Why are the Gospel's accounts of Jesus's so sketchy?
*Writings began 40-80 years after his death
*Extremely low amount of detail, especially at his trial. Mathew's Gospel for instance only has one spoken line by Jesus and the trial is over in a a few sentences
*Accounts contain contradictory information. In some Gospels we are told Jesus remained silent through the entire trial, while in John's Gospel he is giving a big speech. The number of people in various scenes change
*Gospel tell us the trial was not a public, making something as detailed as John's Gospel suspect (espcially when it's written 40+ years after the fact)
*Gospels were written anonymously, probably not by the proclaimed author. The church just had to make a guess at who wrote what. It's generally accepted 3 out of the 5 Gospels are actually multiple documents by different authors copy-pasted together. The 4th &5th John and Thomas contain very different portrayal of Jesus, escpially at the trial. John's trial is unlike any other and Thomas skips the trial completely.
>In contrast look at the accounts of Socrates which is 500 years earlier, yet the information is preserved far better and in a manner far less sketchy.
*Writings about him began within the same year of his death.
*Extreme amount of detail given, Phaedo gives more details about one day of Socrate's life than all 5 Gospels give about Jesus's entire life combined.
*All the accounts match up even down to small details.
*All the witnesses were confirmed to be at the trial and jail, both of which were public events.
*Writings were not anonymous and indisputably written by the proclaimed author
>>1017402
DUDE JUST READ AQUINAS ITLL ALL MAKE SENSE LMAO
>>1017402
>Why are the Gospel's accounts of Jesus's so sketchy?
They aren't
>>1017402
Because as a historical figure he probably did not exist, and even if he did he was such an unimportant personage in his own time as to warrant zero record even in the relatively advanced recordkeeping Roman Empire. He was as known worldwide as a random ISIL organizer was today to put it in context.
>>1017436
And Socrates was the town nutcase. What does that matter?
>>1017422
So... do you deny the points OP brought up or do you choose to ignore them?
>>1017436
Let's say he died in 35CE
The earliest date accepted by scholars for Mark is 65CE, 30 years after the event.
The earliest date accepted by scholars for Thomas is 50CE (20 years after event, but this pretty generous and only applies to the earliest lines in it)
So you are right. No one really wrote a thing about Jesus until at least 30 years AFTER his death. In contrast I think the earliest writing about Socrates is The Clouds, which was written when he was still alive.
>>1017452
Socrates is known to have spoken with very importaint people. Famous lawyers, judges, theologians, as well as well known aristocrats such as Plato. This part of the reason he is so well documented. Everyone that knew him could read and write.
He was so well known that a play was made about him when he was still alive (making fun of him).
In contrast Jesus, if he existed, hung around in a place where almost no one could read or write. This is partly why everything about his story was sketchy, every detail had to be transmitted orally. Oral messages can be destorted in a manner of days, and there is no way to separate the true story, from the one made up, to the one that is mostly true but has a few thins wrong in it. If stories can get fucked up in a manner of days imagine what 50+ years of people playing telephone can do!
>>1017452
The question wasn't his signifigance- but why he was unrecorded. Socrates was just as much a 'minor' figure really- he just happened to be a citizen in a much smaller, more philosophically open society.
Jesus was just a rabbi with strong opinions who got executed for insurgency in the ancient equivalent to a failed state in post-rebellion Judea.
Jesus as a man was not that important- the writings of his later worshipers are far more significant and represent most of the theologies origins.
>>1017469
Exactly. It's possible someone fits the rough description of Jesus and did exist- but its just as likely he's a pastiche of other similar messianic figures in a war-torn and largely ignorant backwater, or just a sort of idealized model of what the messiah should be.
Jesus would probably have resented all the circlejerking about his life details anyway- what with being a radical zealot and all.
>>1017469
Could have something to do with the lack of people that could actually read and write in the area at the time. Not even christposting, this is my legitimate secular speculation.
inb4 someone suggests the Jews hid/destroyed older documents to plan the takeover of western media 2000 years later.
>>1017469
What the fuck is CE, you fucking history smearing faggot?
>>1017519
>muh abbreviations (pronouns for christcucks edition).
>The expression "Common Era" can be found as early as 1708 in English,[7] and traced back to Latin usage among European Christians to 1615, as vulgaris aerae,[8] and to 1635 in English as Vulgar Era.
>>1017519
Who pissed in your cereal?
>>1017493
Early Christianity is marked by a struggle for the Jews/Christians bickering over multiple accounts of Jesus's life. It's well known that several rival accounts were hidden/destroyed. Only one copy of Thomas's Gospel is known to exist, it was hidden in a jar for almost 2,000 years. Other documents such as Gospel of the Ebionites, allegedly written by James himself were completely destroyed by rival factions. There is also the mysterious Q source.
What makes Gospel study so fasiciniating is this: all of the Gospels contain false information about Jesus. However almost all scholars agree there was some kind of apocalyptic Jewish preacher going around that inspired these stories.
Because, likely, he's been made up out of wholecloth. Cue the video.
>>1017555
>Early Christianity is marked by a struggle for the Jews/Christians bickering over multiple accounts of Jesus's life.
This. Also, after the Roman Empire adopted Christianity as its state religion; the Council(s) of Nicaea were hosted to essentially solidified what would be the canon and proper sources for the modern day Bible, everything else was heresy and systematically destroyed.
>they didn't write about it immediately so that means they never talked about it until they started writing about it
stale meme desu fampai
>>1017469
>CE
>>1017422
Go read the depiction of Jesus crucifixion in Mark, the skip to John and do the same thing. Tell me they're talking about the same guy.
Not to mention the fact that Jesus doesn't even die on the same day in John as he does in Mark
>>1017519
>using BC/AD
Fuck off, Christcuck.
>>1017402
>*Writings began 40-80 years after his death
The Jew wars were heating up, and nobody wanted to lose the information in the chaos. Plus, they all thought Jesus was going to come back in their lifetimes. The writings actually began a few years after his death, and continued until the last book was written in 95 AD.
>*Extremely low amount of detail, especially at his trial. Mathew's Gospel for instance only has one spoken line by Jesus and the trial is over in a a few sentences
That mock trial did not deserve much in the way of memorializing, and Matthew was focused on presenting the King of the Jews to the Jews.
>*Accounts contain contradictory information. In some Gospels we are told Jesus remained silent through the entire trial, while in John's Gospel he is giving a big speech. The number of people in various scenes change
Not remained silent; did not offer a defense. Big difference.
>*Gospel tell us the trial was not a public, making something as detailed as John's Gospel suspect (espcially when it's written 40+ years after the fact)
It was an illegal sham trial.
>*Gospels were written anonymously, probably not by the proclaimed author. The church just had to make a guess at who wrote what. It's generally accepted 3 out of the 5 Gospels are actually multiple documents by different authors copy-pasted together. The 4th &5th John and Thomas contain very different portrayal of Jesus, escpially at the trial. John's trial is unlike any other and Thomas skips the trial completely.
You're conflating the real gospels with gnostic gospels.
>>In contrast look at the accounts of Socrates which is 500 years earlier, yet the information is preserved far better and in a manner far less sketchy.
Just the opposite. Only a handful of manuscripts of Socrates exist, and those from a thousand years later. There are tens of thousands of NT manuscripts, dating back to 20 years after the events.
>>1017469
45 AD is the earliest date for Mark.
>Talking about Jesus
>Uses CE
Thomas is a gnostic gospel; the earliest date for it is 200 AD, and it was not written by Thomas.
You both are wrong. Paul was writing about Jesus in the 30's, and Jesus died in 32 AD.
>>1020475
All of the gospels record that Jesus died on Nisan 14, Passover.
>>1020508
>"real gospels"
There's no such thing as a "real gospel", considering the councils arbitrarily decided which gospels to add in or throw out based on aesthetic preferences and petty conflicts/squabbles. The gnostic gospel of Judas and the secret gospel of Mark are as "real" as the gospel of Matthew or the gospel of Luke.
Stupid Christcuck.
>>1020507
lmao BCE/CE is literally the same, it doesn't start anywhere new. It's just renamed to avoid hurting your sensibilities.
>>1020533
Real gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
Gnostic gospels: Judas, Mary, Thomas, etc., not written by Judas, Mary, Thomas, etc.
There very much are real gospels and fake gospels. Those councils you deride knew the real from the fake. I wonder why you're so confused.
>>1020555
Godless people are very thin skinned.
Gospel is more reliable than any other story of antiquity.
If you don't believe in Jesus, you might aswell not believe in any other ancient figure.
Who am I kidding, you atheists seek any excuse to reject God, even to the point of believing in the laughable notion that Jesus never existed or that the NT is somehow unhistoric.
>>1017469
>CE
It's AD and BC you retard.
Before Christ and After Death.
Why do atheists let Satan fuck them in the ass?
>>1020524
> I'll just ignore all three synoptic gospels which put the last supper after the Passover sacrifice, and the crucifixion on the day after.
>>1020590
They don't. They just kept the law and the festivals better back then. Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread used to be distinct, and the latter is a special sabbath.
Wednesday night, technically Passover: Last Supper.
Wednesday night: Sham trial.
Thursday, Passover: Crucifixion and death and burial.
Friday: In the tomb.
Saturday: In the tomb.
Sunday morning before the sun comes up: already out of the tomb.
Three days, and three nights, the sign of Jonah that Jesus promised the pharisees.
>>1020566
>"anything I don't like and that doesn't conform to my very specific sense of aesthetics or that someone I dislike likes is false, and only what I like and validates my worldview is real/true"
Literally how the members of the various councils decided what books went into the canon. Christcucks are as bad as Redditors who obsess over the expanded universe canon of their capeshit: actually, worse, since they tend to try to force others to live by these works of fiction.
>>1020606
I'll simplify it for you, since you seem to think I am involved in this process.
Everything properly in the bible is true.
Anything contrary to the Word of God is false.
>>1020606
I'm sorry you think I care what books of the bible the ancients put in their canon. Perhaps you are aware that different groups put different books into their canon.
I only care about the 66 books of the bible, not the canon of different churches.
>>1020586
>AD
>After Death
>not Anno Domini
>>1017402
Look at the Church of Scientology's current disinfo campaign about L. Ron Hubbard. Now imagine it taking time and place when authentic records are basically non-existent.
Jesus probably existed, probably started a messianic cult, and probably was put to death. Beyond that, who the fuck can say.
>>1020586
>after death
Please
>>1020586
>Amerifat education
>>1020628
So you admit we are currently In The Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Sixteen.
>>1020630
>if you disagree with me, you must be american!
nice meme
>>1020604
>They don't.
They do.
>. Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread used to be distinct
Yes, the "Passover" was done on the afternoon of the 14th, and the "Feast of the Unleavened bread" started that evening, on the 15th. WHich means the Synoptics put the crucifixion on the 15th, whereas John puts it on the 14th.
> the latter is a special sabbath.
It's a festival, not a sabbath.
>Wednesday night, technically Passover: Last Supper.
Wednesday night: Sham trial.
Thursday, Passover: Crucifixion and death and burial.
Your daily reminder that according to Leviticus, the Feast of unleavened bread is AFTER the Passover. Leviticus 23:4-6.
>>1020638
The afternoon of the 14th is Thursday afternoon, when Jesus was being crucified.
Jesus was buried before sundown on the 14th, before the 15th started.
Pilate had to be told the next day was a special sabbath; he wasn't a Jew and didn't realize that there was an extra sabbath that week.
All of the gospels put the crucifixion on Nisan 14, Thursday, Passover.
Passover: Nisan 14
Feast of Unleavened Bread: Nisan 15
Daily reminder that Jews start the day at sundown, and Romans start the day at midnight, because (antichrist).
>>1020671
>The afternoon of the 14th is Thursday afternoon, when Jesus was being crucified.
Unless you believe the synoptic gospels, who mention that the passover offering was being brought around the time that the apostles were looking for a palce to have dinner (thus, the afternoon of the 14th). Since the crucifixion is the next day, that's the 15th.
>Pilate had to be told the next day was a special sabbath; he wasn't a Jew and didn't realize that there was an extra sabbath that week.
And you need to be told that no such thing exists, nor has existed outside of Christians making shit up.
>All of the gospels put the crucifixion on Nisan 14, Thursday, Passover.
Then Mark, Matthew, and Luke need to do some funny explaining as to why the entire Jewish nation brought their passover offerings a day early.
>Passover: Nisan 14
>Feast of Unleavened Bread: Nisan 15
Precisely. Now go look up Mark, Matthew, and Luke, about how they all mention that the passover was being brought at around the time of the last supper.
>>1020685
It's called the Day of Preparation. Aren't you a Jew? Why don't you know this stuff?
Leviticus
In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at twilight (*when God says a new day begins) is Yahweh's Passover.
6 'Then on the fifteenth day of the same month there is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to Yahweh; for seven days you shall eat unleavened bread.
7 'On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall not do any laborious work.
8 'But for seven days you shall present an offering by fire to Yahweh. On the seventh day is a holy convocation; you shall not do any laborious work.'" Leviticus 23:5-8
Luckily for you, as a Christian, I know my scriptures:
Luke
52…this man (Joseph of Arimathea) went to Pilate and asked for the body of Y’shua.
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 And it was the preparation day, and the Sabbath was about to begin. Luke 23:52-54
John 19
31 The Jews therefore, because it was the day of preparation, so that the
bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day)
John 19
42 Therefore on account of the Jewish day of preparation, because the
tomb was nearby, they laid Y’shua there.
Passover is not a Sabbath. The Feast of Unleavened Bread is a Sabbath.
>>1020579
Specifically why do you think the Gospel is more reliable than any other story of antiquity? Pretty bold claim considering it is one of the remaining stories without archaeological confirmation despite being written centuries after Herodotus or the record keepers of Assyria.
>>1020566
>Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
>Written by
Mark and Matthew are hearsay at best. Someone wrote about what someone else said they heard another person say. Matthew isn't a sayings Gospel. Mark is unlikely to be authentically written by the claimed interpreter Mark John.
Luke is conjecture because Paul supposedly had a companion named Luke so that must be Luke, despite Lukes inaccurate representation of Paul.
John is completely baseless. Beloved Disciple can be anyone and it was written by multiple people.
And Matthew and Luke do copypaste from Mark.
Those are the gospels he was referring to.
>>1020728
They were inspired by the Holy Spirit of God, Who is Truth.
>>1020579
>Gospel is more reliable than any other story of antiquity.
>>1020533
18+
>>1020737
How do you know that?
>>1020732
Not sure why you care about this stuff, since you don't believe it and by it, you are going to hell.
Oh, wait, you think that if you discredit it, that somehow you won't go to hell?
kek
Authors:
Matthew: Matthew, the Levite tax collector and disciple of God. This one was written for you. So was the Epistle to the Hebrews. (Not that you can understand them, but they tried.)
Mark: John Mark, from Peter's recollections
Luke: Luke, companion of Paul
John: John the beloved apostle
>>1020743
How do you not?
>>1020727
>Irrelevant crap.
Stop deflecting. The unleavened bread. isn't relevant to this. What is is when the paschal offering is to be given, which is the afternoon of the 14th of Nisan. You agree with this, or seem to in your previous posts. If you forgot, you can find this in Numbers, 28:16
Now, knowing that the passover is given on the afternoon of the 14th, we can work backwards. You start with the knowledge, in all 4 gospels, that the Last Supper was the day before the crucifixion. You agree with this part, yes?
Now we look at the synoptics
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+14:12-26
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+26:17-30
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2022:7-38
> On the first day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, when it was customary to sacrifice the Passover lamb, Jesus’ disciples asked him, “Where do you want us to go and make preparations for you to eat the Passover?”
> On the first day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Where do you want us to make preparations for you to eat the Passover?”
> Then came the day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. 8 Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and make preparations for us to eat the Passover.”
All three put the last supper at the time when the sacrifice was being given. It is only John that says that it was the day before.
So which is it? Are you going to admit that you're wrong, or are you going to admit that you can't read?
>>1020744
We care about it because it affects our lives (and in some cases ends them). We've done well to move away from your book the past few centuries by abolishing slavery and ending mass executions in the name of Christ, but there remains work to be done, especially in the field of stem cell research and the stigma of contraception.
Basically the advancement of society has required more and more shifts to moderation and more and more popular denial of Bible verses. For example, does your church allow women on their periods to worship?
desu senpai, this is the next logical step, you can keep holding our species back because of your iron age Cannaanite war god, or we can continue our progress.
>>1020579
You realize that most of those listed in that image aren't typically valued for their utility as historical items, but for their artistic/philosophical merits, and others like Caesar, are taken somewhat at face value simply because the political realities of Europe's history don't make sense without them. Whereas Jesus being made up (not saying he was, I actually agree that he existed) doesn't actually fuck up much at all.
>>1020758
The bible, the law, "irrelevant crap". That explains so much about you.
The offering is to be given on the afternoon of the 14th of Nisan.
Jesus is the offering.
He was given on the 14th of Nisan, after being inspected by the scribes and pharisees on Nisan 10, and found spotless and blameless.
>>1020744
>you are going to hell.
Prove it.
>>1020753
What? How do I not know that your holy book is infallible truth? Is that what you are asking?
Well, among other things, other people are flying planes into buildings because of their holy truth, I'd argue they seem at least as convinced as you or anyone else. They KNOW their religion is truth. Does that make it fact?
>>1020793
Additionally you should check some interviews with the Heaven's Gate cult members from 1997. These people aren't crazy or stupid, and neither are you. I'm not arguing that faith isn't real, I'm arguing that it doesn't equal truth.
>>1020744
>Not sure why you care about this stuff
Because it is idiots like you that would have us die or, worse, live repressed lives and halt our progress for some ancient solar deity and Medieval fictions made to employ the otherwise useless parasitic clergy.
>>1020802
honestly this isn't helpful. Calling them idiots isn't accurate. Faith is a normal human phenomenon and religious people aren't stupid.
>>1020783
>The offering is to be given on the afternoon of the 14th of Nisan.
So you admit then, that according to all the Gospels except John, the Last supper was on the 14th, since they mention it being at around the time the lambs were being offered, and the crucifixion, on the next day, was the 15th.
See how this chain of reasoning didn't involve the feast of unleavened bread at all?
>>1020787
Can you say, right now, out loud, that Jesus is Lord? Do you believe in your heart, right now, that God raised Him from the dead?
If yes: Heaven
If no: Hell
Prove it to yourself.
>>1020768
Abolishing slavery? I'm sorry, did you say abolishing slavery?
And where might this place be, where they abolished slavery? Certainly not in the USA, where there are more slaves than there were just prior to the Civil War?
Where do you live that you do not know this?
>>1020828
>"it's real because I say so"
This is why no one takes you seriously and why your belief-system is rapidly fading into irrelevance in the modern West.
>>1020768
>iron age Cannaanite war god,
I do not worship Chemosh, and I suggest you find out the difference between the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the god of the most evil people on earth, from whose loins you must have sprung.
>>1020828
Do you do nothing but troll? Also I can say all kinds of things. The truth is not sacred to me.
>>1020793
There's only one holy book on earth, so no, the muslims aren't following anything holy.
How do you not know that?
>>1020802
I hate parasitic clergy more than you do, I reckon.
Because I know how much God hates them, while you think they belong to God.
What I want for you is what I have; a relationship with the living God, and an awesome place to spend eternity getting to know God better and better each day.
>>1020826
Yes, the last supper was on Wednesday night, the 14th, and the crucifixion was on Thursday morning, the 14th.
Do you understand that the Jewish day starts at sundown, or no?
>>1020844
It's real because God says so.
>>1020862
Kill yourself, Christcuck.
>>1020853
You think you can.
Go ahead and try it, for real.
>>1020880
Hmmmm, such a tempting offer. Leave the demonic hordes that gather here and be in heaven with Jesus?
Hmmmm.....
I guess it's a shame the Holy Spirit in me won't let me do that.
>>1020876
Then let God say so himself in a direct manner rather than being furtive and actively trying to sabotage his own mission.
Most ancient accounts of people and events it wasn't uncommon for them to be recorded hundreds of years afterwards.
>>1020872
>Yes, the last supper was on Wednesday night, the 14th, and the crucifixion was on Thursday morning, the 14th.
No, because the offering is on the afternoon of the 14th, and then ext day is the 15th.
>Do you understand that the Jewish day starts at sundown, or no?
Do you understand that the afternoon is before sundown?
>>1020876
This guy believes that he bible is self evident true, and anyone who does not acknowledge it is evil.
It took me awhile to figure this out because its so blatantly illogical I have to strain to think like that
>>1020876
Prove it.
>>1020856
You are ignoring my point about faith - am I being trolled? I will grant you the benefit of the doubt and believe this is seriously how you feel about the Bible?
But do you genuinely believe that Muslims don't feel the same way about their book? Do you believe that someone who would blow themselves up for God doesn't also feel the same feelings of faith that you do? Honestly?
>>1020907
90% sure this dude is just fucking around. Probably the same guy who calls evolution a cult.
Impressive, effective, long-form baiting.
>>1020888
He did.
DELET THIS.
>>1020843
Okay, remove slavery from my post, the point stands without it. Got retorts for the other parts?
>>1020899
Wednesday night. Last supper. Nisan 14.
Thursday. Nisan 14. Crucifixion.
Jesus is the Lamb of God, slaughtered on the Passover. Nisan 14th.
You say you understand these things, and then continually express your ignorance thereof.
>>1020907
Yes, as 30% of it is prophecy, and tells the end of the world from the beginning, which is something only God can do.
2 Timothy 3
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
All Christians know this to be true, not just me.
>>1020926
Why don't you wait until God proves it to you?
>>1017402
Mysterious ways brother.
>>1020938
No, you just don't know what faith is. You think it's some sort of religious thing.
Faith is a human ability; faith is the human ability to believe the unseen. Everyone has it, and everyone uses it. Any time you say you can "see" something happening in the future, it's by faith. Any sort of "The Secret" stuff, visualizing the future and making it happen, is done by faith.
The object of the muslim's faith is in allah, the devil. Hence 1400 years of bloody warfare, slaughter, child molestation and abuse.
>>1020972
Because I don't believe in him and see no reason to. The One is formless and perfect, and the Christian anthropomorphizing of it is off-base.
>>1020960
>Wednesday night. Last supper. Nisan 14.
Don't you remember? Days start at the evening. That wednesday night is the 15th, not the 14th.
Don't you remember your Exodus 12:8? After you make the sacrifice in the afternoon, you eat it that evening, when the "unleavened bread and bitter herbs are before you".
The afternoon of the 14th, people slaughter their lambs. They take the roasted meat home. That night (which is now the 15th) you have your dinner, eating the lamb and bitter herbs and unleavened bread.
You would know this if you bothered to read the Bible, but of course that's too much effort for you. I'll stick with the New Testament, since that's easier for you.
Remember how in the above verses, it talked about the lambs being offered at the time of the last supper? Now skip ahead to John's presentation to Pilate: The priests don't want to go in because it would invalidate them from bringing the offerings, which according to the other three, were given the day before.
>>1020958
Yes.
The progress you refer to is the coming kingdom of the antichrist; the NWO. You're cheering it on, but you will fall victim to it.
>>1020987
How do you account for the resurrection of Jesus, Who said He is God?
>>1020983
>Any time you say you can "see" something happening in the future, it's by faith.
No, I think that's called reason. A better description of faith would be that you have faith that your best friend wont fuck you over.
>>1020988
Wednesday night. Nisan 14th. Last Supper.
Thursday morning to afternoon. Nisan 14. Passover.
Jesus. Lamb of God, slain for the sins of the world. His body eaten by the whole world. Completely.
Passover isn't about the Exodus anymore.
It's about the Lamb of God. It's about the cross. It's about the resurrection.
It's about worshiping YHWH.
>>1020996
That it didn't happen and there's no actual evidence of it.
But even aside from that, the resurrection of Jesus doesn't prove that he's God. It just proves he came back from the dead. He could just as easily be any number of demons, spirits, or pagan gods playing some manner of long game.
>>1020999
Reason isn't time specific, or visually specific. Faith is. All faith is used believing things you cannot see. You have never seen electrons, for instance, but you know they exist. At least, you believe they exist. You can believe there is a woman out there for you, although you have not yet seen her.
>>1017402
They're sketchy because they're patently filled with "creative" history, if not lies. Only retards actually believe that shit happened.
>>1021012
There's a bunch of His boys wrote about it. I suggest considering eyewitness testimony as evidence.
>>1021019
We don't typically consider eyewitness testimony to be reliable evidence. Particularly from a group of people who have an obvious agenda in pushing a specific testimony. There are also inconsistencies in the details.
>>1021006
I'm very sorry that you're so deluded. I'll be including you tonight in my prayers, and may the Holy One, Blessed Be He, cure your deficient understanding.
>>1020983
Allah is satan? I didn't know that. I read at the libary it was just the Arabic word for the Abrahamic god, and that Arabic Christians also use the word.
What makes you think they worship Satan?
>>1021027
It's pretty reliable when the Holy Spirit of God is inspired the authors, dwelling within them, and bringing all things to their remembrance.
At least, God's going to consider that very reliable. True even.
So, you kind of stand before God without excuse.
>>1021028
kek
He has never heard any of your prayers, since you have not surrendered to Him yet; you do not have His Son, and therefore you do not have Him, as He and the Son are One.
There is only One God.
>>1021035
>It's pretty reliable when the Holy Spirit of God is inspired the authors, dwelling within them, and bringing all things to their remembrance.
That's the subject of contention here. If you can prove that, your case is airtight. But you haven't yet proven that. You can't use the point in contention as proof. That would be like trying a man for murder and using the fact he was on trial for murder as evidence of his guilt.
>>1020521
>Paul was writing about Jesus in the 30s
This is a history board
>>>/pol/
>>1020744
>believing anyone besides God can judge who's going where
Satanist detected
OP here
>>1020566
>>1020508
If you want to say some Gospels are fake than you have actually made Jesus even LESS BELIEVABLE. Everyone that talks about Socrates had the exact same story. Things get even worst when many historians think the canonical gospels borrow quotes from Thomas (which you are telling me is a fake).
You don't address any of the points. Many of the statements you made are outright wrong.
>>1020508
>Not remained silent; did not offer a defense
Either the earlier gospels are correct and Jesus remained silent or everything John says never happened.
>It was an illegal sham trial.
I'm talking about Pilate's one. Jesus has a different trial in John than the others. Jesus, Pilate, and the Jews all act completely differently. Furthermore John tells us the trial was not public, so there shouldn't even by eyewittnesses by his disciples. In other word's John invalidates not only his only gospel but the other 3 canonical ones as well.
>Only a handful of manuscripts of Socrates exist, and those from a thousand years later.
This is a direct lie.
Earliest writing by Plato: 399 CE
http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/platochron.html
Earliest mention of Socrates: 423
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clouds
Socrates death: 399
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates
People were writing about Socrates before he died
Most historians put the earliest Gospel date at 70CE
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel
Paul is completly untrusty worthy as a source of information. He never knew the man. Meanwhile the writers cannonical Gospels (if they are even written by who they say are), waited until they were 60, 70, or even 80 years old to write this down and 3/4 of the cannonical Gospels are considered to be copy-pastes of older documents.
>>1020996
>Jesus is God
Oh I'm with a bunch of loonies in this fucking thread.
Old Testament preaches a single god you fucks. Read your own damn bible.
>>1021032
Because they worship Hubal, the god of Mohammad's father, by the name of allah. Hubal is HaBaal, the Ba'al of the Moabites.
The Arabs have always worshiped Ba'al, not the God of the Jews.
I am not like you; I do not believe people are christians just because they say so, but I test them to see if they are my brother or sister.
>>1021042
Everything properly in the bible is true.
2 Timothy 3 is in the bible.
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
It is true.
>>1021116
Your delusion is showing
>>1021075
Yes, thank you. Very helpful information.
>>1021088
That admonition is for final judgment, not an assessment of a person's ending from their words now.
He can repent, and be saved, tomorrow.
>>1017469
>>>1017436
>The earliest date accepted by scholars for Mark is 65CE
>The earliest date accepted by scholars for Thomas is 50CE
Evidences? I mean EVIDENCES. Not this 7Q5 crap.
>>1021093
The fake ones are fake, and they don't make Jesus any different by their omission, since they don't speak of the real Jesus.
Again, remained silent is a term of art, and when accused, Jesus remained silent. The Jews had their own version of the Fifth Amendment, and people were not supposed to be forced to incriminate themselves.
None of the gospels are invalidated by your hatred and mischaracterization of them, nor are they inaccurate by dint of your misunderstandings both intentional and unintended.
Plato
Date written: 427-347 B.C.
Earliest copy: 900 AD
Time span: 1200+ years
Number of copies: 7
Jesus
Dates written: 45 to 95 AD
Earliest copy: 130 AD
Time span: Less than a hundred years.
Number of copies: 5600
Accuracy of copies: 99.5%
>>1021098
Yup.
Father is God.
Son is God.
Spirit is God.
There is One God. One triune God.
>>1021129
Yours is if you think the Jews and the Arabs worship the same God.
>>1021136
>Albert Hogeterp argues that the Gospel's saying 12, which attributes leadership of the community to James the Just rather than to Peter, agrees with the description of the early Jerusalem church by Paul in Galatians 2:1–14 and may reflect a tradition predating AD
Other information
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas#Date_of_composition
>>1021161
Daily Reminder the Gospel of Thomas is not in the bible for very good reasons.
The Gospel of Thomas is supposedly a collection of 114 sayings of Jesus that was discovered in 1945 at the village of Nag Hammadi in Egypt. Before the Nag Hammadi discovery, very little was known about the Gospel of Thomas other than three small fragments from Oxyrynchus that date to A.D. 200 and roughly a half-dozen allusions from Church Fathers. The manuscripts discovered at Nag Hammadi dates to around A.D. 340 though the original composition of the Gospel of Thomas was definitely before that time probably sometime around A.D. 140 to 180.
The Gospel of Thomas was probably written by someone in the second century who had an admiration of James (see saying 12), the brother of Jesus, who died in 62 A.D.1 It also probably was a person who group who admired the apostle Thomas and had some sort of Gnostic or Syrian Christian influence.
>>1021161
>Paul took control of the church away from James and redefined the religion
"The Just" is right.
>>1021204
James, the asshole brother of Jesus who never believed in Jesus until after the resurrection, was telling people to be circumcised, baptized in the Jewish temple, and uphold the Law of Moses.
Judaizing doesn't even cover it; that's straight up Jewing.
So no, Paul did not take the teaching of the New Covenant away from James; James wasn't even trying to teach it. Hence the fixation on the law, following the law, doing works, etc.
>>1021150
The "earliest" copy is not the same thing as the date written dummy. Do you fucking think Aristophanes was writing books in the year 1,100?
And you know what? You havn't addressed anything in my OP about the problems with taking the Gospels seriously. John does not give the same account of the trial as the other gospels. Mark's original Gospel has no ressurection.
Furthermore there is no reason to beleive these are written by their reported author. Mathew and Luke are copy pastes of Q and Mark. John and Mark are anonymous.
What I have put forth are established facts in biblical scholarship. I'm sorry the historical truth is perceived to as "hate".
>>1021219
>life long twin brother of Jesus and one of his chosen apostles
Heretic
>guy who literally never knew him about him
everyone is wrong except him
>>1020566
>Real gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
>>1021232
Again, what you are relying on was copied over a thousand years from the event.
Mark's original has no ending for a reason, a reason you won't understand because you don't want to, but I'll tell you anyways.
Mark, written by John Mark, is the account of Peter:
"Papias claimed that Mark, the Evangelist, who had never heard Christ, was the interpreter of Peter, and that he carefully gave an account of everything he remembered from the preaching of Peter."
Mark wrote of Jesus as the Suffering Servant, to the Romans. As such, there is no genealogy, and no finality, as nobody cares about the birth or death of the servant, only what the servant does while he's serving his master, in this case, God.
And since there is nothing false in the ending of Mark, and since we do not have the autographs, and as Mark writing it is nowhere near as important as the Holy Spirit inspiring whomever wrote it, you can take the ending as gospel too.
Matthew: Lion, King of the Jews, to the Jews;
Mark: Ox, Suffering Servant, to the Romans;
Luke: Man, Son of Man, to the Greeks; and
John: Eagle, Son of God, to the world.
Those are the four faces of Jesus written of in the gospel.
>>1021252
Matthew 13
When He had come to His own country, He taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished and said, “Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works? Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us?
Idolator.
>>1021075
>>1021130
Paul wasnt writing until around 55. As near as we can tell he is executed in 59 or 60 AD. He also never once mentions any gospels. Which is weird since a first (or 2nd depending on the gospel) or 2nd hand account would probably be important to somebody who never met Jesus.
The earliest accepted date for Mark is 65 AD but it's probably closer to 70-75.
Daily reminder if you actively call people heretics you need to go outside
>>1021266
Papias was born long after the events. He was not so much as a historian as a Christian apologetic. Historians did not write on Jesus and the Gospels because these were not seen as historically important events.
There is no reason to think that someone like Peter would have an interprettor. There isn't even any reason to think Mark was written by Peter. Neither of these claims has any evidense. Mark could have been written by anyone and itself is likely based on earlier sources rather than being the account of an eye-wittness: consider that Plato wrote his report in the same year as Socrates death, while the writer of Mark waited more than 30 years.
Even than you have failed to explain why Mark's ending is different from the other endings. "The holy spirit did it" is not a good answer. You can't presuppose the truth of a document in order to prove the document true, that is circular reasoning.
If basic history about the life and death of Jesus is not recorded accurately there is no reason to suggest something as detailed as his teachings would be recorded well either. Christ has no eye wittnesses.
>>1021266
Well obviously early Christians disagreed with you because they tacked an ending onto it. and then altered that ending when they realized part of it contradicted doctrine.
>>1021300
Are you 2000 years old? No? So you have no first hand knowledge? And you seem oblivious to the early dating of Mark, noting that the later date was merely the result of people denying prophecy is a real thing?
Do I give you any impression that I care where liberal scholars date Mark?
>>1021325
>Historians did not write on Jesus and the Gospels
About three dozen did.
How many is enough?
>>1021325
>There is no reason to think that someone like Peter would have an interprettor.
Yes, most Jewish fisherman were fluent in Greek.
>>1021325
>Even than you have failed to explain why Mark's ending is different from the other endings.
You literally could not have read my post.
>>1021325
>Christ has no eye wittnesses.
He has billions.
>>1021336
>it's a librul conspiracy
Also, are you 2000 years old? Do you have first hand knowledge?
>>1021266
But the earliest church fathers who essentially laid the foundations for the modern christian belief system disagreed with you so much that they added on multiple endings to Mark.
Also, your reasoning is circular. Like holy shit, I can't even fathom the mental gymnastics you have to do instead of just admitting that the bible was written by humans and contains errors. That doesn't invalidate your faith you ninny.
>>1021325
Mark wasn't even intended to be a biographical account. For all intents and purposes it's a work of literature
>>1021342
There no reason to think Peter put anything to paper with or without an interprettaor. Jesus's ministry happened in one of the most illiterate parts of the world.
>>1021336
So Paul never mentioning the gospels one time even though he was writing in 55 isn't evidence?
There's also linguistic evidence used in the dating.
Also,
>muh liberal scholars
argument is absolutely fucking retarded considering the vast majority of biblical scholars are christian. You have to go to Germany to find academic majority non-christian biblical scholars and their interpretation of Jesus is much harsher than the one we find in English speaking academia.
>>1021365
>and their interpretation of Jesus is much harsher than the one we find in English speaking academia.
In what way? Genuinely curious
>>1021351
Well than that sure makes things shitty?
Mark: Not a biography, literature
Luke&Mathew: Half copy pasted from Mark, half from the unknown Q
John: Written in several stages by different authors at a time when just about everyone who was born in Jesus's time would be dead.
Thomas: Not a biography either
>>1021350
The bible was written by humans who were filled with, and inspired by, the Holy Spirit of God.
The last bit makes it inerrant. And authoritative. And no amount of liberal scholars will ever change that.
>>1021351
It's what Peter wanted you to know about Jesus.
>>1021364
With interpreter makes it not only likely, but a done deal.
Illiterate people who do not commit anything to paper have no need for interpreters.
>>1021374
Proofs? Where are the proofs?
>>1021374
If you want to take that as a matter of faith that's fine.
It's not historical however.
You tell me the Gospels are accurate because of the holy spirit. In order to believe in the holy spirit you must first assume the Gospels are accurate. This is a circular argument for the Gospels. The Gospels are true because they say they are true.
>>1021365
From what I have seen here and elsewhere, the vast majority of biblical scholars are godless liberals.
When Paul said that Peter, James and John added nothing to his faith, maybe believe him.
>>1021388
>From what I have seen here and elsewhere, the vast majority of biblical scholars are godless liberals.
Proofs? Because it stands to reason the majority of people with enough interest in the bible to seriously study it would be themselves Christian.
>>1021388
The religion of a scholar does not change what is historically true. As long as an idea is backed by strong evidense it doesn't matter who is saying it, the evidense speaks for itself.
Also your discontent with Peter, James, and John boarders on calling them heretics. Paul is like Joseph Smith, he went in and radically changed the religion: both of them base their justification on a miraculous story of Jesus telling them that everyone is wrong except them.
The fact is James spent his whole life with Jesus, yet you do not take his word on what the man's teachings were. Than a new prophet comes and you are willing to accept him uncondtionally.
>>1021417
Based anon
>>1021417
You win the thread
>>1021388
>From what I have seen here and elsewhere, the vast majority of biblical scholars are godless liberals.
because there are so many academic biblical scholars on fucking 4chan
>>1021368
>In what way? Genuinely curious
Different scholars obviously believe different things but the dominant interpretation of Jesus in the english speaking world is that Jesus was preaching a sort of spiritual eschatology (eschatology is basically ones view of the end of the world). They mostly think that Jesus wasn't talking about a literal end of the world but rather a spiritual kingdom of heaven that would be brought about by man's actions towards eachother. If everyone is kind and acts well we will have achieved a sort of spiritual kingdom of heaven on earth.
The German view is mostly that he was just one of many Jewish apocalyptic preachers and that he literally thought the world would end in his lifetime when God installed a literal kingdom of heaven on earth. The 12 disciples would more or less "rule" the kingdom of heaven and Jesus would rule the kingdom by extension since they were his disciples.
>>1021430
Right? His first line was just so perfect.
>>1021388
>because you're an athiest you're automatically a liberal
You're retarded.
>>1021417
>The fact is James spent his whole life with Jesus, yet you do not take his word on what the man's teachings were. Than a new prophet comes and you are willing to accept him uncondtionally.
Fucking this. He's literally following Paul because you like his ideas more, whether or not he'll admit it.
I'm gonna jump in here and ask for a good, single-volume work detailing all this talk of Gospel studies; anyone know one? I have the Oxford NRSV which has all manner of essays and footnotes alongside the text which is nice, but I'd like some academic history text as opposed to elucidations and the like that the NRSV has.
>inb4 the Christfriend just tells me to read the KJV or something.
>>1021458
Eisenman
>>1021463
I'm just getting a bunch of stuff about James and some other irrelevant stuff. Any specific titles?
>>1021399
You seem quite oblivious to the spiritual war that rages on earth, and the nature of the enemy, and his choice targets.
>>1021417
There's your opinion, and then there's this:
1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
So, there you have it. Liberal scholars, i.e. godless man, cannot understand the things of God because they lack spiritual discernment. Not intelligence. The godless can be quite intelligent. But the godless can never be as intelligent as their father the devil, whose work they do by their lies.
>>1021417
>Than a new prophet comes and you are willing to accept him uncondtionally.
Paul is not a new prophet, as he is not a prophet at all but an apostle.
James was not an apostle.
>>1021436
If you can't see disgruntled seminary dropouts everywhere on 4chan, that's really not my problem.
>>1021439
Revelation 22:15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.
>>1021443
Atheists are fools.
>>1021444
Accounts written by people with a pro-Paul agenda say he followed him.
On the other hand in history the Ebionates, who were lead by James were attacked and destroyed as heretics, we are also told that they had alternative versions of the bible books which did not express Paul's views.
It is not possible for both these things to be true. James could not have both followed Paul and opposed him only to be destroyed. One of the stories is invented. So which one is made up?
It is very unlikely to think that Paul's men would make up a story where they destroy James and his church. On the other hand them making up a story where James sided with them is something they would have a motive for.
>>1021444
I'm following Jesus. Paul followed Jesus. So I'll end up where Paul and Jesus are.
>>1021497
>If you can't see disgruntled seminary dropouts everywhere on 4chan, that's really not my problem.
You see whatever you want to see because it makes you feel special.
>>1021506
I used to be just like you.
>>1021510
>I'm following Jesus. Paul followed Jesus.
So did Peter. So did James. But you ignore them because it isn't what you want to believe.
>>1021507
James never followed Paul's teachings; James dismissed Paul and basically told him not to try to teach anything to the Jews, but he could teach whatever he wanted to the Gentiles.
Because again, James the Judaizer didn't give a rip about Gentiles, only Jews.
>>1021512
I see, and believe, the truth.
What is your guiding light, again?
>>1021513
Simply not possible, as I am saved.
>>1021514
Not only that but they are arguing against the idea that an arguement can stand on reason and historical evidence.
They have literally turned this into faith vs reason.
>>1021526
>I see, and believe, the truth.
>What is your guiding light, again?
You believe it to be the truth because you want it to be.
My guiding light is a basic capacity for reason which you appear to lack.
>>1021514
They're all bible verses. I have no idea what I will do when I'm refuted, because I'm giving you the truth, and the truth is never refuted.
If you think no historian has a bias due to his worldview, you're insane, have never read a historian, and have known no historians. If you think that the godless liberal scholars know anything about the things of God, you think something contrary to the Word of God.
>>1021518
Shifting goalposts is so annoying.
I'm following Jesus. Peter, James and John, and Paul, followed Jesus. We will all end up together, where Paul is sitting on the right hand of Jesus, and not James, who will be in a corner somewhere, muttering to himself.
>>1021538
God's revealed truth.
Your ability to understand things.
Which is higher?
>>1021543
If you do not worship Jesus, you do not worship God, as Jesus is God, and there is only one God.
I know that I am saved, yes. And I know that a person once saved can never be not saved, in this age.
>>1021544
Unsurprising to see a Christian mocking someone who literally just followed the Law, like Jesus did.
>>1021539
>you think something contrary to the Word of God.
the word of God is contrary to itself. You just refuse to admit because you'd rather bury your head in the sand and use circular logic to believe whatever you want to believe.
If you want to take it as a matter of faith that's your perogative but that's exactly what you're doing, taking it on faith. You have no claims that don't rely on circular logic.
>>1021436
> They mostly think that Jesus wasn't talking about a literal end of the world but rather a spiritual kingdom of heaven that would be brought about by man's actions towards eachother. If everyone is kind and acts well we will have achieved a sort of spiritual kingdom of heaven on earth.
Do you have any books that expand on this view?
Also isn't this the interpretation Nietzsche had? I find it odd that the Germans would adopt would the literal interpretation you mentioned.
>>1021549
>If you do not worship Jesus, you do not worship God, as Jesus is God, and there is only one God.
A man cannot be God. But you already knew that.
>I know that I am saved, yes.
But how do you know that? Revelation has ceased.
>>1021551
Jesus did more than follow the Law; He fulfilled the Law, both by following it, and by paying the price for not following it.
By being born again in the Spirit, I died to the Law, and the Law has no hold over me. Nor do I live my life trying to be found righteous to God by my works under the Law, as that is the gospel of the Synagogue of Satan.
>>1021552
>the word of God is contrary to itself.
Never, not once, not ever.
Things you don't understand are not wrong, they're just things you don't understand. And they are legion.
>>1021545
>God's revealed truth.
>Your ability to understand things.
>Which is higher?
Apparently my ability to understand things as I'm capable of writing a cohesive book that tells a singular message and doesn't contradict itself. Something it appears your "god" is incapable of.
>>1021545
This is what you are doing
>>1021554
Yes, Satan's History of the World, Part Lie
Why does the shitflinging always come from the professed Christian? C'mon on man, everyone here wants to have a pleasant discussion and you have to come and ruin it by calling everyone names and (what seems to be) intentional ignorance of what the other posters are trying to say.
The arrogance is astounding.
>>1021557
>and by paying the price for not following it.
Only the "Father" can forgive sins. Jesus has/had no power in this domain, and it even says this in your Scripture.
>>1021528
As am I.
>>1021559
Such hubris.
>>1021556
Jesus is God; He is fully man as though not God, and as fully God as though not man. He is the hypostatic union between man and God; the mediator Job reasoned must exist.
Revelation has not ceased; it is written for any with eyes to read. It speaks of things in the future.
The certainty of salvation is the understanding of things the lost cannot understand. To wit, Jesus is God, and He rose from the dead.
>>1021568
No, the truly astounding thing is that it's always the same guy.
>>1021559
You're not, actually, nor are you capable of understanding one that is, albeit 66 books written by 40 men over 1500 years.
Reminder:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presuppositional_apologetics
You literally cannot have a discussion with these people. They will never ever consider a differing viewpoint.
>>1021562
You're the one turning in circles; if you stopped, you'd see the line.
God is Truth.
>>1021577
Guaran-fucking-tee it's the same guy who posts Kent Hovind whenever evolution gets brought up.
>>1021576
>He is fully man as though not God, and as fully God as though not man.
m8, I have no idea what this means.
>the mediator Job reasoned must exist.
Cite the verses you're talking about.
>>1021557
You're literally ignoring the Matthew verse where he explicitly states he did not come to abolish the old law.
>>1021569
And the Father forgave all the sins, just as Jesus asked Him to, and signified by Jesus rising from the dead, proof that His sacrifice was accepted by the Father.
>>1021583
And you know God is the truth because the bible says so.
And you know the bible is true because God is the truth.
>>1021571
Not if you're not saved right now. Your testimony is that you used to be like me. I am saved. You cannot used to be saved. Simply impossible.
>>1021594
You know not of YHWH.
>>1021584
At MAXIMUM, it's like 3 guys. But I'm pretty sire it's all the same person, with the same writing style.
/his/torians years from now will remember him in a nostalgia thread.
>>1021586
Correct. He came to fulfill it. And did. By following it perfectly, and by paying the price of everyone else not following it perfectly. The Law is fulfilled.
And it was not meant for you to follow.
>>1021590
You're going to have to start very slowly by letting it drip into your head that maybe objective truth exists.
>>1021599
I know Him, He knows me, and tabernacles within me. He's proud that I'm His brother, as I was sanctified by the Father.
>>1021577
Really? I rarely read these threads since I usually just skim them looking for neat books to check out. This is the first I've actually read to any real degree and it turned to complete garbage after the Christposter showed up.
What a mess.
>>1021600
>/his/torians years from now will remember him in a nostalgia thread.
I remember arrow-girl from /lit/ and I would not call it nostalgic. She just ruined any decent discussion that was taking place.
>>1021589
>And the Father forgave all the sins, just as Jesus asked Him to, and signified by Jesus rising from the dead
But what is the proof of this happening?
>>1021603
Show me the passage where Jesus says you can ignore the law.
>>1021610
Seems like you're easily disgruntled. And maybe a pussy?
>>1021611
What's hilarious is that one of the rules of the passover sacrifice is that you cannot forgive the sins of others with it. You can only have your own sins forgiven.
>>1021600
Fucking this. It's always the same 2 or 3 people.
>>1021610
>Really? I rarely read these threads since I usually just skim them looking for neat books to check out. This is the first I've actually read to any real degree and it turned to complete garbage after the Christposter showed up.
>What a mess.
These threads aer usually pretty good until he shows up. I thought since I'm Muslim, I could establish some sort of common ground with him and convince him to be less annoying..but there is no reasoning with that guy.
>I remember arrow-girl from /lit/ and I would not call it nostalgic. She just ruined any decent discussion that was taking place.
Kek, probably true.
>>1021611
The proof of Jesus rising from the dead is in the bible. The Word of God.
The evidence is everywhere. Men have written books about it. Evidence that Demands a Verdict. More Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Who Moved The Stone? Cold Case for the Resurrection. God on the Dock.
You dismiss it at peril of your own soul.
>>1021606
And you can never perceive it.
>>1021606
If so, than everything in the bible should be verifiable.
But as the bible has been torn apart by modern archeology this clearly isn't true.
so if objective truth exists, it must be something different from the bible
>>1021616
Not really. I just dislike shitposting.
>>1021613
It was only possible with the advent of the New Covenant, and it does not say "ignore".
It says we are dead to the Law.
The Law does not pursue dead men. If you want to be judged by God as to how perfectly you kept the Law, expect curses.
>>1021618
Lel forgot about that too.
The authors of the Gospels probably should've spent a little more time in rabbi school
>>1021618
Jesus took your sin as His own. He took everyone's sins as His own. He literally became Sin, so that you might live.
>>1021623
Common ground with a muslim.
kek
>>1021631
>It says we are dead to the Law.
I'm pretty sure only Paul said that.
>>1021633
>Substitutionary atonement
>>1021627
I cannot perceive what I know to be true because you do not know objective truth exists.
Dopey.
>>1021629
Archaeology supports the bible in pretty much every single case possible, but when it fails, you can tell that too by its being contrary to the Word of God.
>>1021633
>He literally became Sin
This is starting to sound more and more like fan-fiction every moment.
>>1021630
Ah, I see. An homosexual.
>>1021626
>The proof of Jesus rising from the dead is in the bible. The Word of God.
Yeah, but what's the proof of the Bible being the Word of God?
>>1021635
Paul under inspiration of the Holy Spirit said that many times, and you believe him not.
>>1021643
I hope you are under absolutely no impression you are convincing anyone of anything. I also hope you're just a troll and not actually this stupid.
>>1021558
see
>>1021562
>>1021554
>Do you have any books that expand on this view?
>Also isn't this the interpretation Nietzsche had? I find it odd that the Germans would adopt would the literal interpretation you mentioned
I'm not terribly familiar with Nietzsche. And they way I wrote it is a broad generalization. It's just that the two main places historical Jesus is studied are Germany and America. American scholarship tends to have a less harsh view of Jesus as its still mostly christian. Jesus is studied in Germany because that's where biblical scholarship began more than anything else.
Bart Erhman shares the "german" view but his books are a bit light and more "pop" history than anything else. That said, he's a legitimate scholar, it's just his books are better as an intro to the topic.
I'm traveling do I don't have access to my book collection, unfortunately.
>>1021638
Propitiation, not atonement. Atonement is only a car cover over sin. Propitiation is the voiding, the removal, of sin.
You're free to pay for your own sin in hellfire forever, if you choose.
>>1021648
And what is the proof that he was inspired...
>>1021645
2 Corinthians 5
He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
Matthew 1:21 And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.”
Mark 2:5 When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven you.”
Romans 6:11 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
It's all in the bible.
>>1021647
About 30% of it is prophecy, telling the end from the beginning.
>>1021554
Not him but you could check out Revolution in Judea, by Maccoby.
But he's English, not German (obviously)
>>1021631
>ask to be shown a passage
>Pauline bullshit
You suck at this shit
>>1021650
It does. Hittites? Finally found. Pilate? Finally found. Quinarius censuses? Finally found. Jericho? Finally found. Jerusalem cisterns? Finally found.
Most wise archaeologists use the bible to find things in the ground.
>>1021652
Things you don't understand can be true is not circular reasoning; I doubt you could spot circular reasoning even if given an example:
This trilobite is 10 million years old, as it was found in this 10 million year old rock strata
This rock strata is 10 million years old, as we found this 10 million year old trilobite in it.
>>1021652
Nietzsche and Ehrman. Perfect.
I love this thread. So much hatred from Jews, muslims, catholics, secular humanists; this is just glorious.
>>1021618
Actually, what's hilarious is that Passover has nothing to do with sins, something that the "expert Pharisee" Paul never figured out.
>>1021655
Him telling you how to get into heaven.
>>1021679
Actually, it's often "we know how this rock strata is formed, and estimate that it would have taken 10 million years to form at this depth and location, ergo this trilobite found within it, is likely of comparable age."
>>1021674
You asked to be shown where Jesus said something, after the resurrection of Jesus.....which He did through Paul.
Saul: Greatest Jew of his time.
Paul: Greatest Christian ever.
>>1021681
>I love people hating me
Uhh ok...
>>1021682
Hmmm, without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins......
By the shed blood of Jesus are our sins forgiven us......
Yeah, he has no idea what he's talking about. You're the expert. The blind Jew.
kek
>>1021686
Nah, it's as circular as I say it is.
>>1021675
> Quinarius censuses
It's spelled "Quirinius" there was only one census, and it didn't get into Judea, only being up in Syria, and it was in 6 AD, so after Jesus was born by several years no matter what dating system you use.
So no, you're just wrong.
>>1021681
>I love this thread. So much hatred from Jews, muslims, catholics, secular humanists; this is just glorious.
>claims to be christian
>doesn't exemplify any christian values
just like most "christians." You act like a disgusting human being and then winder why anybody wouldn't want to follow your views. Hint: it's because I'm a better person than you are.
there's no hate here, we're just trying to have a discussion and you're ruining it. Go back to /pol/
>>1021691
Friendship with the world is enmity with God.
