What part of "reliable source documented the resurrection at the time (Not bible NT)"
DID YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?
I don't want to hear the cultists biased slanted warped opinion.
Last edited:
God is...
- Thread starter studentofthemarkets
- Start date
- Status
DID YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?
I don't want to hear the cultists biased slanted warped opinion.
Ppppfffffff.
the most plausible date for the writing of Galatians is 48 AD. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_to_the_Galatians
"Book of Acts and the Gospel of Luke make up a two-part work, Luke–Acts, by the same anonymous author. It is usually dated to around 80–90 AD, although some scholars suggest 90–110 AD......"
According to the account in the Book of Acts, Saul's conversion took place on the road to Damascus, where he reported having experienced a vision of the ascended Jesus. The account says that "He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, 'Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?' He asked, 'Who are you, Lord?' The reply came, 'I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting'."
Here once again we have not an original account, Paul does not make the claim, others do at a much later date, even though Saul/Paul was an educated Pharasee quite capable of writing.
According to the account in the Book of Acts, Saul's conversion took place on the road to Damascus, where he reported having experienced a vision of the ascended Jesus. The account says that "He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, 'Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?' He asked, 'Who are you, Lord?' The reply came, 'I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting'."
Here once again we have not an original account, Paul does not make the claim, others do at a much later date, even though Saul/Paul was an educated Pharasee quite capable of writing.
Last edited:
I must pick you up on that statement.
Jesus tells The Parable of the Ten Minas. A story in which the context clearly means and does in fact covey a message via a nobleman who is to become king. This story is quite obviously intended to be a proxy for Jesus and how the kingdom of God is supposed to be.
Luke 19:27
"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’”
The whole chapter is a thinly veiled cover story about someone who is to be king (guess who) killing those who don't do what is demanded of them by an imaginary God.
There is no counter or condemnation to any of this or the other violent murderous statements in the Luke narrative as told by the Jesus character.
So did the actual author write it in that way for Jesus to be able to make threats, but should anyone hold the tale to account, allow the reader to dodge criticism of Jesus by simply re-directing or projecting everything onto the other nobleman character who would be king ?
These texts in their original forms were designed to attract supporters towards some political agenda or other and were the usual political archetypal battle cries of their place and times. This was a Jewish cult against orthodox Judaism that morphed into Christianity.
In so many ways The New Testament is such a very cynical book.
Last edited:
"....Most New Testament scholars believe Paul the Apostle wrote this letter from Corinth, although information appended to this work in many early manuscripts (e.g., Codices Alexandrinus, Mosquensis, and Angelicus) state that Paul wrote it in Athen after Timothy had returned from Macedonia with news of the state of the church in Thessalonica. Paul was known to the Church at Thessalonica, having preached there.
For the most part, the letter is personal in nature, with only the final two chapters spent addressing issues of doctrine, almost as an aside. Paul's main purpose in writing is to encourage and reassure the Christians there. Paul urges them to go on working quietly while waiting in hope for the return of Christ.
It is also sometimes suggested that 1 Thes. 5:1–11 is a post-Pauline insertion that has many features of Lukan language and theology that serves as an apologetic correction to Paul's imminent expectation of the Second Coming in 1 Thes. 4:13–18.
So here we are 50AD and no Jesus resurrection yet, but after the disciples die, that's when all the cultist pretenders emerge to claim the resurrection had occured.
You are correct. I would be leaving my wife, kids and the two very small grandchildren that I have so far. So it is better to see my grandkids grow up first. I'm hanging on for dear life!
LOL ... "... iron sharpens iron ..."Sorry, I'm being difficult.
I'm going on memory, so let me see what I can find to cite today in support of this. But here's the possible logic behind it:
- Currently, God could descend every year or so and prove his existence to everyone if he wanted to ... but where would faith/trust fit in.
- The rapture (pe-trib) would essentially prove certain scriptures, and the existence of God. And there would, again, be no need for faith/trust for those left behind if they could simply enter heaven under grace. Saturday morning, rapture. Saturday afternoon, suddenly, everyone left behind are born again Christians.
- Grace would be prophecy fulfilled after the rapture. No Biblical requirement for grace after the rapture.
If memory serves me correctly, salvation during the tribulation (7 years) comes via surviving the whole 7 years, or being beheaded in the name of God during the tribulation.
Ya God doesn't want to overplay His hand, gotta keep everyone guessing.
In ye olde days, God revealed Himself more frequently, but that was long ago and mankind was given enough information then to set themselves on the right course if they so to speak were interested in salvation.
These days God prefers to keep everyone guessing, its better for mankind that way, to argue, fight, debate, live in a cloud of doubt and generally talk shit.
In ye olde days, God revealed Himself more frequently, but that was long ago and mankind was given enough information then to set themselves on the right course if they so to speak were interested in salvation.
These days God prefers to keep everyone guessing, its better for mankind that way, to argue, fight, debate, live in a cloud of doubt and generally talk shit.
- Status