrote the last whisper.Again John is right in front of the cross
He this whole section of the cross is not mentioning anything Jesus is screaming out, John records the quieter sentences but not the screams.
Wouldn't it be similar on any given day at any given event?Again John is right in front of the cross
He this whole section of the cross is not mentioning anything Jesus is screaming out, John records the quieter sentences but not the screams.
Wouldn't it be similar on any given day at any given event?
Why were the people running around with sponge of vinegar, did the others record what they saw from a little distance, and why would John be the only one in conversation, and record I am thirsty?
It is an exaggerated overcorrection, presumably similar to why you posted "York being dumb." - which I see you've corrected (though still using the wrong version of you're.)
Or did you take one line and think they should be the same prespective?
If they did that, then that would make them unlikely true. Because I witness accounts are from the view of the writer as to their experience in it.
They are not writing an account of someone else's experience. So why do you want it to be not an eye witness accounts.
I'll say it again if you read John's account, he records details like one standing right in front of the cross.
You can see each's personality.
Each account ... has emotion in it. You can actually see Luke going from a matter of fact account at court, to as unglued as Luke gets. The writing seems to speed up, and it gets less organized. You can tell the memory details are messy, and a little emotionally messy. Which is unusual for the personality of this writer.
And you need to read the text referred to.
Did you read them?
Did you note any context of the account?
Or did you take one line and think they should be the same prespective?
If they did that, then that would make them not from an eyewitness account. Because eyewitness accounts are from the view of the writer as to their experience in it. So it should be like an imperfect puzzle or a little bit messy of a puzzle yet that fits together to make one picture anyway.
They are not writing an account of someone else's experience, they are writing as they experienced it. So why do you want the text to sound different than an eye witness account. And not an eyewitness account.
You have to think, they didn't have some kind of rules. No one said hey someday is going to dissect my words and if I say it slightly different, they will accuse the faith. They wrote accurate facts without comparing notes, according to their eyewitness memory, and it's infused with personality and even emotion.
Again John is right in front of the cross
He this whole section of the cross is not mentioning anything Jesus is screaming out, John records the quieter sentences but not the screams.
Wouldn't it be similar on any given day at any given event?
If me and my husband were at the hospital with an my daughter when she was in labor with my grand baby, and I was at the bedside, and my husband was in the hall while the nurse was in.
Would we hear things differently in the conversations. He might catch the nurse and whatever she said on the way out of the room. I may have to ask him, what did she say?
But he might not have heard my daughter ask me for ice chips while I was close to her in the room and he was in the hall.
Were we at the same hospital? With the same daughter and grand baby?
Or would it be proof to be false because what we heard was not the exact same?
The sentences are just common sense.
I'm amazed how desperate everyone is to disprove the Bible!
Luke is over toward the right of the thieves in a loud crowd
Luke has a better vantage point. But not like Luke is hearing the screams pretty clear, but not the quieter sentences like John.
John is right in front! He has had a best seat position since the trial, he is with Jesus mother, and doesn't leave her side.
Matt is over toward the left in a noisier crowd.
Mark is furthest from the trial and the crosses, he is by the road looking on from there, so maybe toward the back of the crowd. You can tell because he mentions reactions as people were passing by, not standing in the midst of the commotion.
So all 4 texts show their prespective down to where they were standing and who they were likely with.
Peter was probably easy to pick out, we know he was scared and hiding. Mark writes alot more about Peter's prespective in the Gospel, so you know they were connected.
Mark discusses Joseph the rich guy with the tomb was scared, no one else did.
So you can see this was their discussions.
Matt was paranoid and shocked at the behaviors, and John records the quieter sentences. All fits like each is an historical account by eye witnesses!
Now the sentence in question:
If you begin to die and give up your spirit while standing, do you lift your head up and scream in you last breath?
Or do you bow your head and simply mumble?
Who do you think heard Jesus very last Words? John or Luke?
Luke wrote the last scream, John wrote the last whisper.
-----------------------
I'll say it again if you read, John's account, he records details like one standing right in front of the cross. Because he WAS!
He literally records a conversation from the cross to Mary and John. Now, no one is going to be horrible to Mary, she is mom watching this, so there is some level of expectation that her townspeople would give her some respectful space.
John is with her, and everyone else in mixed in trying to blend in. We know this because Peter felt scared enough to deny Jesus three times, just as Jesus pre-told.
Even in details of the trial, you can tell where John Matt Luke were by their details.
John was in the court room with Mary, John mention more stenographer details of testamony. Luke at a great vantage point probably near to the exit door, because he catches much of the trial, and also on the way out he catches much on the way.
Matt tell of some of the court, he didn't get as close as Luke, and especially not as close as John. And Matt is hanging near this regretting of Judas, so he wasn't in a good vantage point, he was likely hiding near where the pharasees where gathered.
You can see each's personality.
Each account ... has emotion in it.
You can actually see Luke go from a matter of fact account at court, to progressively more emotional, a bit unglued which Luke doesn't usually get.
Luke's writing seems to speed up, and it gets less organized. You can tell the memory details are a little emotionally messy. Which is unusual for the personality of this writer.
Luke 23
44 It was now about the sixth hour, and darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour, 45 because the sun was obscured; and the veil of the temple was torn in two. Luke describes unusual outward event first.
46 And Jesus, crying out with a loud voice, said, “Father, into Your hands I commit My Spirit.” Having said this, He breathed His last.
Luke is probably closer in or in a less noisy surrounding crowd, than Matt, Mark, and Peter.
I think Mark was Peter's road dog, and I think Joseph the rich guy with the tomb, was with them both for some of the time.
Luke has details that are inclusive of on the way while walking, he seemed to have been in a good hearing of the trial and walk. He also likely followed closer on the walk in, because he has more side conversations detailed. He also hears what both criminals were sayiing back and forth. And Luke records something Jesus said that others didn't when they were planting the cross.
Luke 23: 4
34 But Jesus was saying, “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.” And they cast lots, dividing up His garments among themselves.
While standing in the crowd Luke also seems to be within an ear shot of the cross, he was probably on the right side, over nearer to the thief on the right side, because Luke heard what the right side thief said, as a matter of fact he heard the whole entire conversation between the thieves from his vantage point.
Matt was over toward the left, and you can tell his account is from a memory that seemed more emotion and paranoid than Luke's account.
Matt is negative about everyone who was present, he is seeing the horror. And his account shows it.
Probably further left. You can tell in putting the pieces together, that Matt is describing his prespective. Visually seeing the two thieves screaming out words, and it all blends in as insults.
So he likely could hear some of the thief on the left's words, and seeing the thief on the right moving his mouth screaming, but he can't distinguish the words in the noise.
In his writing, his ears were focused on the loud insults, noise, and hate. He comes off disgusted.
He is writing like we would, if some injustice made us write what was done to our friend, listing them with a finger banging at each count.
Matt is still emotionally there in that moment in this writing.
He is running through that list like, on going inclusive, and that one, and that one, and over there them to!
Because Matt says about then, put in commotion, and weeping, and insulting noises and realize they are writing their perspective.
And its not going to be rehearsed or a perfect picture, like a scene in picture in a Cathedral. It was real life noise, and real life crowd, emotionally weeping and also a protesting mob.
Luke's accont shows details, he was close by, but not as close as John and Mary.
47 Now when the centurion saw what had happened, he began praising God, saying, “Certainly this man was innocent.”
48 And all the crowds who came together for this spectacle, when they observed what had happened, began to return, beating their breasts. 49 And all His acquaintances and the women who accompanied Him from Galilee were standing at a distance, seeing these things.
John has many details, he seems to be the most sensitive disciple, and also possibly more perceptive of everything around him. And probably very prophetic in his gifts, we all have gifts to use that are a part of us.
And again John talks most about oneness and love, and the others , martyred - John not - Which Jesus foretold. Peter and Paul were work horses, they taught in different style than John.
John was more of a teacher and prophet. And we know he was a Weezer more than the others. And no, he wasn't gay. He was just sweeter and more sensitive. Because in his letters he teaches against the lusts of the flesh, and he says things like if we are in Him we cannot sin, and be perfect as the Father is perfect.
Also John seems to be particularly mindful of fulfilment, so no doubt, these things were coming to his mind, as they were unfolding before his eyes!
He mentions several, attaching fulfillment of prophesy, with him as a witness! John seems to be the most detailed, makes sense sinse he was sitting with Mary Jesus' mother, so He didn't run and hide, he clearly had been in a front seat, likely right at the cross, as close as permitted.
He was close enough to hear what the others did not hear, "I am thirsty"
The people running getting vinegar on a sponge doesn't make sense, unless you were close enough to hear Jesus say I am thirsty!
So two accounts actually recorded Jesus calling out twice, once about Elijah, and a second time they didn't say what was said when He cried out.
But sequence of all 4 show this order.
He cries out, people around those 2 disciples say He is calling for Elijah - they visually see people running around with a drink of vinegar.
John hears - I am thirsty, makes sense since John is the only one close enough, and Jesus was talking to him about Mary, John doesn't mention the 1st cry out. He was close enough that he probably heard other things.
The others only recorded what He cried out, and they didn't quite hear it themselves, they said what others said He said. Why, because they could hear both cries .
One before vinegar and one after, but they were not close enough really to hear either word for word, that's why they are quoting the crowd around them
Here we have the same words also the statement, what the people around him said, so maybe they were standing close to each other in the crowd, since they heard the crowd say and do the same thing.
Also one the account says He called out loudly twice, once the phrase which was not His last words, because He cried out a second time, and that was His last words!
Now Matt and Mark tell of the rich guy Joseph who donated his tomb - Mark decided to add the fear Joseph had -
He got up enough courage. Matt doesn't discuss the courage or fear. Maybe Joseph the rich guy wasn't in a conversation with Matt. about trying to get up courage.
You have to realize, they all feared for their lives, yet 10 days later they were bold as lions! Why? What changed?
Mark is thought to have written for Peter. It would still be an eyewitness account.
10 days later they were bold as lions! Why? What changed?
Ever hear of Marshal Applewhite?
Jesus had a dozen disciples - this guy got more than 3 dozen people to put on sweat pants, armband patches reading "Heaven's Gate Away Team", some Nikes, and purple tablecloths and then commit suicide believing that they had to catch a UFO behind the Halle Bopp comet.
Does the craziness or the fervency of their belief make it true?
No, they could have heard Him cry out loudly from deeper in the crowd, maybe they weren't closer at that moment.
The words you are speaking of were likely spread out over an hour. His "final hour"
And there is more in the text also that prophetic.
So maybe where the two writers who wrote - He cried out loudly ... maybe they were a little far off, so only those specified words were recorded in their accounts on purpose!
Like take the hours, God has an appointed time for everything down to the hour!
He set all things appointed into our time line, then pronounced it all in prophesy..
The 6th hour, the 9th hour, and the final hour, these are all significant for more than even the crucifixion account. They actually tell more!
What the biblically illiterate fails to understand is the perfect depth of God's Word. In dead on, hands down, by every measure, accurate to the penny, detail of God's Word!
Even these phrases have a prophetic course!
Every utterance of God, every jot and tittle is prophecy, it's speaking what is, even what can't be see. It is!
So He cried out .... 9 th hour 6th hour final hour
Like a Trumpet - 6th hour Final hour - 6th Day - Day of man
6th generation from Cain- Lemach - total depravity
9th hour - 9th generation from Adam a different Lemach to compare! God gives side by side comparisons!
Noah 10th Gen from Adam Lemach, Noah's father - preceded judgement of the flood washing the earth, the dust, the flesh, judgement, the cross He took our flood of judgement, He is our Arc of The Covenant!
Flood baptized, cleansing flood!
9th hour before the cleansing of the flood, 6th hour - He put to death the curse of day 6 - Man.
6000 years day 6. This is our final hour!
Multidimensional is the Word. It is physical, instructional, prophetic. Is as intricate as our Universe, and He has woven Eternity into every word. We could never search the depths of God, or His Word.
And that is what is meant by an unintentional fitting of an event.
If we were both at a concert, and you were in the 8th row from the stage, and I was at the far right, You may get splashed with water, or catch a cd thrown out to the crowd.
Maybe I saw something thrown but said, the band threw something out to the crowd. But you say, they were throwing cds into the crowd, and water.
If we were both testifying this statement we both made would be unintentional confirmation.
Because it's a consistency of prespective actually proving the same event.
Gospels are eye witness accounts and actual biography.
Most historians confirm this.
Wrong right off the bat. And also guilty of what in debate circles is called Cherry Picking. Are you gonna be like this all the time? I hope not. If so you will prove to be so biased and/or deluded in your supertsitious beliefs so as to not merit my time.
Anyway....No..."most historians" do NOT confirm the gospels are eye witness accounts. My Lord...is it really possible that you cannot know that the vast majority of biblical scholar now agree that NONE OF THE GOSPEL WRITER KNEW JESUS?
Wow. Listen.....Mark was the first gospel written, but the bible compilers put Matt first, due to reasons we will not go into here. So, Mark, the earliest gospel, was not written till Jesus had been dead for a good 25 years.
Next we have Matt...written about 35 years after JC died.
Then comes Luke...not penned until a good 40 years had passed since JC was killed! And finally, John was not written until around 95-100 AD! Wow! Almost 75 years since Jesus' death. There is even dispute among bible scholars nowadays that those men were even the REAL authors! The gospels could have been written by scribes using their mentors' names.
For example, John's Gospel was certainly not the "beloved disciple John" from the days of JC's ministry. That John was long dead by 100 AD.
The question for the skeptic really lies in the belief of Resurection and other miracles.
But as a Biography, that isn't disputable by any reasonable argument.
Of course we doubt the Resurrection. Any sane and logical person doubts that three-days-dead Jewish carpenters can rise from the dead. There has never been a recorded instance of somebody doing this. And all of your kind have never in the 2000 years since JC provided us with one tiny shred of proof or even evidence of him rising from the dead. Except fo your tired and worn and silly, "It's true cuz my bible tells me so!"
And there also has been forensic analysis done that would make the 4 gospels written collaborating the detailed stories impossible.
What does this even mean? LOL. I don't understand whay you're claiming. Sounds like yo are saying forensic analysis has been done that proves it is impossible for the gospel stories to be true.
In that case, I agree!
Anyway, I read the book you linked by that Wallace dude. Did you read it? Be honest. Or did you just find the link. I doubt you did read it. You don't seem the type to want to research ANYthing. As in the "midrash" definition I asked you to look up.
So, yeah. I rewad his book and was totally undwerwhlemed. Nothing new was presented at all. It was just another Christian apologetic. With no real evidence: just a lot of speculation.
Wallace claims that if we don't take the Bible seriously on the account that it was written late and has errors, then we must throw out most ancient history accounts. This is completely fallacious.
But see? Historians do in fact treat the Bible like other histories. Huge swaths of "historical" narratives are thrown out by scholars because they contain miracle accounts, dubious accounts of battles and prodigies, and late additions by copyists. For this reason historians try to sort out what is and is not historical. This process is called textual criticism, and has been applied to our ancient texts to great effect.
For example, historians accept that Augustus Caesar existed, but not that he was the son of a god. Similarly, historians accept that Jesus existed (and they do), but not that he was the son of a god.
The treatment is exactly the same! The difference is that Wallace wants us to take the miracle accounts of the Bible seriously.
How would history look if we did this with the other books?
At any rate, Wallace asks that we that we throw away our suspicion of miracles and really consider the evidence for the Bible's miraculous accounts. I really do wonder if he applies the same logic to other miracles. Has he considered the evidence for the inspiration of Joseph Smith's golden plates, Muhammad's ride on the flying donkey, or the miracles performed daily by faith healers?
Your 1st point innaccurate: parts of disagreement are the miracles, as I said. But if evidence shows gospels historical, and Biblical intrusion by God is shown, and is historically accurate, and there is evidence of God designing our history ahead as written, then miracles are possible also, and likely probable, since pre-written history is also super natural, and some even basic prophesies show miracle input from Divinity, such as Joseph going from Slave to Honored above all others in Ancient Egypt. As seen by a tomb found that indicates likely to be Joseph.
.
The gospels have a high degree of authenticity compared to other artifacts and ancient writings.
And it being 25 years from when they were with Jesus?
Really?? So how many biographies do you know written in real time???
The historical reliability of the Gospels refers to the reliability and historic character of the four New Testament gospels as historical documents. Although some claim that all four canonical gospels meet the five criteria for historical reliability,others say that little in the gospels is considered to be historically reliable.
Almost all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts of Jesus, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate. Elements whose historical authenticity is disputed include the two accounts of the Nativity of Jesus, the miraculous events including the resurrection, and certain details about the crucifixion.
Slapshot - Wow. Listen.....Mark was the first gospel written, but the bible compilers put Matt first, due to reasons we will not go into here. So, Mark, the earliest gospel, was not written till Jesus had been dead for a good 25 years.
Next we have Matt...written about 35 years after JC died.
Then comes Luke...not penned until a good 40 years had passed since JC was killed! And finally, John was not written until around 95-100 AD! Wow! Almost 75 years since Jesus' death. There is even dispute among bible scholars nowadays that those men were even the REAL authors! The gospels could have been written by scribes using their mentors' names.
For example, John's Gospel was certainly not the "beloved disciple John" from the days of JC's ministry. That John was long dead by 100 AD.
WOW! 25 years from when they were with Jesus?
Really?? So how many biographies do you know written in real time???
Empty argument alert on Slapshot!
Here is a great scientist, apply the same thought please!
Today we do not know where Archimedes’ tomb is – it has been lost, probably for ever.
Much of his work has also been lost for ever, but what we know of it leaves us in awe of his achievements from so long ago.This book is also the unique source for Archimedes' treatise On Floating Bodies in the original Greek.
The Archimedes Palimpsest, as this book is called, has true claims to greatness: it is the earliest surviving Archimedes manuscript by about 400 years; it is the most important source for the diagrams that Archimedes drew in the sand in Syracuse, in the third century B.C.
.
It is by far the most important evidence we have for the greatness of Archimedes. And Archimedes was a very great man.
.
Paleography, or the study of ancient texts, can allow us to approximately date when manuscripts were written. The Archimedes manuscript was probably written in the second half of the tenth century. It was almost certainly written at Constantinople, for the simple reason that there is no other place that we know of where ancient mathematics was systematically studied and copied.
Constantinople was the one place with a continued tradition of copying and preserving ancient texts from antiquity through the Middle Ages.
All of Slappy's arguments are empty. Atheism is an empty belief system, they try to pretend they have joy and wonder in the beauty and complexity of nature....as if that makes them feel better when they watch a loved one suffer and die....assuming they actually love another human being, many of them love nobody but themselves.
What does this even mean? LOL. I don't understand whay you're claiming. Sounds like yo are saying forensic analysis has been done that proves it is impossible for the gospel stories to be true. In that case, I agree!
Anyway, I read the book you linked by that Wallace dude. Did you read it? Be honest. Or did you just find the link.
.
Obviously not, my wording leaves these items for open debate with me,the context is confirming historical factors only, let's establish that, then discuss miracles. My point is to get away from generalizations that occupy too much space I'm arguments of nonsense!
No I listened to several of his seminars though, they are on
Slapshot - Anyway....No..."most historians" do NOT confirm the gospels are eye witness accounts. My Lord...is it really possible that you cannot know that the vast majority of biblical scholar now agree that NONE OF THE GOSPEL WRITER KNEW JESUS?
Support your claims :
You say - Most historians say they are not eyewitness accounts
" the vast majority of biblical scholar now agree that NONE OF THE GOSPEL WRITER KNEW JESUS?:
It's also obvious to me that I have done far far more reading and research on biblical history from secular sources than have you. I am beginning to think you have never done any, as you do not wish to chance the facts getting in the way of your opinions.
As I said before: Slapman is the Christians' worst nightmare: an atheist who knows more about biblical and Christian history than they do.
My argument is that you were wrong in your OP when you claimed that JC's resurrection was indisputable and beyond doubt since it was written by eye witnesses. Rather, even your ONLY reference to this--your bible--has its accounts of the alleged Res. written by people who did not see it, and who never even met or knew JC.
The fact that other bios are sometimes written by folks who did not know the subject is moot. Why? Because, say, a bio on FDR has been written by hundreds if not thousands of people. So there is no doubt as to the facts in it, which are easily checkable. And no doubt of course to FDR's existence. And of course a bio on FDR or JFK does not have them performing magical or supernatural feats.
With JC, there is precious little written about him by ANY secular sources. And of the few mentions of him there ARE by seculars, NONE of them claim he was a god nor did miracles. Only that, I think in maybe one or two secular accounts, it is mentioned that "some of his followers claim he performed miracles."
IOW: outside of your bible, which is filled with preposterous claims of magic, there is scant if not NO evidence that JC was anything close to a god. Thus, when taken as a whole, it appears in all likelihood he was simply another of the dozens of zealous political insurrectionists of his time, who bristled at Roman Occupation.
You would do well to read Reza Aslan's book, "Zealot." It really captures the political and social climate of Jesus's time--first century Palestine--very well and accurately. For accuracy and objectivity it beats anything in the bible.
Slapshot - My argument is that you were wrong in your OP when you claimed that JC's resurrection was indisputable and beyond doubt since it was written by eye witnesses. Rather, even your ONLY reference to this--your bible--has its accounts of the alleged Res. written by people who did not see it, and who never even met or knew JC.
I never said His Resurection was indisputable. As a matter of fact you made fun of my wording about it. So you know I said that it was disputable for lack of hard evidence, and I provided .
I said "Beyond Reasonable Doubt" And my argument outside the miracles which are supernatural, was on historical reliability.
Then I offered 10 reasons why the Resurection happened beyond a "Reasonable Doubt" and I offered that to you as evidence for you to weigh or discuss if you like.
Slappy believes every imaginable scenario is more likely than the resurrection.....I really don't think he believes any of the garbage he presents as he puts up so many sources that contradict each other while each individually tries to deny the deity and resurrection of Christ. He's into the pleasures of sin and loves it more than life.....in the last days there shall come scoffers, walking after their own lusts. He knows that if he believes on Jesus he will have to turn against the sins which bring him pleasures and he knows it will cause problems in his education, career goals, and close personal sinful relationships. He'll argue science, history, whatever......Paul reasoned with unbelievers regarding righteousness, judgement, and mercy. It's the wisdom of God Slappy quiets down a bit for....You can hone your arguments with Slappy, but you wont' persuade him by science or history........I enjoyed trying, it's fun to strengthen your ability to answer truth against lies.
Slapshot - The fact that other bios are sometimes written by folks who did not know the subject is moot. Why? Because, say, a bio on FDR has been written by hundreds if not thousands of people. So there is no doubt as to the facts in it, which are easily checkable. And no doubt of course to FDR's existence. And of course a bio on FDR or JFK does not have them performing magical or supernatural feats.
With JC, there is precious little written about him by ANY secular sources. And of the few mentions of him there ARE by seculars, NONE of them claim he was a god nor did miracles. Only that, I think in maybe one or two secular accounts, it is mentioned that "some of his followers claim he performed miracles."
IOW: outside of your bible, which is filled with preposterous claims of magic, there is scant if not NO evidence that JC was anything close to a god. Thus, when taken as a whole, it appears in all likelihood he was simply another of the dozens of zealous political insurrectionists of his time, who bristled at Roman Occupation.
They have been historically confirmed the way anything historical has been confirmed!
What makes it all the more confirmed is the outside sources!
And you mentioned there is no outside sources regarding Jesus performing miracles, then an even greater challenge would be there are no writings saying the claim of miracles to be fraudulent. With the objection, I would think writings stating how not to fall for these lies would be an even greater expectation.
After all, the are documented by 4 Gospel writers, and in acts and letters.
And Catholocism and Constantine, even though he converted he established Catholocism and killed Christians who resisted Catholicism and beginning Catholocism burned their Bibles and writings, Catholocism wanted to control the populous so only the the Catholic Church had the written Word, hence the Dark Ages. The one sect remained true to the faith, and the Word was a black market item punishable by prison or death.
So the proof actually is there are NO writings rebutting claims of miracles. There are None rebutting Jesus' miracles, nor the early Christian miracles. Which should be more so in excess from all the opposition from Jews, Romans, and Greeks! They had even more reason to write against claims, then the Christians who already had much documentation of the miracles and Words of Jesus in all the writings we did and do already have as Christians!
So thanks, FYI that's now my 11th reason for evidence "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt!"
Also there are other sources. Such as the Darkening from the 6th hour to the 9th. And it was documented to not be a coincidental eclipse.
We have a documentation stating it, and astronomers confirm there was no eclipse that day. So as the Roman Soldiers said, "Surely He was the Son of God" and if that's the case then of course the Resurection is a God thing to do!
You don't know what you think you know. The gospels are eyewitness accounts. My Bible says the first book of the New Testament is The Gospel According to Matthew. I don't see anywhere it says "written by Matthew". So what? You imply it is not reliable. If I told somebody a lot of the things you said, it would be the words of Slappy according to Saint Now, and it would be a reliable and accurate account because that's the kind of person I am.
The same with The Gospel According to Mark.
Luke begins his gospel with an elaborate and personalized declaration that he is writing it himself and addressing it to "Theophilus" which may or may not have been one specific person since the name means "Friend of God". There is no reason to believe the book was written by anybody other than Luke. If you want to believe it is all lies, fabrications, go ahead. You will believe pretty much anything, that's obvious by all the stuff you present as possibilities which you decide are believable when they are easily debunked.
I do believe John himself penned The Gospel According to John since John was the only apostle to die of natural causes in his old age. It was not easy for Christians to compose and pass along writings when writing materials were not easy to get and Christians were being used as human torches and thrown to the lions.
You read all kinds of garbage from secular sources, written by people like you who think that if they can prove God does not rule over life and death, they can excuse themselves for their lusts and evil deeds. You eat that stuff up like a child eating candy. You need to start reading the facts which prove that the stuff you present is fabrications and lies from Hell designed to make merchandise of people whose lives are full of vices.
That website is more conjecture than the author implies the Bible is conjecture.........the guy is ten times more full of conjecture than his accusations of the Bible being conjecture.
The Bible was not written for atheists. Haters MUST try to discredit it because they know they are on their way to Hell if it is true, and it is true. Sorry Slappy.
Slapshot "of course we doubt the Resurrection. Any sane and logical person doubts that three-days-dead Jewish carpenters can rise from the dead. There has never been a recorded instance of somebody doing this. And all of your kind have never in the 2000 years since JC provided us with one tiny shred of proof or even evidence of him rising from the dead. Except fo your tired and worn and silly, "It's true cuz my bible tells me so!"
Evidence when viewed goes beyond reasonable doubt!
Here is some evidence that supports an affirmative verdict regarding many Biblical facts, including the Resurection:
1 - The Prophetic Words, and the Biblical Directions of Prophesy, and the Plan, the ultimate bottom line action and goals of Biblical content and Prophesy.
2 - Because Biblical History is credible it is a source in support of evidence.
3 - Because Biblical Prophesy is credible in its fulfillments it is an even greater source in support of evidence, especially since prophesy is layered, with many separate prophesies having to also come true for one to come true! - Even greater than knitting cells together in evolution!
4 - Because eye witness testimony, even outside of the Bible, other documents, Greek and Roman secular offer details confirming the dynamics of Christianity and Persecutions and Martyrdom.
5 - The accounts are not contradictions, (as though any were lying) the various times and places of writings actually are a confirmation of reliability, people who lie have fuzzy memories in a week, even with practice and easy communications of our day, lies unravel because even the untrained eye can pick out lies, but that's not the case with the four gospels, they confirm accidentally each other's facts, that show true eyewitness independent works, with different perspectives of the same exact event, as you know since you "read the book" the private investigated discusses this.
6 - The degree of insistence on the testimonies of Christians, and it's growth beyond their group, location, and generation. In comparison Muslims were militant from the start, attracting like violent individuals. It would not have the same magnet effect as peaceful Christians fed to lions. One would excell in dominance, like cell selection, the other would be eliminated as passive cells are dominated.
7 - The Prophetic Words spoken of concerning the rejection by its "mother religion" and the Prophetic Words stating as Messiah would be rejected, All Nations would hear an exclusive religion, rejected by its originator and accepted world wide!
8 - 300 prophesies fulfilled in just the one person Jesus
9 - Martyrdom, the ferverency and dedication, they most all went courageously against horrible opposition, and most ultimately died for it. And not in a group drinking poison like Jim Jones, Christians often died or were imprisoned alone and often died gruesome deaths
10 - Paul a Jew of Jews, happily killing Christians saw what must have been a hologram! Jesus the Risen Lord knocked him off a horse and blinded him, then sent him to talk to his disciples.
Picture this, Saul/Paul had just led a crowd in Stephen's stoning, Saul was unmoved by it, it was something he was gladly a part of. All the Christians knew of Saul, and he scared of them, they feared for their lives.
Jesus knocks Saul off of a horse, and disarms him by making him temporarily blind. Probably so the Christians wouldn't fear him when he pulled up on his horse. Jesus made him disabled in killing them, so he couldn't harm them.
Jesus sends Saul to get disciples that just saw him murder their friend and brother, Stephen! Now he is there to be saved, healed and filled with the Spirit.
Paul goes on to lead the way like a work horse bringing the message of Jesus the Risen Christ to the Gentiles. Saul Jew of Jews - takes on a new name, born again, and brought the gospel out to the Gentiles.
So these are 10 pieces of evidence I have and consider as evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt"
Slapshot "You don't seem the type to want to research ANYthing. As in the "midrash" definition I asked you to look up."
This is an empty accusation.
Slapshot "as in the "midrash" definition I asked you to look up.
I already answered this! It is not a change to original Biblical text, it's a method of interpreting and applying to modern day.
So why is this big word of yours at all relevant to Bible history and Prophesy?
So Catholics interpret it in their way, and the Baptist do their way. And people who explain the Bible away and then have little truth left, these would not be people or religion that I would credit any merit to.
There are Jewish people and Christians alike who spiritualize the stories and its just a nice story, that's not true faith, so why is it relevant to me or my discussion?
Re: Midrash - is commonly defined as the process of interpretation by which the rabbis filled in "gaps" found in the Torah. It is a literature that seeks to ask the questions that lie on the tips of our tongues, and to answer them even before we have posed them.
Midrash responds to contemporary problems and crafts new stories, making connections between new Jewish realities and the unchanging biblical textHere are a few ways to add to your big word.
The word "hermeneutics" refers to the art and science of interpreting written texts. Within Christianity, the term generally refers to methods of interpreting the Bible
The most consistent use of the method of Bible study known as the Historical - Grammatical - Lexical Method called the Contextual/Textual method began in Antioch, Syria, in the third century AD in reaction to the Allegorical Method, which had developed several hundred years earlier in Alexandria, Egypt.
The rabbis’ interpretation is characterized by a focus on “how to,” especially in relation to the Law of Moses.
Philo, although using some of the same idiosyncrasies of grammar and spelling, found hidden meanings in the text as it related to Platonism.
I think God uses many of these, but the Spirit is the Bible Interpreter not man, As told in Old and New Testament!
Wallace claims that if we don't take the Bible seriously on the account that it was written late and has errors, then we must throw out most ancient history accounts. This is completely fallacious.
Here are biographies of great scientist.
The text of the Gospels is much more documented in accuracy.
The Bible people were documenting more than any group of people. The Jews had specific people that's all they did.
And to confirm accuracy they would have checkers.
Making sure every letter was in the same place on the page.
But other widely accepted historical documents can be 1000 years from the originator, without a question, but the Bible, they don't want that proven. It's pretty ridiculous.
Like this famous scientist as example -
Today we do not know where Archimedes’ tomb is – it has been lost, probably for ever.
Much of his work has also been lost for ever, but what we know of it leaves us in awe of his achievements from so long ago.
This book is also the unique source for Archimedes' treatise On Floating Bodies in the original Greek.
The Archimedes Palimpsest, as this book is called, has true claims to greatness: it is the earliest surviving Archimedes manuscript by about 400 years; it is the most important source for the diagrams that Archimedes drew in the sand in Syracuse, in the third century B.C.
.
It is by far the most important evidence we have for the greatness of Archimedes. And Archimedes was a very great man.
.
Paleography, or the study of ancient texts, can allow us to approximately date when manuscripts were written.
(^ Except Biblical, because miracles exist, they dismiss it and it's history, are historians now in kindergarten ? Do they dismiss this and that science theory because they don't understand it?Of course not, it's selective by atheists, and that is deplorable!^)
The Archimedes manuscript was probably written in the second half of the tenth century.
It was almost certainly written at Constantinople, for the simple reason that there is no other place that we know of where ancient mathematics was systematically studied and copied.
Constantinople was the one place with a continued tradition of copying and preserving ancient texts from antiquity through the Middle Ages.
Double standard, you guys hate facts you know you will never be able to explain by science, even as basic as Prophesy as seen in The Bible as pre-written history.
Slapshot - Historians do in fact treat the Bible like other histories. Huge swaths of "historical" narratives are thrown out by scholars because they contain miracle accounts, dubious accounts of battles and prodigies, and late additions by copyists.
Its not thrown out by historians! The contrary its accepted by MOST historians, but thrown out by atheists!
There is a skepticism climate in these fields to begin with, and in it there are many passionate atheists.
These individuals make the fields of study a climate that is extremely difficult to present archeological finds as seen in "Patterns of Evidence."
Exodus time frame is presented in the wrong time period, and has been inaccurate, with atheists gladly trumpeting their failed incompetancies, boasting in failures, they gladly stand by their inaccuracies!
Now every find was made in the digs in the correct time period, and corrected locations, they were not finding anything because Israel moved out of Egypt about 200 years earlier! And not Pharoah Rameses! But no they don't want to fix that,
Where is the integrity of the field, why aren't they happy and excited about the findings, shouldn't they be jumping up and down and making adjustments fitting the puzzle together?
Because it authenticates the Bible as the most reliable source of ancient history! And oh no, we can't have that now, can we?!?!?
I think there is a difference between Christianity and other religions, in that
persecution was prophesied, and so also was the growth of Christianity. They were both prophesied by Jesus on several occasions, and they both came true in tandem.
2 The 4 Gospels are detailed individually written accounts that do not show any discrepancies that would indicate collusion .
by historians, and other investigative studies.
3 There are other documents confirm the texts. Some are hostile sources. But we can see the dynamics of the time period
.
Hostile Non-Biblical Pagan Accounts
There are a number of ancient classical accounts of Jesus from pagan, non-Christian sources. These accounts are generally hostile to Christianity; some ancient authors denied the miraculous nature of Jesus and the events surrounding His life:
.
Thallus (52AD)
Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus and he is so ancient his writings don’t even exist anymore. But Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD does quote Thallus who previously tried to explain away the darkness occurring at Jesus’ crucifixion:
.
“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.” (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)
.
If only more of Thallus’ record could be found, we might find more confirmation of Jesus’ crucifixion. But there are some things we can conclude from this account: Jesus lived, He was crucified, and there was an earthquake and darkness at the point of His crucifixion.
.
Tacitus (56-120AD)
Cornelius Tacitus was known for his analysis and examination of historical documents and is among the most trusted of ancient historians. He was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and was also proconsul of Asia. In his “Annals’ of 116AD, he describes Emperor Nero’s response to the great fire in Rome and Nero’s claim that the Christians were to blame:
.
“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”
.
In this account, Tacitus confirms several historical elements of the Biblical narrative: Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Christ.
.
Mara Bar-Serapion (70AD)
Sometime after 70AD, a Syrian philosopher named Mara Bar-Serapion, writing to encourage his son, compared the life and persecution of Jesus with that of other philosophers who were persecuted for their ideas. The fact Jesus is known to be a real person with this kind of influence is important. Mara Bar-Serapion refers to Jesus as the “Wise King”:
.
“What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?…After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men…The wise king…Lived on in the teachings he enacted.”
.
From this account, we can add to our understanding of Jesus: He was a wise and influential man who died for His beliefs. The Jewish leadership was somehow responsible for Jesus’ death. Jesus’ followers adopted His beliefs and lived their lives accordingly.
.
Phlegon (80-140AD)
In a manner similar to Thallus, Julius Africanus also mentions a historian named Phlegon who wrote a chronicle of history around 140AD. In this history, Phlegon also mentions the darkness surrounding the crucifixion in an effort to explain it:
.
“Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth to the ninth hour.” (Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)
Phlegon is also mentioned by Origen (an early church theologian and scholar, born in Alexandria):
“Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events . . . but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 14)
.
“And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place … ” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 33)
.
“Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59)
.
From these accounts, we can add something to our understanding: Jesus had the ability to accurately predict the future, was crucified under the reign of Tiberius Caesar and demonstrated His wounds after he was resurrected.
.
Pliny the Younger (61-113AD)
Early Christians were also described in early, non-Christian history. Pliny the Younger, in a letter to the Roman emperor Trajan, describes the lifestyles of early Christians:
.
“They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food—but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.”
.
This early description of the first Christians documents several facts: the first Christians believed Jesus was GOD, the first Christians upheld a high moral code, and these early followers met regularly to worship Jesus.
.
Suetonius (69-140AD)
Suetonius was a Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. His writings about Christians describe their treatment under the Emperor Claudius (41-54AD):
.
“Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome).” (Life of Claudius, 25:4)
.
This expulsion took place in 49AD, and in another work, Suetonius wrote about the fire which destroyed Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians for this fire and he punished Christians severely as a result:
.
“Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief.” (Lives of the Caesars, 26.2)
.
There is much we can learn from Suetonius as it is related to the life of early Christians. From this account, we know Jesus had an immediate impact on His followers: They were committed to their belief Jesus was God and withstood the torment and punishment of the Roman Empire. Jesus had a curious and immediate impact on His followers, empowering them to die courageously for what they knew to be true.
.
Lucian of Samosata: (115-200 A.D.)
Lucian was a Greek satirist who spoke sarcastically of Christ and Christians, but in the process, he did affirm they were real people and never referred to them as fictional characters:
.
“The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account….You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property.” (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine. 11-13)
.
From this account we can add to our description of Jesus: He taught about repentance and about the family of God. These teachings were quickly adopted by Jesus’ followers and exhibited to the world around them.
.
Celsus (175AD)
This is the last hostile, non-Christian account we will examine (although there are many other later accounts in history). Celsus was quite antagonistic to the claims of the Gospels, but in his criticism he unknowingly affirmed and reinforced the Biblical authors and their content. His writing is extensive and he alludes to 80 different Biblical quotes, confirming their early appearance in history. In addition, he admits the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the early 2nd century:
.
“Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.”
.
Celsus admits Jesus was reportedly born of a virgin, but then argues this could supernatural account could not be possible and offers the idea Jesus was the illegitimate son of a man named Panthera (an idea borrowed from Jews who opposed Jesus at the time). But in writing this account, Celsus does confirm several important claims: Jesus had an earthly father who was a carpenter, possessed unusual magical powers and claimed to be God.
.
Hostile Non-Biblical Jewish Accounts
In addition to classical pagan sources chronicling the life of Jesus and His followers, there are also a number of ancient hostile Jewish sources describing Jesus. These are written by Jewish theologians, historians and leaders who were definitely not sympathetic to the Christian cause. Their writings are often very harsh, critical and even demeaning to Jesus. But there is still much these writings confirm:
.
Josephus (37-101AD)
In more detail than any other non-biblical historian, Josephus writes about Jesus in his “the Antiquities of the Jews” in 93AD. Josephus was born just four years after the crucifixion. He was a consultant for Jewish rabbis at an early age, became a Galilean military commander by the age of sixteen, and he was an eyewitness to much of what he recorded in the first century A.D. Under the rule of Roman emperor Vespasian, Josephus was allowed to write a history of the Jews. This history includes three passages about Christians, one in which he describes the death of John the Baptist, one in which he mentions the execution of James (and describes him as the brother of Jesus the Christ), and a final passage which describes Jesus as a wise man and the messiah. There is much legitimate controversy about the writing of Josephus, because the first discoveries of his writings are late enough to have been re-written by Christians who were accused of making additions to the text. So to be fair, we’ll examine a scholarly reconstruction stripped of Christian embellishment:
.
“Now around this time lived Jesus, a wise man. For he was a worker of amazing deeds and was a teacher of people who gladly accept the truth. He won over both many Jews and many Greeks. Pilate, when he heard him accused by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, (but) those who had first loved him did not cease (doing so). To this day the tribe of Christians named after him has not disappeared” (This neutral reconstruction follows closely the one proposed by John Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus: The Roots of the Problem and the Person).
.
Now there are many other ancient versions of Josephus’ writing which are even more explicit about the nature of Jesus’ miracles, life and his status as the Christ, but let’s take this conservative version and see what we can learn. From this text, we can conclude: Jesus lived in Palestine, was a wise man and a teacher, worked amazing deeds, was accused by the Jews, crucified under Pilate and had followers called Christians.
.
Jewish Talmud (400-700AD)
While the earliest Talmudic writings of Jewish Rabbis appear in the 5th century, the tradition of these Rabbinic authors indicates they are faithfully transmitting teachings from the early “Tannaitic” period of the 1st Century BC to the 2nd Century AD. Scholars believe there are a number of Talmudic writings referring to Jesus, and many of these writings are said to use code words to describe Jesus (such as “Balaam” or “Ben Stada” or “a certain one”). But for our purposes we’ll be very conservative and limit our examination to the passages referring to Jesus in a more direct way:
.
“Jesus practiced magic and led Israel astray” (b. Sanhedrin 43a; cf. t. Shabbat 11.15; b. Shabbat 104b)
.
“Rabbi Hisda (d. 309) said that Rabbi Jeremiah bar Abba said, ‘What is that which is written, ‘No evil will befall you, nor shall any plague come near your house’? (Psalm 91:10)… ‘No evil will befall you’ (means) that evil dreams and evil thoughts will not tempt you; ‘nor shall any plague come near your house’ (means) that you will not have a son or a disciple who burns his food like Jesus of Nazareth.” (b. Sanhedrin 103a; cf. b. Berakhot 17b)
.
“Our rabbis have taught that Jesus had five disciples: Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah. They brought Matthai to (to trial). He said, ‘Must Matthai be killed? For it is written, ‘When (mathai) shall I come and appear before God?’” (Psalm 92:2) They said to him, “Yes Matthai must be killed, for it is written, ‘When (mathai) he dies his name will perish’” (Psalm 41:5). They brought Nakai. He said to them, “Must Nakai be killed? For it is written, “The innocent (naqi) and the righteous will not slay’” (Exodus 23:7). They said to him, “Yes, Nakai must be kille, for it is written, ‘In secret places he slays the innocent (naqi)’” (Psalm 10:8). (b. Sanhedrin 43a; the passage continues in a similar way for Nezer, Buni and Todah)
.
And this, perhaps the most famous of Talmudic passages about Jesus:
.
“It was taught: On the day before the Passover they hanged Jesus. A herald went before him for forty days (proclaiming), “He will be stoned, because he practiced magic and enticed Israel to go astray. Let anyone who knows anything in his favor come forward and plead for him.” But nothing was found in his favor, and they hanged him on the day before the Passover. (b. Sanhedrin 43a)
.
From just these passages mentioning Jesus by name, we can conclude the following: Jesus had magical powers, led the Jews away from their beliefs, had disciples who were martyred for their faith (one of whom was named Matthai), and was executed on the day before the Passover.
.
The Toledot Yeshu (1000AD)
The Toledot Yeshu is a medieval Jewish retelling of the life of Jesus. It is completely anti-Christian, to be sure. There are many versions of these ‘retellings’, and as part of the transmitted oral and written tradition of the Jews, we can presume their original place in antiquity, dating back to the time of Jesus’ first appearance as an influential leader who was drawing Jews away from their faith in the Law. The Toledot Yeshu contains a determined effort to explain away the miracles of Jesus and to deny the virgin birth. In some places, the text is quite vicious, but it does confirm many elements of the New Testament writings. Let’s take a look at a portion of the text (Jesus is called ‘Yehoshua’):
Do you really think anyone is going to devote as much time into reading these book-length posts as you do assembling them? I think not unfortunately...
historians do not accept that Jesus was the Son of God.............hahahahahha......
Some of them do, Slappy, most of them do not. My history professor believed Jesus is God the Son, I think he counts as a historian.......Western Civ and such.
Bad news for you, if you want to die as an anti-Christ. The story is true, Jesus is God and He is risen from the dead and coming back. You will see Him if you are on earth when He returns, you will be pulled up from Hell to appear before Him in judgement for your words, thoughts and actions if you do not see Him before your time in this ungodly world is over.
You really don't use your noggin very well. If Jesus were not risen from the dead, why in the world would so many Christians refuse to bow to Caesar as a god and refuse to renounce their testimony of either seeing Him themselves alive after the Roman Guards failed in their duty and could not keep the tomb sealed? Why would they refuse to bow to Caesar when it would have kept them from being burned alive or thrown to the lions? He was seen of over five hundred eyewitness at one time, He ate with His disciples, He invited Thomas to put his finger in the nail prints and thrust his hand into the spear hole in the side of His chest........it was because they knew that He was alive that they gave their lives to spread the good news, the gospel, and "historians" who did not believe on Him wrote of the complaints of ungodly rulers saying Christians "turned the world upside down".
So you reject the good news because you think sinful indulgences are better than living. Whoopity doo. The story is true, it has been handed down through the centuries at the cost of the blood of holy martyrs who committed no offense other than to stand firm in confidence of the power of God in Jesus Christ to raise the dead......any coward can be a hater and pretend to be strong....too bad they can't conquer death like Jesus did.
Please scientifically explain this record. Or was it just a coincidence that this was a record of the day Jesus died on the cross? The record is not Christian or religious, it is secular.
.
Thallus (52AD)
Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus and he is so ancient his writings don’t even exist anymore. But Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD does quote Thallus who previously tried to explain away the darkness occurring at Jesus’ crucifixion:
.
“On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.” (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)
.
If only more of Thallus’ record could be found, we might find more confirmation of Jesus’ crucifixion. But there are some things we can conclude from this account: Jesus lived, He was crucified, and there was an earthquake and darkness at the point of His crucifixion.
Mark 15
27 They *crucified two robbers with Him, one on His right and one on His left. 28 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “And He was numbered with transgressors.”
29 Those passing by were hurling abuse at Him, wagging their heads, and saying, “Ha! You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, 30 save Yourself, and come down from the cross!”
31 In the same way the chief priests also, along with the scribes, were mocking Him among themselves and saying, “He saved others; He cannot save Himself. 32 Let this Christ, the King of Israel, now come down from the cross, so that we may see and believe!” Those who were crucified with Him were also insulting Him.
33 When the sixth hour came, darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour. 34 At the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” which is translated, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”
35 When some of the bystanders heard it, they began saying, “Behold, He is calling for Elijah.” 36 Someone ran and filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on a reed, and gave Him a drink, saying, “Let us see whether Elijah will come to take Him down.”
37 And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed His last. 38 And the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. 39 When the centurion, who was standing right in front of Him, saw the way He breathed His last, he said, “Truly this man was the Son of God!”
Below the bold section are prophesies I'd like you to skim, I hope you will pull out some of them to discuss, to answer my questions.
Can you tell me about these prophesies, and why you think that these specific prophesies are not applicable to the events we connect them to, and why you feel they are off, or vague, or not applicable.
And if they are not off, why them isn't it impressive to you, please be specific not generalizations?
And if it's not impressive can you show me the common occurrences or support as to why they ar not impressive to you?
Such prophesies must be common if they are not impressive.
Can you show me some, and tell me why or what makes them equal?
.
The Persecution of the Jews
The return of the Jews to the Holy Land largely began and continues due to persecution in the nations they have lived under exile:
Ezekiel 11:16-17 - Therefore say, 'Thus says the Lord GOD: "Although I have cast them far off among the Gentiles, and although I have scattered them among the countries, yet I shall be a little sanctuary for them in the countries where they have gone."' Therefore say, 'Thus says the Lord GOD: "I will gather you from the peoples, assemble you from the countries where you have been scattered, and I will give you the land of Israel."'
Ezekiel 34:27-30 - "...They shall be safe in their land; and they shall know that I am the LORD, when I have broken the bands
of their yoke and delivered them from the hand of those who enslaved them. And they shall no longer be a prey for the nations, nor shall beasts of the land devour them; but they shall dwell safely, and no one shall make them afraid. I will raise up for them a garden of renown, and they shall no longer be consumed with hunger in the land, nor bear the shame of the Gentiles anymore. Thus they shall know that I, the LORD their God, am with them, and they, the house of Israel, are My people," says the Lord GOD.
Region called "Palestine
Israel and Transjordan
After Great Britain conquered Palestine during World War I,
there were steps made towards pledging support for a Jewish state. However, it wasn't until after the Holocaust (a Jewish "calamity" that many Islamic/Arab groups supported and in some cases perpetuated), and World War II, that there was enough sympathetic support in the world to actually bring about an Israeli state. The British Mandate of Palestine was a proposal for two nations, side-by-side: an Arab nation - Trans-Jordan,
and a Jewish nation - Israel.
The Palestinians and War
UN Partition Plan
Picture source: Wikipedia
Due to conflict with the Arabs, Great Britain handed the issue over to the United Nations, who further partitioned the land, as shown on the map to the left. All of the Arab leaders voted against it.
After Israel declared their independence, the "ancient hatred" of the Arab nations turned into a war to try to prevent the Jewish nation from coming to fruition, so they could take both nations for themselves. Ironically, these same Arab groups are pushing for a similar partition plan to divide Israel today that they initially rejected.
Israel won their war of independence because God was there with them. However, the Bible is clear that future judgment is coming to these Arab nations because of their "ancient hatred" against Israel, their participation against them in the "calamity" (Babylonian conquest, Roman conquest and/or the Holocaust?), and they want the "two nations," Israel and Trans-Jordan for themselves:
Ezekiel 35:5 - "Because you have had an ancient hatred, and have shed the blood of the children of Israel by the power of the sword at the time of their calamity, when their iniquity came to an end."
Ezekiel 35:10-11 - "Because you have said, 'These two nations and these two countries shall be mine, and we will possess them,' although the LORD was there, therefore, as I live," says
the Lord GOD, "I will do according to your anger and according to the envy which you showed in your hatred against them;
and I will make Myself known among them when I judge you."
God also said that He would bless the land that was desolate when His people return from exile. I have seen with my own eyes that the desert in Israel is blooming!
Ezekiel 36:8-11 - But you, O mountains of Israel, you shall shoot forth your branches and yield your fruit to My people Israel, for they are about to come. For indeed I am for you, and I will turn to you, and you shall be tilled and sown. I will multiply men upon you, all the house of Israel, all of it; and the cities shall be inhabited and the ruins rebuilt. I will multiply upon you man and beast; and they shall increase and bear young; I will make you inhabited as in former times, and do better for you than at your beginnings. Then you shall know that I am the LORD.
Ancient Land of Edom
Ironically, it was the improvement in the land after the Jews began their return from exile in the 19th century that drew in the Arab people from the surrounding regions. There is evidence that many of these Arabs are descendants of the ancient Edomites, known later in history as the Idumaeans.
During Israel's War of Independence, over 700,000 Arabs who resided in Israel fled. After the war was over, the surrounding Arab countries refused to absorb these refugees into their countries. Instead, the countries of Jordan and Egypt annexed the Gaza Strip and West Bank through negotiations, and forced the Palestinian refugees to live there.
.
Israel's War of Independence 1948
These refugees in Israel are known as Palestinians. The passage below in Obadiah accurately describes how the surrounding countries have forced the Palestinian people to live as refugees near the borders of Israel.
These countries have, in effect, been using the Palestinians as pawns to try to divide and destroy Israel, refusing to absorb them into their own countries after Israel won their war of Independence in 1948.
The wording about deception and laying a trap supports the notion that the "tents of Edom" are pawns, or bait in a trap being set for Israel:
.
Obadiah 1:6-7 - Oh, how Esau shall be searched out! How his hidden treasures shall be sought after! All the men in your confederacy shall force you to the border; the men at peace
with you shall deceive you and prevail against you. Those who eat your bread shall lay a trap for you. No one is aware of it.
Most of the Arab people who live in and around Israel are Muslim. The Jewish state's existence is a direct threat to their religion and belief in the Koran, which is why they deny Israel's sovereignty. Muslims believe that the Jews lost their right to the land because of their disobedience.
The Koran teaches that Muslims have to recover land that non-Muslims took from them (source). Therefore, they believe Israel has no right to the Holy Land anymore and that it is Allah's will to take it back.
Islam also teaches Muslims to kill Jews and Christians because they are infidels (source).Instead of disbelieving in Islam, they reject Israel being a nation and seek annihilation of the Jews. In doing so, they blaspheme the truth of God's Word:
.
Ezekiel 35:12-13 - "...I have heard all your blasphemies which you have spoken against the mountains of Israel, saying, 'They are desolate; they are given to us to consume.' Thus with your mouth you have boasted against Me and multiplied your words against Me; I have heard them."
Ezekiel prophesied that God would take the "ancient heights" from Israel's enemies and give it back to them after their return from exile. These "ancient heights" are the Golan Heights and the mountains in the West Bank:
.
Ezekiel 36:1-5 - "And you, son of man, prophesy to the mountains of Israel, and say, 'O mountains of Israel, hear the word of the LORD! Thus says the Lord GOD: "Because the enemy has said of you, 'Aha! The ancient heights have become our possession,'"' therefore prophesy, and say, 'Thus says the Lord GOD: "Because they made you desolate and swallowed you up on every side, so that you became the possession of the rest of the nations, and you are taken up by the lips of talkers and slandered by the people"- therefore, O mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord GOD!
Thus says the Lord GOD to the mountains, the hills, the rivers, the valleys, the desolate wastes, and the cities that have been forsaken, which became plunder and mockery to the rest of the nations all around - therefore thus says the Lord GOD: "Surely I have spoken in My burning jealousy against the rest of the nations and against all Edom, who gave My land to themselves as a possession, with wholehearted joy and spiteful minds, in order to plunder its open country."'
.
Ezekiel 36:6-7,12 - "Therefore prophesy concerning the land of Israel, and say to the mountains, the hills, the rivers, and the valleys, 'Thus says the Lord GOD: "Behold, I have spoken in My jealousy and My fury, because you have borne the shame of the nations." Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: "I have raised My hand in an oath that surely the nations that are around you shall bear their own shame.... My people Israel; they shall take possession of you, and you shall be their inheritance; no more shall you bereave them of children."
Ezekiel's prophecy found fulfillment in the Six-Day-War in 1967, when Israel took back the Golan Heights and the West Bank:
Territory Won by Israel after
Six-Day War 1967
Territory Won by Israel after Six-Day War 1967
Since the Jews began returning to the land, there has been constant struggle in the Middle East in the form of wars and terrorism. The Islamic world wants to destroy Israel, while the rest of the world wants to bring peace to the region by dividing Israel and Jerusalem. What the world fails to realize is that Islamic ideology will never allow for a peace agreement to last.
Islam's "culture of death," in the form of raising suicide bombers who believe they are doing the will of Allah, make a difficult situation impossible. The reason the United States became involved in the struggle against Islamic fundamentalists is simply because it is an impediment to their destruction of Israel.
As prophesied in the Bible, this region will continue in turmoil until the Messiah returns:
Zechariah 12:2-3 - Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.
3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.
Those who try to divide the land appear as peacemakers. However, they are acting in opposition to God's will, so destruction will come on those who try: And Terrorism - a cup of Trembling to those who lift Israel, pretty wild fulfilment the way I see it!
Ezekiel 36:5-7, 12 - Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: "Surely I have spoken in My burning jealousy against the rest of the nations and against all Edom, who gave My land to themselves as a possession, with wholehearted joy and spiteful minds, in order to plunder its open country."' "Therefore prophesy concerning the land of Israel, and say to the mountains, the hills, the rivers, and the valleys, 'Thus says the Lord GOD: "Behold, I have spoken in My jealousy and My fury, because you have borne the shame of the nations." Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: "I have raised My hand in an oath that surely the nations that are around you shall bear their own shame.... My people Israel; they shall take possession of you, and you shall be their inheritance; no more shall you bereave them of children."
1 Thessalonians 5:3 - For when they say, "Peace and safety!", then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape.
The world insists that the answer is to divide tiny Israel, but the Lord says it belongs to Israel. The Arabs want to take all of Israel. But has the Lord been unfair to the Arabs?
Israel and the Arab Countries
Unfulfilled prophecies litter the Old Testament prophets that pronounce future judgment on Israel's immediate neighbors. Judgment is coming in the form of two wars against Israel's neighbors bent on their destruction, who occupy a large area of the land promised to Israel by God.
In the first war, the Palestinian refugees, who are the "tents of Edom" (Psalm 83:6), will form a confederacy with Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria against Israel.
The devastation described on both sides, including the complete destruction of Damascus (Isaiah 17), leads to the conclusion that the threat to Israel's existence is such, that they will have no choice but unleash what they call the "Samson Option," taking down their enemies with massive retaliation in the form of nuclear warfare.
The following scriptures describe this "Great Middle East War":
Before looking at the second war, note that there are two of Israel's neighbors who are not listed as aggressors in either war: Iraq and Egypt.
While it is true that the Assyrians ruled over Babylon before the Babylonian empire rose, the heart of the Assyrian empire covered northern Syria and western Iraq.
This is important to note, because Assyria is in the Psalm 83 confederacy. I do not believe Iraq as a nation will be an aggressor in that conflict. Iraq is better represented by the heart of the ancient area of Babylon, which is not in view in the parallel passages to Psalm 83. However, the area of Mosul is in western Iraq and is the same area of ancient Nineveh which gets destroyed in the "Great Middle East War."
In recent history, the Kurds have occupied the ancient area of Nineveh. The Kurds have continuously struggled with both Turkey and the rest of Iraq. There have even been proposals made to allow the Kurds to break away and be their own country. If this occurs before the "Great Middle East War," I wouldn't rule out their direct involvement in the Psalm 83 coalition, as politically they could be considered the heart of ancient Assyria along with Syria.
Another possibility is that rebels aligned with the other
Psalm 83 aggressors take over the western part of Iraq before the "Great Middle East War." Interestingly, the terrorist group ISIS has laid claim to most of the territory of ancient Assyria as a result of 2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.
3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against
I read his story before. It may be good to start conversations but I don't use it myself as some of his experiences do not line up with scripture and he talks about things as if those experiences are revelations......overall I like the guy, I just lost interest in him. He does tell a good story and you may want to try to get some of the atheists on here to watch it.
Well it is common for people who die and are revived to say they saw a light like through a tunnel.
I thought somethings he said were just like how God shows things to us from my experience.
He understood something from the Word, especially from childhood and clearly understood it like never before in an instant, understanding in this way is typical of the Holy Spirit.
He touched on the importance of forgiveness, that's definitely a God thing! The Light very sound true, with the black hole below would be how I'd expect it, and Satan in the pitch black.
Yeah, I don't remember all the details, one of the experiences did not line up with scripture but most of the story was good........I forget exactly what it was in the experience that did not line up with scripture. We can't go by experiences to determine truth, truth must be determined by the word of God. I've had many experiences which did not line up with the scriptures so sometimes I have to conclude I was either self-deceived or having my buttons pushed by demons to try to get my going by experiences rather than by the word. The devil always tries to throw monkey wrenches into the middle of good things.....his goal is to keep lost people in the dark more than to mislead Christians. There are simply some things in the man's experience which are not Biblical and should not be used as doctrine....and again, most of it was pretty good, I clearly remember I enjoyed his story when I first saw it a few years ago.......I don't use his stuff because I think he lets his experience lead too much rather than being critical of some things in the experience as the word of God contradicts some of his experience.
It's better to say, "here is what happened and the things I saw, heard, and felt, but this is what the Bible says about those things.....then stand on the word as our sensual (seeing, hearing, feeling) perceptions can be misled.
Hmm I don't know, I can't confirm or deny your experience.
I have gifts of discernment, to see the persona of the evil spirits.
But I've never known anyone to have a physical confrontation with one.
I test truth by theology, not by experienced. God isn't in
a box, it wouldn't make sense to me, but God can move in unique ways, God is unsearchable so I don't limit Him.
So my test wouldn't be based on your experiences. I would look to see what truth is to you. The Truth speaks one language, so I'd have to hear more about the understanding you have of God.
So I'm not that moved one way or another about the physical confrontation with a demon, it's interesting. But not defining one way or another.
The word of God is the standard, not our experience or feelings. In the man's testimony, the place he referred to as Hell had no fire. That is a contradiction to the word of God and a lot of people teach that even though Jesus said Hell is a place of fire, they teach Hell is like what that man explained in his experience. According to the word of God, his experience was not entirely from God though allowed by God.
I don't know what you are talking about with "physical confrontation with a demon". The fact our senses can be deceived is known by devils.
You are not the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit does not guide contrary to the Bible. Your going by your own feelings and not by the word of God. Truth is not tested by your theology, it is revealed in God's word and His word, not your theology, is the only standard of truth.
Oh sorry that was a copy and paste from a conversation I had with a debater, I think it was Demon-hunter
I meant to just copy my part agreeing with you that we can't go by experience.
Although we understand spiritual experiences, truth and doctrine need to be listened for, we need to hear Jesus in people, if we hear Jesus, then I dont care if they walked on the moon, God can do whatever He wants in our lives, and I don't limit God. But, experiences carry the lesser weight.
Except for the spiritual experience of being Born Again, and being lead by the Spirit, and producing the fruits of the Spirit. Because those are the Seal of the Elect.
Demons Hunter said he had a physical confrontation with demons. He was involved in Satan worship, so I wouldn't judge his experience. It's not typical to get into a physical confrontation with a demon, but God deals with us all differently.
Ok, I responded strongly when you got something mixed up with Demon Hunter. I'm trying to pull back and let you do your thing......I have voiced my opinion on everything enough
Ok, I watched it and did not see the things I saw before. Maybe it was a different guy but the story is much the same, if it is the same guy he left some things out of the story and that's ok with me, it would have been the things I didn't agree with....this story is better than the one I saw before.
Some time before 500 BC, the prophet Daniel proclaimed that Israel's long-awaited Messiah would begin his public ministry 483 years after the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25-26).
He further predicted that the Messiah would be "cut off," killed, and that this event would take place prior to a second destruction of Jerusalem. Abundant documentation shows that these prophecies were perfectly fulfilled in the life (and crucifixion) of Jesus Christ. The decree regarding the restoration of Jerusalem was issued by Persia's King Artaxerxes to the Hebrew priest Ezra in 458 BC, 483 years later the ministry of Jesus Christ began in Galilee.
(Remember that due to calendar changes, the date for the start of Christ's ministry is set by most historians at about AD 26. Also note that from 1 BC to AD 1 is just one year.) Jesus' crucifixion occurred only a few years later, and about four decades later, in AD 70 came the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.
(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 10 to the 5th power )
Some time before 500 BC, the prophet Daniel proclaimed that Israel's long-awaited Messiah would begin his public ministry 483 years after the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25-26).
What? Daniel 9:25-26 talks about weeks. How did you get 483 years from it?
(1) Some time before 500 BC, the prophet Daniel proclaimed that Israel's long-awaited Messiah would begin his public ministry 483 years after the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25-26).
He further predicted that the Messiah would be "cut off," killed, and that this event would take place prior to a second destruction of Jerusalem. Abundant documentation shows that these prophecies were perfectly fulfilled in the life (and crucifixion) of Jesus Christ. The decree regarding the restoration of Jerusalem was issued by Persia's King Artaxerxes to the Hebrew priest Ezra in 458 BC, 483 years later the ministry of Jesus Christ began in Galilee.
(Remember that due to calendar changes, the date for the start of Christ's ministry is set by most historians at about AD 26. Also note that from 1 BC to AD 1 is just one year.) Jesus' crucifixion occurred only a few years later, and about four decades later, in AD 70 came the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.
(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 10 to 5th power.)
You are making it abundantly clear that you don't actually understand the bible. You can copy and paste a website that talks about prophecies being fulfilled. You want a cookie?
(4) Some 400 years before crucifixion was invented, both Israel's King David and the prophet Zechariah described the Messiah's death in words that perfectly depict that mode of execution. Further, they said that the body would be pierced and that none of the bones would be broken, contrary to customary procedure in cases of crucifixion (Psalm 22 and 34:20; Zechariah 12:10). Again, historians and New Testament writers confirm the fulfillment: Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, and his extraordinarily quick death eliminated the need for the usual breaking of bones. A spear was thrust into his side to verify that he was, indeed, dead.
(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 10 to the 13th power.)
Guys - debate is a confirmation of facts showing support of your opinion. We can argue day and night "yes it is" and "no it ain't" till we are blue in the face.
It's meaningless if you have no factual basis of truth to show why your opinion is so wonderful!
Hey, don't demean tweety birds. Every morning, even in winter, when I open my bedroom curtains the tweety blackbirds are singing waiting for me to feed them good Californian raisins. Nothing but the best. They're worth a 1000 times more than all the embarrassing religious hocus pocus and dreamed up gobbledygook you continually gauche on about. Did you know that you can get free psychiatric treatment for your condition?
Evidence when viewed goes beyond reasonable doubt!
Here is some evidence that supports an affirmative verdict regarding many Biblical facts, including the Resurection:
1 - The Prophetic Words, and the Biblical Directions of Prophesy, and the Plan, the ultimate bottom line action and goals of Biblical content and Prophesy.
2 - Because Biblical History is credible it is a source in support of evidence.
3 - Because Biblical Prophesy is credible in its fulfillments it is an even greater source in support of evidence, especially since prophesy is layered, with many separate prophesies having to ALSO come true for one to come true! - EVEN GREATER THAN KNITTING CELLS TOGETHER IN EVOLUTION!
4 - Because eye witness testimony, even outside of the Bible, other documents, Greek and Roman secular offer details confirming the dynamics of Christianity and Persecutions and Martyrdom.
5 - The accounts are not contradictions, (as though any were lying) the various times and places of writings actually are a confirmation of reliability, people who lie have fuzzy memories in a week, even with practice and easy communications of our day, lies unravel because even the untrained eye can pick out lies, but that's not the case with the four gospels, they confirm accidentally each other's facts, that show true eyewitness independent works, with different perspectives of the same exact event, as you know since you "read the book" the private investigated discusses this.
6 - The degree of insistence on the testimonies of Christians, and it's growth beyond their group, location, and generation. In comparison Muslims were militant from the start, attracting like violent individuals. It would not have the same magnet effect as peaceful Christians fed to lions. One would excell in dominance, like cell selection, the other would be eliminated as passive cells are dominated.
7 - The Prophetic Words spoken of concerning the rejection by its "mother religion" and the Prophetic Words stating as Messiah would be rejected, All Nations would hear an exclusive religion, rejected by its originator and accepted WORLD WIDE!
8 - 300 PROPHESIES fulfilled in just the person Jesus
9 - Martyrdom, the ferverency and dedication, they most all went courageously against horrible opposition, and most ultimately died for it. And not in a group drinking poison like Jim Jones, Christians often died or were imprisoned alone and often died gruesome deaths
10 - Paul a Jew of Jews, happily killing Christians saw what must have been a hologram! Jesus the Risen Lord knocked him off a horse and blinded him, then sent him to talk to his disciples.
Get this picture, Saul/Paul just led Stephen's stoning, unmoved by it! Everyone knows of Saul and are scared of him.
Jesus knocks him off a horse and disarms him so the Christians wouldn't fear him, and so he couldn't harm them. Sends Saul to get saved, healed and filled with the Spirit, and in Paul to the Gentiles - Jew of Jews - brought the gospel out to the Gentiles.
So these are 10 pieces of evidence I have to consider evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt"!!
Slapshot is just another upset Democrat because he hasn't made the money Paul Newman did from the movie Slapshot. I have given that Democrat numerous opportunities to make a post about Muslims and their God but it has yet to do so. Democrats such as Slapshot support Muslims and their faith. Wonder how well Slapshot being an atheist would make it in a Muslim country.
It does not take books and beyond to see God is there. The heavens declare the glory of God. It takes books and beyond to cast doubt on God......and there's never enough to make Him go away.