-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Religion Ask a Christian - Continued in Part 2
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Status
Number37
Anyhow, have a Winfield 25.
- Oct 5, 2013
- 23,099
- 25,133
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Read the Constitution and tell me where it says anything about a separation of powers.
It doesn't.
And yet a fundamental principle of our system of govt is the separation of powers.
When interpreting words, one interpretation isn't the only interpretation.
Where have i ever said one interpretation is the only interpretation? I was quoting early the Christians, the church fathers, the ones BT as a Catholic subscribes to.
My religion is always the right religion, this argument never ceases to amaze me.
- Jul 5, 2012
- 30,535
- 52,264
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Kidding, right?
I notice that none of the Christians on this thread have so far come forth with their definition of “dead”.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
No rigor mortis for Jesus. He wasn't really dead.
- Jul 5, 2012
- 30,535
- 52,264
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Kidding, right?
Given that of late we’ve seen the cases of ragged individualists who would prefer to spend their final moments on earth clogging up ICUs with their arse in the air, coughing the gunk that used to be their lungs into a bucket, than get a perfectly safe vaccine, I think the strength of the martyrdom argument has waned a bit recently.
- Jul 5, 2012
- 30,535
- 52,264
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Kidding, right?
That may well be, but what I’m interested in here is what a Christian’s definition of the word “dead” is.
God can do everything, reverse his own 'death'.
Number37
Anyhow, have a Winfield 25.
- Oct 5, 2013
- 23,099
- 25,133
- AFL Club
- Sydney
I never said you said...
A quote from Mabo by the Chief Justice...
“We were brought up on the footing that the Aborigines were people roaming the continent who never remained in one particular area without any relationship
with the land. Well, of course, we now know that’s all wrong.”
How many judges, including Chief Justices, before him said the exact opposite?
How many after the Mabo judgment said it was wrong?
Interpretations, even from the highest authorities, are still only interpretations...
Agreed, which is precisely my point in this thread, BT believes that interpretation of the organised religion is the only interpretation out there. As a Muslim, won't you appreciate Rumi's poetry? how spirituality and beauty of nature and the universe comes out through it? Resurrections are merely an archetype in the spiritual world, but most Christians believe it's literal, cause they are sold this idea. Resurrections are common in mythlogies all over the world, just like the flood, virgin birth etc are....they are trying to tell us something! it's upto us to figure out what, we can either take it literally or we can look towards spirituality to find answers.
Number37
Anyhow, have a Winfield 25.
- Oct 5, 2013
- 23,099
- 25,133
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Again....that's your interpretation....of someone else's interpretation.....that is probably another interpretation of another interpretation.
If you are afforded an interpretation, so is BT.
Who is right is an unanswerable question.
Let's not kid ourselves, it isn't the interpretation, it's who thinks they're right.
This entire thread has devolved into who thinks they're right about unanswerable questions.
I have never said i am right. Whatever i said , i have constantly stated 'don't believe in what i say' as opposed to 'this is the truth and nothing but the truth'. I have had more than a 1,000 posts in this thread, nowhere i have said i am right in my interpretation. I have provided an alternative explanation, that's it. But literal interpretations like the flood myths can easily be dismissed through science. Unanswerable yes, maybe, but evidence is out there, the early church fathers forged, plagiarized, lied about things to fend of Arianism. This is history.
Same pro arguments for an institutionalized religious creator year after year, century after century, re hashed again and again.... the gap for "god" to squeeze into is getting ever smaller.
There is no judgmental daddy in the sky looking over us and preoccupied with what we do with our own and to each others genitals, among other nonsensical preoccupations.
You look at the immense suffering all over the world and you can blame us humans for it but god can make all of it go away cause god admitted we are sinners/pricks or whatever. But he is busy answering BT's call over others.
Unfortunately, there is no benevolent, deity centered religion that explains these inconsistencies. You are right. It's a good reason to doubt, as well as God hiding himself from his own supposed creations.
It's not even that it's humans that suffer. Needless suffering is everywhere. Infectious microbes, animals red in tooth and claw, natural disasters. Suffering is everywhere and not limited in any real scope. Life eats life, it's not just sustenance, much of it suffers when it becomes a meal. We could expect this from a directionless nature, but not a God that is supposedly moral.
Number37
Anyhow, have a Winfield 25.
- Oct 5, 2013
- 23,099
- 25,133
- AFL Club
- Sydney
So BT is right in his interpretation?
Number37
Anyhow, have a Winfield 25.
- Oct 5, 2013
- 23,099
- 25,133
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Gap? What gap?
The entire thing is a gap.
Like the building of the pyramids... the best of our knowledge is no more than, it could possibly have happened this way based on the little bits of information we have that we think fits.
You decide. He believes 'only christians know how to love'.
I don't need to say more about his 'belief system'.
Number37
Anyhow, have a Winfield 25.
- Oct 5, 2013
- 23,099
- 25,133
- AFL Club
- Sydney
If there was a God then everything would be perfect, or like this, or like that....really? Based on what? What you want it to be?
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Personal God is utterly BS. I have said multiple times in this thread there may or may not be a god that's not the point here, we are discussing the god of the Abrahamic religions. You are right when you say it's unknowable and no one is disputing that.
- Jul 5, 2012
- 30,535
- 52,264
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Kidding, right?
Sorry if I came across as a bit patronising. I'm not suggesting you believers "make it up". I'm suggesting you leap a little too quickly to conclude that something inexplicable is a sign from "god".
See, as I’ve described on this thread before, the religious explanation for the origin of the universe made perfect sense for millennia, because there was simply no other explanation.
But the unavoidable fact is that the Enlightenment blew the religious origins of the universe out of the water, and religion has simply not adapted.
In fact, since the Enlightenment, theists have been less than honest with themselves, by elevating the concept of belief far beyond that which it deserves.
I invite you to read Kurt Andersen’s formidable “Fantasyland” a history of the US through the prism of belief - no matter how absurd - trumping (pun intended) all else. (As a theist, take a big deep breath, because Anderson’s attitude is that, given religion has never even begun to honestly deal with the Enlightenment, it deserves no greater respect than alien abductions, crystal healing or pyramid power.)
I also recommend Tim Dean’s excellent recent “How We Became Human”. He explains how religion was crucial to enabling us to advance to the sophisticated point we’ve now reached (he makes a distinction, as some others do, between the Small God religions of hunter/gatherer societies, and the Big God religions that enabled modern, complex, sophisticated societies), but how it is now necessary to jettison much of that religious baggage before it destroys us, being unfit for the modern world. Give it a squiz.
Number37
Anyhow, have a Winfield 25.
- Oct 5, 2013
- 23,099
- 25,133
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Whatever God it is...on what basis are you supposing things should be, if there is a God?
Rosscoe
Cancelled
- Sep 28, 2018
- 1,949
- 2,943
- AFL Club
- Carlton
The Burial of Jesus NIV
LUKE 23
50 Now there was a man named Joseph, a member of the Council, a good and upright man, 51 who had not consented to their decision and action. He came from the Judean town of Arimathea, and he himself was waiting for the kingdom of God. 52 Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus’ body. 53 Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen cloth and placed it in a tomb cut in the rock, one in which no one had yet been laid. 54 It was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath was about to begin.
55 The women who had come with Jesus from Galilee followed Joseph and saw the tomb and how his body was laid in it. 56 Then they went home and prepared spices and perfumes. But they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment.
Mark 16
16 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus’ body. 2 Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb 3 and they asked each other, “Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?” 4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. 5 As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. 6 “Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. 7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’”8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.[a] 9 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. 11 When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it.
Robert M. Price. “That the Empty Tomb story is Mark’s own creation is evident from the fact that he knows about the young man, his message, and the women’s refusal to tell anyone about this encounter. If they told no one, how does Mark know? He is ‘the omniscient narrator’—of fiction!”
The bible was written by Mark years after the event; so common sense would indicate that they told no one at that time.
John Shelby Spong: “The angels of the empty tomb, the tomb itself with its massive stone and its female visitors, to say nothing of the entire burial tradition, must be dismissed as not factual. These parts of the tradition were quite simply the myths and legends that arose later in a Jerusalem setting.”
It is clearly stated in Luke 23 verse 56 above that they prepared spices and perfumes and rested on the sabbath as was their tradition. So the burial tradition did not occur because it was the sabbath along with a range of other reasons.
Dale B. Martin: “If the empty tomb stories were historically true, [one] would strongly expect that the tomb would have become a place of veneration among early Christians. If they knew where it was, why didn’t they go back? It was very popular in the ancient world for people to have picnics around tombs. The family and the loved ones would get together on the anniversary of the death and they would actually celebrate the person’s memory with a picnic. If they knew the tomb where Jesus had been raised from, why did it take over 200 years for Christians to start venerating the tomb? And then they had to pick one that doesn’t seem to fit the archaeology of the Biblical narratives! It took basically Helen, the mother of Emperor Constantine, to go back and choose period traditions about where the tomb might have been. [And] she said, ‘OK, this is the tomb, build the church of the sepulchure here!’ That’s in the 4th century! If [earlier Christians] knew where the tomb was, why didn’t they use it as a place to pray, as a place to hold Easter worship services? There’s no evidence that early Christians knew where the tomb was until too late to count as historical evidence.”
After Jesus died the apostles scattered; I doubt that they would of cared to create a memorial for someone they had been talking to and learning from for a further 40 days Acts 1:3. In short we do not create memorials for someone that is living. All that place stuff is for tourism dollars.
Gerd Lüdemann: “Investigation into the burial of Jesus [suggests] that his followers did not even know where their leader had been buried […] Either the Jews entrusted Joseph of Arimathea with putting the body of Jesus in a tomb or Jews unknown to us ‘buried’ the corpse in a place which can no longer be identified […] None of the [empty tomb narratives] come from eyewitnesses; they have passed through the hand of the community and/or a theologically trained figure. So the historical yield is unsatisfactory.”
Incorrect; Luke 23 verse 55 clearly states that the women followed Joseph to the tomb.
Peter Kiirby: “The empty tomb narrative is a fiction. It is the invention of the author of Mark, from which all other reports are dependent on. There are signs of fictional creation in the narrative, and it contains several improbabilities. There are several plausible alternate reconstructions of the events that exclude the discovery of an empty tomb.”
This is opinion. Show us where the bible is incorrect according to your false narratives and improbabilities.
Michael Goulder: “Romans almost always left the bodies of crucified criminals on the cross, where unburied and a prey to birds, they would be a horror and a warning to passers-by […]. We should assume that Jesus’ fate followed [this] normal pattern and that his body was left hanging for perhaps forty-eight hours. For the Jerusalem view of resurrection all that was necessary was that Jesus should have been seen. […] The trouble [of the empty tomb story] is that at so many points it is implausible, and even contradictory. If Jesus’ body is to be found missing, it will have to be buried in the tomb of a wealthy sympathizer. Joseph of Arimathaea supplies this need: he is an honorable councilor and has been expecting the kingdom of God. But then surely this is what Jesus has spent the week proclaiming in the temple; and if he is a councilor, presumably that means a member of the Sanhedrin, and he will have been present at the recent meeting, and so have been part of the unanimous vote condemning Jesus for blasphemy. A group of women goes out to anoint Jesus’ body “exceedingly early,” not knowing who is to roll away the enormous stone covering the tomb: although they are part of a community of tough men, some of them their relations, they would rather take a chance on meeting a gardener, or some such person, who happened to be around at 4 a.m. The point of the angel’s message is to have the disciples directed to Galilee, but the women say nothing to anyone in their fear, so the whole tale is pointless. The thought must arise that it is a late development of the Markan church, and that the women’s silence is an explanation of why it has not been heard before. In a divided church, those who thought physical resurrection an absurdity would not take kindly to a brand new story that Jesus’ body was buried in a stranger’s tomb, and had left it in the night. They would inevitably ask, “Why have we never heard this before?” “Ah,” replies the wily evangelist, “the women said nothing to anyone; for they were afraid.”
Luke 23 Verse 52 clearly states that Joseph got authorisation from Pilate to take the body. In verse Luke 23:51 Joseph was at the meeting and had not consented to decision and action.
regarding the women.
Their relatives and friends lives were at stake; their friend was just murdered for no good reason. The not telling part is part of the story.
Randel Helms: “Paul did not know the Gospel resurrection stories, for the simple reason that they had not yet been invented, and the four evangelists, who wrote twenty to fifty years after Paul, either did not know his list of appearances or chose to ignore it. Perhaps most surprisingly of all the differences is Paul’s failure to mention the legend of the empty tomb, which was, for the writer of the earliest Gospel, the only public, visible evidence for the resurrection… Indeed, [Paul] had probably never heard of it; it was a legend that grew up in Christian communities different from his own.”
Paul did not witness the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Paul was in contact with the Apostles; why would he write about something that already had eyewitness accounts.
Robert W. Funk: “[I take the position that] the empty-tomb story found in the last chapter of the Gospel of Mark is a late legend, introduced into the tradition for the first time by Mark. It was unknown to Paul. It was also unknown to the Sayings Gospel Q and the Gospel of Thomas. Evidently the empty-tomb story and the reports of appearances did not come to play a central part in the Jesus tradition until several decades after Jesus’ death.”
What a massive assumption; of course Paul knew about the empty tomb. The women were terrified at the time; not forever.
and
"....the empty tomb story was actually created by Mark 40 years or so after Jesus died and probably had nothing to do with the original experience,"
I recently read a book by eddie jaku a holocaust survivor. Is his story not true because he wrote the book 80 years or so on.
Christopher F. Evans: “The status of [the empty tomb story] in Mark is not easy to discern. The empty tomb does not seem to have belonged to the earliest kerygma of the resurrection, and should probably not be read out of either the references to the burial (1 Cor. 15.4; Rom. 6.4; Col. 2.12) […] Attempts to establish an historical kernel of [Mark’s] empty tomb story are not very convincing […]. It is in itself the proclamation of the resurrection, and is made so by the non-naturalistic elements, i.e the contradiction in the women setting out with the question, ‘Who will roll away the stone?’, and the presence of the interpreting angel, who, in place of the Lord, utters the vital statements. It is difficult to see what historical nucleus would be left if these were removed. And The very basis of the narrative, a visit for a delayed embalming of a body already buried, is itself improbable, and is dropped by Matthew and John.”
Mark 16 Verse 4 clearly states that when they looked up they saw that the stone was rolled away. So they were already at the tomb site not setting out.
James Crossley: “The earliest evidence for the empty tomb has no genuine eyewitness support (in contrast to the resurrection appearances) and Mk 16.8 suggests that the story was not well known. The first resurrection appearances are more likely to be visionary experiences interpreted as a bodily raised figure, which meant that the early accounts of Paul and Mark could assume an empty tomb even if historically this was not the case.”
The women were the eyewitnesses as stated in both Mark and Luke above.
THESE FALSE SCHOLARS DO NOT READ THE BIBLE.
LUKE 23
50 Now there was a man named Joseph, a member of the Council, a good and upright man, 51 who had not consented to their decision and action. He came from the Judean town of Arimathea, and he himself was waiting for the kingdom of God. 52 Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus’ body. 53 Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen cloth and placed it in a tomb cut in the rock, one in which no one had yet been laid. 54 It was Preparation Day, and the Sabbath was about to begin.
55 The women who had come with Jesus from Galilee followed Joseph and saw the tomb and how his body was laid in it. 56 Then they went home and prepared spices and perfumes. But they rested on the Sabbath in obedience to the commandment.
Mark 16
16 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus’ body. 2 Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb 3 and they asked each other, “Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?” 4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. 5 As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. 6 “Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. 7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’”8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.[a] 9 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. 11 When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it.
Robert M. Price. “That the Empty Tomb story is Mark’s own creation is evident from the fact that he knows about the young man, his message, and the women’s refusal to tell anyone about this encounter. If they told no one, how does Mark know? He is ‘the omniscient narrator’—of fiction!”
The bible was written by Mark years after the event; so common sense would indicate that they told no one at that time.
John Shelby Spong: “The angels of the empty tomb, the tomb itself with its massive stone and its female visitors, to say nothing of the entire burial tradition, must be dismissed as not factual. These parts of the tradition were quite simply the myths and legends that arose later in a Jerusalem setting.”
It is clearly stated in Luke 23 verse 56 above that they prepared spices and perfumes and rested on the sabbath as was their tradition. So the burial tradition did not occur because it was the sabbath along with a range of other reasons.
Dale B. Martin: “If the empty tomb stories were historically true, [one] would strongly expect that the tomb would have become a place of veneration among early Christians. If they knew where it was, why didn’t they go back? It was very popular in the ancient world for people to have picnics around tombs. The family and the loved ones would get together on the anniversary of the death and they would actually celebrate the person’s memory with a picnic. If they knew the tomb where Jesus had been raised from, why did it take over 200 years for Christians to start venerating the tomb? And then they had to pick one that doesn’t seem to fit the archaeology of the Biblical narratives! It took basically Helen, the mother of Emperor Constantine, to go back and choose period traditions about where the tomb might have been. [And] she said, ‘OK, this is the tomb, build the church of the sepulchure here!’ That’s in the 4th century! If [earlier Christians] knew where the tomb was, why didn’t they use it as a place to pray, as a place to hold Easter worship services? There’s no evidence that early Christians knew where the tomb was until too late to count as historical evidence.”
After Jesus died the apostles scattered; I doubt that they would of cared to create a memorial for someone they had been talking to and learning from for a further 40 days Acts 1:3. In short we do not create memorials for someone that is living. All that place stuff is for tourism dollars.
Gerd Lüdemann: “Investigation into the burial of Jesus [suggests] that his followers did not even know where their leader had been buried […] Either the Jews entrusted Joseph of Arimathea with putting the body of Jesus in a tomb or Jews unknown to us ‘buried’ the corpse in a place which can no longer be identified […] None of the [empty tomb narratives] come from eyewitnesses; they have passed through the hand of the community and/or a theologically trained figure. So the historical yield is unsatisfactory.”
Incorrect; Luke 23 verse 55 clearly states that the women followed Joseph to the tomb.
Peter Kiirby: “The empty tomb narrative is a fiction. It is the invention of the author of Mark, from which all other reports are dependent on. There are signs of fictional creation in the narrative, and it contains several improbabilities. There are several plausible alternate reconstructions of the events that exclude the discovery of an empty tomb.”
This is opinion. Show us where the bible is incorrect according to your false narratives and improbabilities.
Michael Goulder: “Romans almost always left the bodies of crucified criminals on the cross, where unburied and a prey to birds, they would be a horror and a warning to passers-by […]. We should assume that Jesus’ fate followed [this] normal pattern and that his body was left hanging for perhaps forty-eight hours. For the Jerusalem view of resurrection all that was necessary was that Jesus should have been seen. […] The trouble [of the empty tomb story] is that at so many points it is implausible, and even contradictory. If Jesus’ body is to be found missing, it will have to be buried in the tomb of a wealthy sympathizer. Joseph of Arimathaea supplies this need: he is an honorable councilor and has been expecting the kingdom of God. But then surely this is what Jesus has spent the week proclaiming in the temple; and if he is a councilor, presumably that means a member of the Sanhedrin, and he will have been present at the recent meeting, and so have been part of the unanimous vote condemning Jesus for blasphemy. A group of women goes out to anoint Jesus’ body “exceedingly early,” not knowing who is to roll away the enormous stone covering the tomb: although they are part of a community of tough men, some of them their relations, they would rather take a chance on meeting a gardener, or some such person, who happened to be around at 4 a.m. The point of the angel’s message is to have the disciples directed to Galilee, but the women say nothing to anyone in their fear, so the whole tale is pointless. The thought must arise that it is a late development of the Markan church, and that the women’s silence is an explanation of why it has not been heard before. In a divided church, those who thought physical resurrection an absurdity would not take kindly to a brand new story that Jesus’ body was buried in a stranger’s tomb, and had left it in the night. They would inevitably ask, “Why have we never heard this before?” “Ah,” replies the wily evangelist, “the women said nothing to anyone; for they were afraid.”
Luke 23 Verse 52 clearly states that Joseph got authorisation from Pilate to take the body. In verse Luke 23:51 Joseph was at the meeting and had not consented to decision and action.
regarding the women.
Their relatives and friends lives were at stake; their friend was just murdered for no good reason. The not telling part is part of the story.
Randel Helms: “Paul did not know the Gospel resurrection stories, for the simple reason that they had not yet been invented, and the four evangelists, who wrote twenty to fifty years after Paul, either did not know his list of appearances or chose to ignore it. Perhaps most surprisingly of all the differences is Paul’s failure to mention the legend of the empty tomb, which was, for the writer of the earliest Gospel, the only public, visible evidence for the resurrection… Indeed, [Paul] had probably never heard of it; it was a legend that grew up in Christian communities different from his own.”
Paul did not witness the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Paul was in contact with the Apostles; why would he write about something that already had eyewitness accounts.
Robert W. Funk: “[I take the position that] the empty-tomb story found in the last chapter of the Gospel of Mark is a late legend, introduced into the tradition for the first time by Mark. It was unknown to Paul. It was also unknown to the Sayings Gospel Q and the Gospel of Thomas. Evidently the empty-tomb story and the reports of appearances did not come to play a central part in the Jesus tradition until several decades after Jesus’ death.”
What a massive assumption; of course Paul knew about the empty tomb. The women were terrified at the time; not forever.
and
"....the empty tomb story was actually created by Mark 40 years or so after Jesus died and probably had nothing to do with the original experience,"
I recently read a book by eddie jaku a holocaust survivor. Is his story not true because he wrote the book 80 years or so on.
Christopher F. Evans: “The status of [the empty tomb story] in Mark is not easy to discern. The empty tomb does not seem to have belonged to the earliest kerygma of the resurrection, and should probably not be read out of either the references to the burial (1 Cor. 15.4; Rom. 6.4; Col. 2.12) […] Attempts to establish an historical kernel of [Mark’s] empty tomb story are not very convincing […]. It is in itself the proclamation of the resurrection, and is made so by the non-naturalistic elements, i.e the contradiction in the women setting out with the question, ‘Who will roll away the stone?’, and the presence of the interpreting angel, who, in place of the Lord, utters the vital statements. It is difficult to see what historical nucleus would be left if these were removed. And The very basis of the narrative, a visit for a delayed embalming of a body already buried, is itself improbable, and is dropped by Matthew and John.”
Mark 16 Verse 4 clearly states that when they looked up they saw that the stone was rolled away. So they were already at the tomb site not setting out.
James Crossley: “The earliest evidence for the empty tomb has no genuine eyewitness support (in contrast to the resurrection appearances) and Mk 16.8 suggests that the story was not well known. The first resurrection appearances are more likely to be visionary experiences interpreted as a bodily raised figure, which meant that the early accounts of Paul and Mark could assume an empty tomb even if historically this was not the case.”
The women were the eyewitnesses as stated in both Mark and Luke above.
THESE FALSE SCHOLARS DO NOT READ THE BIBLE.
Suffering is ALL that there is in nature, it's absolutely brutal. Are you saying God 'intended' it that way? Us humans are slightly above animals, yet vast majority are suffering and no, it's not just our doing. Suffering is all that there is. Why would someone assume God is good then?
But our knowledge of genetics overwhelmingly demonstrates that humanity did not originate from a single breeding couple ~6000 years ago, nor did it undergo a significant bottleneck ~2600 years ago. Me believing in a god or not has zero to do with rejecting the answer of two people eating a piece of fruit is how suffering originated. You can start to dismiss these arguments of organised religion and see how absurd it is.
Number37
Anyhow, have a Winfield 25.
- Oct 5, 2013
- 23,099
- 25,133
- AFL Club
- Sydney
You reckon if the scriptures were written by the Einstein equivalent in the language of quantum physics people would have flocked to it because they would have had such an outstanding understanding of quantum physics back in the day?
Do we expect adults who have completed their schooling to understand quantum physics? No.
The people that do understand quantum physics have to dumb it down so that they can explain it to the rest of us plebs.
Our knowledge of genetics also tells us that we originate from apes whose society was male dominated rather than the apes whose society was female dominated....because reasons...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
