This is the general impression that I got from my Rice ancient history professor over a few beers at Vahalla Probably not the rock solid evidence you were looking for
1. Are you willing to believe that Jesus rose from the dead? 2. Are you willing to believe that Jesus is God? 3. Are you willing to believe in the Trinity?
Are you like..um trying to convert him over the internet? Dude (lady maybe? your handle suggests a girl) you've presented a case, of which I haven't really read much after your condemnation of Catholocism. Either he believes or not. You've done your job, so back off? Capice?
Please, don't make me out to be an "I'm right, you're wrong" poster. This has nothing to do with Islam or the Qura'an. hat's another thread/debate on its own. As for the resurrecting, it's only true to Christians that Jesus resurrected himself. However, Islam, Christianity, and Juddaism all agree that Moses split the sea. But this is not the point. The point is, we're as close to splitting the sea right now as we are to giving life (cloning). Resurrecting the dead is not amazing compared to spliting the sea. if you told me that God could resurrect the dead, while Moses could split the sea and that's the difference in power that they have, it would look very bad for God The Son. You claim that there's no difference in the early writings, but everything that's being said in this thread (and NO ONE disagreed btw) says that Mark's version is not like John's version. I believe the term christology was used to describe which portrayed Jesus more as God and which less. It's very interesting that there is a steady increase in "christology" with the 4 books. As for the sacrificing being a sin thing... That's my bad. Islam considers suicide a sin regardless of the situation, but I don't think Jesus' crucifixion applies anyway.
Why so touchy? I'm sure No Worries is secure in his beliefs enough that he can read these posts objectively. Are you insecure in your beliefs?
1. Are you willing to believe that Jesus rose from the dead? 2. Are you willing to believe that Jesus is God? 3. Are you willing to believe in the Trinity? Recalling that I am a resident of the Jesse Ventura wing of the Christian faith, 1. I do not believe Jesus,if he actually ever walked the earth, was divine. I believe in the afterlife and that Jesus went to heaven. (Since I don't believe in hell he had little else choice.) 2. Jesus is no more God and than anyone else who is human. 3. The Holy Trinity is an entity created by the Catholic Church for theological purposes. This is how God has enlightened me.
I do not believe in the Holy Spirit. God does not need intermediaries. Of course, this may be exactly what you believe in the 3-for-1 Trinity.
1. It's all good, Sane. You're cordial and respectful. I don't mean to make you feel like I'm trying to persecute you...or anything else, frankly. Please understand that I am fully convinced that Jesus Christ is my Lord and my Savior, though. 2. The key difference between Moses and Jesus, to me, as evidence of Jesus being different...is the sinless life. Man is sinful. Jesus was not. Jesus was entirely different. Moses was a murderer, right? Jesus...not so much. 3. Wait...on the writings thing. We're talking about 2 different subjects, I think. a. the gospels weren't written contemporaneously...nor where they written by the same people in the same place. they were accounts of events that were finally transcribed and assembled together years after the event. i would imagine that if you and i went to lunch together today and talked...we would both remember some key details...but we might see them through the lenses of our own perceptions. if we had lunch with another person, you might remark at how kind he was...while i might remark how well dressed he was. neither of us would be wrong, we would just be commenting on differing aspects. b. frankly, if all the gospels read exactly the same we'd all be saying, "look...there's no way those documents would be exactly the same unless they were doctored!" there would be zero believablity that documents written far apart in place and time would come out looking exactly the same. we do see the same stories told...but just as you might tell the story of our lunch one way, i might not tell it another way...particularly after some period of time. and because they're not exactly alike, i think that lends to the credibility of the accounts. c. i was ultimately talking about our earliest extant original copies of manuscripts of books from the Bible...which are extremely accurate. most of those earlier texts we have very early copies of are letters from the apostle paul. and despite assertions to the contrary, those earliest copies read word for word with what appears in my Bible that's sitting in my Jeep right now.
You are in dire need of an epiphany. You are failing to understand, consistently, the meaning of historical and belief statements. Historical statement: This is a statement where there is chance of historians proving correct or incorrect (or some degree in between). It should be noted that historians tend to think in probabilities more so than correct/incorrect. As examples GWB is the 43rd President of the USA. Pontius Pilate was the procurator of Judea from 27 CE to 35 CE. Jesus walked the earth. (I erred previously here. This is a historical statement with a low probably of correctness versus solely a belief statement. Though to view this as a 100% historical statement is overstating the case and moves the statement into the belief realm.) Belief statement: This is a statement which requires faith in order to believe. As examples Paul Bunyon (sp?) was a really tall dude with a blue ox. The Bible is The Word of God. Jesus was divine. Mary was a pregnant virgin. Jesus walk on water. As an aside, to move any of the above belief statements into the historical realm would require extraordinary proof due to their extraordinary nature.
most of those earlier texts we have very early copies of are letters from the apostle paul. and despite assertions to the contrary, those earliest copies read word for word with what appears in my Bible that's sitting in my Jeep right now. Dude, you know how to read Greek!!! Way cool!!!
no..i can't. i've read the works of those who have translated them, though. translators...archaelogists...exigesiologists (sp?). never have i even read the claim that the earliest copies we have are completely off base...or tell a different story..than what appears in the bible today. that's been tested and acknowledged, no worries. maybe not on imouttoprovejesusisafraud.com...but in other sources. by the way...Jesus walked on water. that's not a statement of faith...that's recounting what those who were there said he did. if i told you that george washington crossed the delaware, is that a statement of faith?
KB7, Sorry, my ISP crashed for a few days, but I'm back now. After reading the last 2 pages word for word, I honestly don't have the energy to answer every single question you asked, but I'll give you the main stuff you are looking for: 1) Am I willing to believe? Yes, but as No Worries pointed out, the evidence is proof. I told you my style - I see the evidence then I give my faith. The evidence that has been presented to me is poor in my eyes. I know more about the bible know than most Christians, but I'm not fooling myself - anything quoted from the bible is not proof to me. However, info from outside the bible has been presented, and that has been good stuff for me. Am I willing to believe that Jesus is/was God, part of an equal trinity? That God the Son washed someone's feet? That God (even The Son) DIED? Regardless of whether or not he resurrected himself, I cannot accept that God died. Just the fact that he's God says to me that he shouldn't or doesn't die. A belief of mine is that if Jesus was God, he would have proven it with actions, because that's how diine sources have worked in the past - through actions more than words. I'm talking miracles of any kind. However, to me, Jesus proved that he has certain abilities that a regular human being couldn't have. If we are in agreement that Moses' powers were from God, then what makes Jesus God and Moses a prophet? As I was debating with MadMax, Jesus is just baaarely more "powerful" in actions than Moses. As for his claims, I'll mention again that I look at the bible objectively. But I'll also mention that I've been looking at and listening to some Aramaik recently, and it really really doesn't translate well to English. So, to answer your question, I am more than willing to believe. I am constantly in one-way religious "conversations" about Christianity, Juddaism, Buddhism, etc... Just the fact that I go looking for these things is enough proof that I'm looking for something. However, it's simply a case of "not enough proof" in this case. I go with whatever has presented the most reliable evidence, and Christianity doesn't bring that. In fact, Christianity relies on LARGE part on assumptions. If you don't have faith in Christianity, it will do little to change your mind. But when you already believe that Jesus is Son of God, believe in the trinity, etc... Then it doesn't really matter if the Bible is convincing or not - you already believe it.
Are you serious?? You actually think it is logical to defend the Bible as historical truths or likelihoods by quoting from it. It blows my mind. What's next? Did Paul Bunyen really exist as because the story says he did?
ok...and the Koran does??? please explain. because maybe i'm nuts...but a book written by many different folks that includes purported eyewitness testimony sounds infinitely more reliable to me than a book by a guy who says, "yeah...i went up on this hill...and God told me all this stuff....sorry that none of the rest of you saw it." talk about resting on assumptions?? i mean, just looking at it objectively...i think it's a hard case to make that the Koran presents more evidence of its "truth" than the New Testament does.
When people need stories of the "supernatural", I always think of this quote.: People usually consider walking on water or in thin air a miracle._ But I think the real miracle is not to walk either on water or in thin_ air, but to walk on earth. Every day we are engaged in a miracle_ which we don't even recognize: a blue sky, white clouds, green_ leaves, the black, curious eyes of a child -- our own two eyes._ All is a miracle. -__ Thich Nhat Hanh
1) No problem MadMax. Me and you have debated before, and I'm not really worried about you. I was just a bit worried that someone else might come in, read your statements and think along the lines of "yeah, this guy is just here to say he's right and we're wrong". Being in the minority (Muslim), I don't want to rub people off the wrong way, I don't want anyone to think that I'm here for the sole purpose of converting them or something. But again, it's cool between us, I just didn't want anyone to get a wrong impression. 2) If Jesus committed a sin, and everyone thought he was God, would anyone dare write about it? I'm assuming that the Bible unequivocally states that Jesus is/was absolutely sinless. That's true right? I don't have a stance on the "sinless" view, it may be true, I don't know. I'm definitely open to that one, but I could (as a Muslim) justify that by saying he was the only one to know whom he was early enough in his life to avoid sin. 3) Yes, definitely different things. I agree that it would be impossible for everyone to remember exactly the same thing and write exactly the same thing. However, do you acknowledge that since it was after a while that these accounts were brought forth, there may have been some discrepancy in some situations? I don't remember which quote it was where one account says "Teacher" and one account says "master" in the quote. The difference is small, but the effect is potentially huge. Have you ever had a conversation with a friend when both of you were there, and one day you two are recalling that day.. and you completely disagree. "She was wearing the blue shirt" versus "she was wearing the RED shirt". This happened to me just the other day. We were both there, and the "recalling" took place 2 days later. We never came to an agreement, we had no proof and eyewitnesses that took different sides. Turned out, 3 people saw blue, one saw red. Two days later, I'm speaking to this girl, and wouldn't you know it... she was wearing red. The story speaks for itself, you know what I'm tryign to say right?
