Saw this question somewhere, anyone know the answer?

[JESUSLOVESME98]

The Reserection:

A)
Flawed Assumption:
Christianity takes for granted the assumption that if we indeed knew for sure that Jesus was in fact resurrected, then this would conclusively establish Jesus’ status as God/the Son of God, thereby validating everything Jesus said and taught, which would in turn set Christianity on a solid foundation – except that there’s a question as to whether or not Jesus actually arose from the dead. But the entire above-assumption is flawed! That is, even if we knew that Jesus was resurrected, and that he affected his own resurrection, it still would tell us absolutely nothing about whether or not Jesus had any special kinship to God or whether or not he was the long-awaited Messiah; and without proof for those specific claims, Christianity doesn’t get off the ground.

B) A logical point which even a Christian would need to agree too, considering its inherent logic.
That is, even according to Christians (who accept the “Old Testament”), death came into existence as a result of very specific circumstances – this being Adam’s primordial sin, the context of which was unrestrained indulgence in physical desires. It follows that anyone who manages to completely rectify this topic, training himself to engage in physical pleasure in complete accordance with God’s will, but not at all for selfish reasons, thereby repairs the damage caused by Adam’s sin – at least as far as what’s relevant to that individual, and he can thereby become exempt of the decree of death.

C)
There are two individuals that even the Christians agree had complete control over death, and yet it has never entered the mind of any Christian that either of those individuals had Divine kinship or were the long-awaited Mashiach. Eliyahu and Elisha. That is, we find that Eliyahu resurrected a child in Melachim Aleph 17:17-24 and that Elisha resurrected a child in Melachim Bet 4:32-36 – narratives that every believing Christian acknowledges happened. Although Eliyahu and Elisha resurrected someone, still, did it ever enter the thought of any Christian that because of this, either one of them is God/the Son of God or the Messiah?! Surely not. And why not? Because that’s just not the logical implication of being able to resurrect someone and having power over death.

D)
Even if the prevouis points are false. Prove it happend:
None of the resurrection accounts were definitively written by eyewitnesses. That is, the Gospel of Mark abruptly stops early-on in its resurrection narrative, and Luke’s author was, according to all opinions, not a direct disciple of Jesus who even claims to have himself seen Jesus in a resurrected state. As for the Gospels of Mathew and John that although there are those who believe that these works were written by the Apostles of those names, the mainstream opinion of scholars – even Christian ones (based on internal evidence) is that in both cases, Jesus’ own disciples who bore those names were not the ones who wrote these two volumes. And even if there are attempts to claim otherwise, still, when fighting the status quo, only definitive information is relevant. As such, since concerning Mathew and John there’s a significant scholarly belief that these Gospels were not authored by the Apostles – and thus not by direct witnesses to Jesus’ supposed arising from the dead, so this alone is enough to make any claims of “eyewitness testimony” to the resurrection inconclusive, and so useless in regards to the need for Christians to bring bonafide proof for their anti-Old Testament claims.

In any event, the open contradictions between the three Gospels that do discuss Jesus’ resurrection (whereby Mathew states that he met with his disciples in specifically the Galilee, Luke states that he met with them specifically in Jerusalem, and John says that he met with them in both), not to mention that at the point where the Gospel of Mark’s narrative ends, the Gospels of Mathew and Luke – which both built off of the text of Mark – significantly diverge, all show how vague the matter is. And here too, it should once again be emphasized that although Christians can theoretically reconcile the aforementioned
contradictions, still, as touched upon , such an “excuse for a discrepancy” is good in a vacuum, but not if you’re coming to argue on the status quo based on the supposed resurrection. In different words, the contradictions alone highlight that we’re dealing with a tradition that’s in-any-event-dubious-enough to not be usable against the status quo.

E)
When God first gave the Torah at Har Sinai (which is again, something that any believing Christian acknowledges happened), it was a nationally witnessed event, that hundreds of thousands, if not millions, saw. In contrast, Jesus’ resurrection was at most witnessed by relatively few individuals whose identity is generally not known. Logic dictates that a non-nationally-witnessed-event does not have the ability to cancel out a nationally-witnessed event – period.

F)
Another point to consider is that even if Jesus arose from the dead, this tells us nothing about Jesus’ own powers (as the Christian claim that it does), since maybe he was resurrected by God, and not that he engendered his own resurrection. You claim that in arising from the dead, it shows that Jesus himself had the power to overcome death. So regarding this detail we’re noting that simply getting resurrected doesn’t prove anything about the powers of the person who gets resurrected. This can be seen clearly from the story of the individuals in Tanach that were resurrected by Eliyahu (in Melachim Aleph 17:17-24) and Elisha (in Melachim Bet 4:32-36), whereby not the slightest claim is made that the individuals that got resurrected by them were in any way special, or possessing of special powers.

 

[Magenta]

"If you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins."

Jesus speaking in John 8:24b

 

[garee]

The Reserection:

A)
Flawed Assumption:
Christianity takes for granted the assumption that if we indeed knew for sure that Jesus was in fact resurrected, then this would conclusively establish Jesus’ status as God/the Son of God, thereby validating everything Jesus said and taught, which would in turn set Christianity on a solid foundation – except that there’s a question as to whether or not Jesus actually arose from the dead. But the entire above-assumption is flawed! That is, even if we knew that Jesus was resurrected, and that he affected his own resurrection, it still would tell us absolutely nothing about whether or not Jesus had any special kinship to God or whether or not he was the long-awaited Messiah; and without proof for those specific claims, Christianity doesn’t get off the ground.

B) A logical point which even a Christian would need to agree too, considering its inherent logic.
That is, even according to Christians (who accept the “Old Testament”), death came into existence as a result of very specific circumstances – this being Adam’s primordial sin, the context of which was unrestrained indulgence in physical desires. It follows that anyone who manages to completely rectify this topic, training himself to engage in physical pleasure in complete accordance with God’s will, but not at all for selfish reasons, thereby repairs the damage caused by Adam’s sin – at least as far as what’s relevant to that individual, and he can thereby become exempt of the decree of death.

C)
There are two individuals that even the Christians agree had complete control over death, and yet it has never entered the mind of any Christian that either of those individuals had Divine kinship or were the long-awaited Mashiach. Eliyahu and Elisha. That is, we find that Eliyahu resurrected a child in Melachim Aleph 17:17-24 and that Elisha resurrected a child in Melachim Bet 4:32-36 – narratives that every believing Christian acknowledges happened. Although Eliyahu and Elisha resurrected someone, still, did it ever enter the thought of any Christian that because of this, either one of them is God/the Son of God or the Messiah?! Surely not. And why not? Because that’s just not the logical implication of being able to resurrect someone and having power over death.

D)
Even if the prevouis points are false. Prove it happend:
None of the resurrection accounts were definitively written by eyewitnesses. That is, the Gospel of Mark abruptly stops early-on in its resurrection narrative, and Luke’s author was, according to all opinions, not a direct disciple of Jesus who even claims to have himself seen Jesus in a resurrected state. As for the Gospels of Mathew and John that although there are those who believe that these works were written by the Apostles of those names, the mainstream opinion of scholars – even Christian ones (based on internal evidence) is that in both cases, Jesus’ own disciples who bore those names were not the ones who wrote these two volumes. And even if there are attempts to claim otherwise, still, when fighting the status quo, only definitive information is relevant. As such, since concerning Mathew and John there’s a significant scholarly belief that these Gospels were not authored by the Apostles – and thus not by direct witnesses to Jesus’ supposed arising from the dead, so this alone is enough to make any claims of “eyewitness testimony” to the resurrection inconclusive, and so useless in regards to the need for Christians to bring bonafide proof for their anti-Old Testament claims.

In any event, the open contradictions between the three Gospels that do discuss Jesus’ resurrection (whereby Mathew states that he met with his disciples in specifically the Galilee, Luke states that he met with them specifically in Jerusalem, and John says that he met with them in both), not to mention that at the point where the Gospel of Mark’s narrative ends, the Gospels of Mathew and Luke – which both built off of the text of Mark – significantly diverge, all show how vague the matter is. And here too, it should once again be emphasized that although Christians can theoretically reconcile the aforementioned
contradictions, still, as touched upon , such an “excuse for a discrepancy” is good in a vacuum, but not if you’re coming to argue on the status quo based on the supposed resurrection. In different words, the contradictions alone highlight that we’re dealing with a tradition that’s in-any-event-dubious-enough to not be usable against the status quo.

E)
When God first gave the Torah at Har Sinai (which is again, something that any believing Christian acknowledges happened), it was a nationally witnessed event, that hundreds of thousands, if not millions, saw. In contrast, Jesus’ resurrection was at most witnessed by relatively few individuals whose identity is generally not known. Logic dictates that a non-nationally-witnessed-event does not have the ability to cancel out a nationally-witnessed event – period.

F)
Another point to consider is that even if Jesus arose from the dead, this tells us nothing about Jesus’ own powers (as the Christian claim that it does), since maybe he was resurrected by God, and not that he engendered his own resurrection. You claim that in arising from the dead, it shows that Jesus himself had the power to overcome death. So regarding this detail we’re noting that simply getting resurrected doesn’t prove anything about the powers of the person who gets resurrected. This can be seen clearly from the story of the individuals in Tanach that were resurrected by Eliyahu (in Melachim Aleph 17:17-24) and Elisha (in Melachim Bet 4:32-36), whereby not the slightest claim is made that the individuals that got resurrected by them were in any way special, or possessing of special powers.

I would ofer we can plant the incorutible born again seed and water it with the doctrines of God that fall like rain from above. But he causes the new life and growth if any.

I thought of a parable in Luke where a person hoped something else could make the dead alive and cause growth. This shows us the man had no faith working in him needed to please God. He was trusting in necromancy communing with familiar spirts or what Catholicism as a law of the fathers calls patron saints. No need for the unseen Holy Father in heaven.

The rich man was hoping Abraham to represent the bosom of God not seen . . . send them to his house to warn his family . Jesus said if he did not believe all things written in the law and the prophets the gospel ("Moses and the prophets" or sola scriptura as it is written alone. ) Then neither would they if one arose from the dead .Faith comes by hearing to those given ears to hear, not literally seeing but eyes of our new hearts.

Christ arose, mankind does not believe . Preach the gospel perhaps God will have mercy and freely give them the gift of faith.. eternal life. The proof is in believing.

And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. And he said unto him, If they hear not "Moses and the prophets", neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. Luke 16:26-31

 

[blue_ladybug]

It's "Resurrection". Not reserection..

 

[JamOn]

Hmm guess it’s still in circulation

Matt 28
15So the guards took the money and did as they were instructed. And this account has been circulated among the Jews to this very day.

 

[Nehemiah6]

It's "Resurrection". Not reserection..

Correct. And the OP likes like it was taken from a Muslim propaganda site.

To the OP: Just ignore all that nonsense and believe what is revealed in the Word of God.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

The Reserection:
[…] D)
Even if the prevouis points are false. Prove it happend:
None of the resurrection accounts were definitively written by eyewitnesses. That is, the Gospel of Mark abruptly stops early-on in its resurrection narrative, and Luke’s author was, according to all opinions, not a direct disciple of Jesus who even claims to have himself seen Jesus in a resurrected state. As for the Gospels of Mathew and John that although there are those who believe that these works were written by the Apostles of those names, the mainstream opinion of scholars – even Christian ones (based on internal evidence) is that in both cases, Jesus’ own disciples who bore those names were not the ones who wrote these two volumes. And even if there are attempts to claim otherwise, still, when fighting the status quo, only definitive information is relevant. As such, since concerning Mathew and John there’s a significant scholarly belief that these Gospels were not authored by the Apostles – and thus not by direct witnesses to Jesus’ supposed arising from the dead, so this alone is enough to make any claims of “eyewitness testimony” to the resurrection inconclusive, and so useless in regards to the need for Christians to bring bonafide proof for their anti-Old Testament claims.

In any event, the open contradictions between the three Gospels that do discuss Jesus’ resurrection (whereby Mathew states that he met with his disciples in specifically the Galilee, Luke states that he met with them specifically in Jerusalem, and John says that he met with them in both), not to mention that at the point where the Gospel of Mark’s narrative ends, the Gospels of Mathew and Luke – which both built off of the text of Mark – significantly diverge, all show how vague the matter is. And here too, it should once again be emphasized that although Christians can theoretically reconcile the aforementioned
contradictions, still, as touched upon , such an “excuse for a discrepancy” is good in a vacuum, but not if you’re coming to argue on the status quo based on the supposed resurrection. In different words, the contradictions alone highlight that we’re dealing with a tradition that’s in-any-event-dubious-enough to not be usable against the status quo.

Ooo boy, I could get really long-winded here ^ ... will TRY to make my comments very brief (hard to do, on this ^ , LOL)

Let's see... where to start (sorry if this is choppy, tryin to make it short):

• I do not believe that what we call "The Gospel of John" was written by John [internal and external evidences, won't go into here]

• the writer of the Book of John [not John] was indeed "witness" to His resurrection, and was the ONLY person of whom it was said (in the text of John 20:8, in the scene of the empty tomb) "and he saw [the linen cloths (from prev. verse)] AND BELIEVED" [NOTE: this was NOT said of "Peter" who was with him, in that scene; it is ONLY said of THIS ONE GUY (one of His "disciples," to be sure," but NOT one of "the 12" or even "the 11")]; Verse 9 goes on to say, "FOR AS YET they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead" (but of THIS ONE GUY it is said that "he saw [the linen cloths] AND BELIEVED"--not said of Peter!)
  
  
  
• later that same evening (I believe fairly late), in Mark 16:14, Jesus "[Later] as they were eating, Jesus appeared to the Eleven and rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen." ["those who had seen Him" would have included "Mary Magdalene" of whom vv.9-11 had this to say, "9 And having risen early the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom He had cast out seven demons. 10 She having gone, told it to those having been with Him, mourning and weeping. 11 And they having heard that He is alive and has been seen by her, disbelieved." (so all of "the Eleven" were included in this "rebuke" by Jesus in the later v.14 setting---it just says "the Eleven" were the object of this "rebuke," not "that other disciple" at the empty tomb with Peter early in the day... it seems that when "he SAW [the linen cloths] AND BELIEVED" that this was because of a prior, um [lacking the word I want here] inclination/knowing/understanding, if you will--recall, this is "the disciple whom Jesus loved" who is the writer of this Book/Gospel... but regardless, he is indeed witness to His resurrection, for we also see him later also in the John 21:20-23 scene [where Peter had said, "I go a fishing," v.3; and the text says, "This is now THE THIRD TIME that Jesus showed himself to his disciples [there were more than just 12 disciples, altogether, recall! (tho 7 are here in THIS scene)] AFTER that he was risen from the dead" v.14)]

...I forget what else I wanted to point out about that... oh well (it'll probably come to me )

 

[NotmebutHim]

"For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God."

- 1 Corinthians 1:22-24 KJV

 

[Deuteronomy]

The Resurrection:

A)...even if we knew that Jesus was resurrected, and that he affected his own resurrection, it still would tell us absolutely nothing about whether or not Jesus had any special kinship to God or whether or not he was the long-awaited Messiah; and without proof for those specific claims, Christianity doesn’t get off the ground.

While that may be true in a sense (as a number of saints who had previously died/been buried rose from the dead right after Jesus' Resurrection .. Matthew 27:52-53), it is Jesus alone who fulfilled hundreds of other OT and NT prophecies, and miracles, confirming that He was who He claimed to be.

B) ... death came into existence as a result of Adam’s sin, the context of which was unrestrained indulgence in physical desires. It follows that anyone who manages to completely rectify this topic, training himself to engage in physical pleasure in complete accordance with God’s will, but not at all for selfish reasons, thereby repairs the damage caused by Adam’s sin – at least as far as what’s relevant to that individual, and he can thereby become exempt of the decree of death.

As a result of our first parents' first sin, decay and death entered into the ~whole~ of God's Creation, not just into us, their sinful/sinning progeny.

As for this article's "easy escape from death" plan, all of us are begotten in our progenitors' tarnished/fallen image (not in our Creator's perfect one), so no "self-repairs" to our nature are possible! Rather, our redemption and reconciliation with God requires our Savior, His life, His death, and His Resurrection, to make us innocent, righteous, and reconciled w/God, and thereby capable of standing in His holy presence in the age to come .. e.g. Romans 5:8-10; 2 Corinthians 5:21.

The other BIG assumption that point "B" makes is that someone, other than Jesus, could somehow train him/herself to be both innocent and righteous and walk before God in complete accordance with His will (a feat that even our first parents, who did not have a fallen nature, could not do). We are all, both by nature and by deed, children of wrath, so such a thing would hardly be possible for any of us .. e.g. Psalm 51:5; Isaiah 53:5-6; Romans 3:9-12, 23; Ephesians 1:1-3.

Finally, the reprobate will be judged and condemned in death on the basis of his/her own personal trespasses and sins, not on their forefathers', and not on the basis of their fallen "nature" .. Deuteronomy 24:16; Romans 2:12-16, 5:12.

As a quick aside, describing Adam/Eve's first sin as an "unrestrained indulgence in physical desires", hardly captures what was revealed to us in the OT Creation narrative .. e.g. Genesis 3:1-6, then again, this article makes all kinds of stuff up as it goes along, so I guess we have to give its author(s) credit for being consistent

~Deut
p.s. - this post is long enough already, so I'll continue with the other points in another post (Dv).

He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf,
so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
2 Corinthians 5:21
.​

 

[Deuteronomy]

C) There are two individuals that even the Christians agree had complete control over death, and yet it has never entered the mind of any Christian that either of those individuals had Divine kinship or were the long-awaited Mashiach. Eliyahu and Elisha. That is, we find that Eliyahu resurrected a child in Melachim Aleph 17:17-24 and that Elisha resurrected a child in Melachim Bet 4:32-36 – narratives that every believing Christian acknowledges happened. Although Eliyahu and Elisha resurrected someone, still, did it ever enter the thought of any Christian that because of this, either one of them is God/the Son of God or the Messiah?! Surely not. And why not? Because that’s just not the logical implication of being able to resurrect someone and having power over death.

Neither lad was long dead, nor were they buried. Both Elijah and Elisha got to them soon after they stopped breathing, so the Lord's choice to bring them back to life could hardly be referred to as a "resurrection" from the dead.

Finally, both men prayed to God, that ~He~ would restore the life and health of these two boys, so neither Elijah nor Elisha, "had complete control over death". In fact, neither of them had ANY control over the life or death of those boys, as their lives were/always will be in God's precious hands alone.

And again, Jesus' Resurrection is not the only evidence we have for who He really is.

~Deut

 

[Deuteronomy]

Hello again @JESUSLOVESME98, I have one last thought about your article's reference to First and Second Kings. If these two boys were ~resurrected~, as your article proposes, is there any evidence that they received glorified, eternal (imperishable) bodies at that time, the kind of body that Jesus had when He was resurrected, or did God simply return life to their perishable bodies, bodies which would eventually die again and be buried, still in need of Resurrection to Glory

The Lord's Resurrection involved FAR more than His life simply returning to His former perishable, broken & dead human body.

~Deut

 

[Deuteronomy]

D) None of the resurrection accounts were definitively written by eyewitnesses. That is, the Gospel of Mark abruptly stops early-on in its resurrection narrative, and Luke’s author was, according to all opinions, not a direct disciple of Jesus who even claims to have himself seen Jesus in a resurrected state. As for the Gospels of Mathew and John that although there are those who believe that these works were written by the Apostles of those names, the mainstream opinion of scholars – even Christian ones (based on internal evidence) is that in both cases, Jesus’ own disciples who bore those names were not the ones who wrote these two volumes. And even if there are attempts to claim otherwise, still, when fighting the status quo, only definitive information is relevant. As such, since concerning Mathew and John there’s a significant scholarly belief that these Gospels were not authored by the Apostles – and thus not by direct witnesses to Jesus’ supposed arising from the dead, so this alone is enough to make any claims of “eyewitness testimony” to the resurrection inconclusive, and so useless in regards to the need for Christians to bring bonafide proof for their anti-Old Testament claims.

The historic Christian church (with her theologians, doctors, and other scholars), all of it, Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Lutheran, Anglican, Baptist, etc., has always held and continues to teach that the Gospels were written by the human authors that they were named for.

The scholars that you speak of, who believe/teach otherwise today, are (generally speaking) enemies of the Christian faith (the "Jesus Seminar" comes immediately to mind because they, for instance, both believe and teach 1. that John didn't write John, and 2. that NONE of the words in "red ink" in John's Gospel were ever spoken or taught by the Lord).

As for Luke not being an eyewitness to the Resurrection, you are correct (he tells us as much in the opening of his Gospel), but he also makes it clear that what he wrote came directly from eyewitnesses who did.

In any event, the open contradictions between the three Gospels that do discuss Jesus’ resurrection (whereby Mathew states that he met with his disciples in specifically the Galilee, Luke states that he met with them specifically in Jerusalem, and John says that he met with them in both), not to mention that at the point where the Gospel of Mark’s narrative ends, the Gospels of Mathew and Luke – which both built off of the text of Mark – significantly diverge, all show how vague the matter is. And here too, it should once again be emphasized that although Christians can theoretically reconcile the aforementioned, contradictions, still, as touched upon , such an “excuse for a discrepancy” is good in a vacuum, but not if you’re coming to argue on the status quo based on the supposed resurrection. In different words, the contradictions alone highlight that we’re dealing with a tradition that’s in-any-event-dubious-enough to not be usable against the status quo.

If you want me to discuss the supposed "contradictions" that some have pointed to in the Gospel accounts, I'd be happy to, but I'll need specific references, including Book, Chapter, and Verse(s). I believe that this will be a waste of my time and yours however if you either wrote or agree with your article's sentiments (in the last sentence or two above), because if you do, it sounds like your mind is already made up

~Deut

 

[Deuteronomy]

E) When God first gave the Torah at Har Sinai (which is again, something that any believing Christian acknowledges happened), it was a nationally witnessed event, that hundreds of thousands, if not millions, saw. In contrast, Jesus’ resurrection was at most witnessed by relatively few individuals whose identity is generally not known. Logic dictates that a non-nationally-witnessed-event does not have the ability to cancel out a nationally-witnessed event – period.

Unless I am misunderstanding you somehow, Moses came down from the smoke-covered Mt. Sinai with two stone tablets containing the Decalogue (written by the hand of God), not the entirety of the Torah.

And, Moses alone (not the whole of Israel) witnessed God writing the 10 Commandments down, because no one else was up on top of Mt. Sinai with God and Moses when He did.

On the other hand, hundreds saw/heard/talked to Jesus after His Resurrection, both prior to and after His Ascension to Heaven .. e.g. 1 Corinthians 15:3-8; Acts 9:1-19. We also know the names of ~many~ who were eyewitnesses of our resurrected Lord, but do we know the names of anyone else than Moses and his brother Aaron who witnessed what happened on the day the Decalogue was created by God and delivered to Israel by Moses

Finally, your article mentions that Jesus' Resurrection event somehow ~cancels out~ the event that occurred some 1,500 to 2,000 years earlier at Sinai. Do you have any idea what the author of your article may have been referring to ... IOW ... what, about writing of the 10 Commandments, was canceled out by Jesus' rising from the dead some 2,000 years later*

*(this is an especially odd thought when we remember that it was the same Person at both events/the same Person who both wrote the Decalogue and then later, rose from the dead after His Incarnation and Crucifixion)

Thanks!

~Deut

 

[pottersclay]

The Reserection:

A)
Flawed Assumption:
Christianity takes for granted the assumption that if we indeed knew for sure that Jesus was in fact resurrected, then this would conclusively establish Jesus’ status as God/the Son of God, thereby validating everything Jesus said and taught, which would in turn set Christianity on a solid foundation – except that there’s a question as to whether or not Jesus actually arose from the dead. But the entire above-assumption is flawed! That is, even if we knew that Jesus was resurrected, and that he affected his own resurrection, it still would tell us absolutely nothing about whether or not Jesus had any special kinship to God or whether or not he was the long-awaited Messiah; and without proof for those specific claims, Christianity doesn’t get off the ground.

B) A logical point which even a Christian would need to agree too, considering its inherent logic.
That is, even according to Christians (who accept the “Old Testament”), death came into existence as a result of very specific circumstances – this being Adam’s primordial sin, the context of which was unrestrained indulgence in physical desires. It follows that anyone who manages to completely rectify this topic, training himself to engage in physical pleasure in complete accordance with God’s will, but not at all for selfish reasons, thereby repairs the damage caused by Adam’s sin – at least as far as what’s relevant to that individual, and he can thereby become exempt of the decree of death.

C)
There are two individuals that even the Christians agree had complete control over death, and yet it has never entered the mind of any Christian that either of those individuals had Divine kinship or were the long-awaited Mashiach. Eliyahu and Elisha. That is, we find that Eliyahu resurrected a child in Melachim Aleph 17:17-24 and that Elisha resurrected a child in Melachim Bet 4:32-36 – narratives that every believing Christian acknowledges happened. Although Eliyahu and Elisha resurrected someone, still, did it ever enter the thought of any Christian that because of this, either one of them is God/the Son of God or the Messiah?! Surely not. And why not? Because that’s just not the logical implication of being able to resurrect someone and having power over death.

D)
Even if the prevouis points are false. Prove it happend:
None of the resurrection accounts were definitively written by eyewitnesses. That is, the Gospel of Mark abruptly stops early-on in its resurrection narrative, and Luke’s author was, according to all opinions, not a direct disciple of Jesus who even claims to have himself seen Jesus in a resurrected state. As for the Gospels of Mathew and John that although there are those who believe that these works were written by the Apostles of those names, the mainstream opinion of scholars – even Christian ones (based on internal evidence) is that in both cases, Jesus’ own disciples who bore those names were not the ones who wrote these two volumes. And even if there are attempts to claim otherwise, still, when fighting the status quo, only definitive information is relevant. As such, since concerning Mathew and John there’s a significant scholarly belief that these Gospels were not authored by the Apostles – and thus not by direct witnesses to Jesus’ supposed arising from the dead, so this alone is enough to make any claims of “eyewitness testimony” to the resurrection inconclusive, and so useless in regards to the need for Christians to bring bonafide proof for their anti-Old Testament claims.

In any event, the open contradictions between the three Gospels that do discuss Jesus’ resurrection (whereby Mathew states that he met with his disciples in specifically the Galilee, Luke states that he met with them specifically in Jerusalem, and John says that he met with them in both), not to mention that at the point where the Gospel of Mark’s narrative ends, the Gospels of Mathew and Luke – which both built off of the text of Mark – significantly diverge, all show how vague the matter is. And here too, it should once again be emphasized that although Christians can theoretically reconcile the aforementioned
contradictions, still, as touched upon , such an “excuse for a discrepancy” is good in a vacuum, but not if you’re coming to argue on the status quo based on the supposed resurrection. In different words, the contradictions alone highlight that we’re dealing with a tradition that’s in-any-event-dubious-enough to not be usable against the status quo.

E)
When God first gave the Torah at Har Sinai (which is again, something that any believing Christian acknowledges happened), it was a nationally witnessed event, that hundreds of thousands, if not millions, saw. In contrast, Jesus’ resurrection was at most witnessed by relatively few individuals whose identity is generally not known. Logic dictates that a non-nationally-witnessed-event does not have the ability to cancel out a nationally-witnessed event – period.

F)
Another point to consider is that even if Jesus arose from the dead, this tells us nothing about Jesus’ own powers (as the Christian claim that it does), since maybe he was resurrected by God, and not that he engendered his own resurrection. You claim that in arising from the dead, it shows that Jesus himself had the power to overcome death. So regarding this detail we’re noting that simply getting resurrected doesn’t prove anything about the powers of the person who gets resurrected. This can be seen clearly from the story of the individuals in Tanach that were resurrected by Eliyahu (in Melachim Aleph 17:17-24) and Elisha (in Melachim Bet 4:32-36), whereby not the slightest claim is made that the individuals that got resurrected by them were in any way special, or possessing of special powers.

So you question the deity of Christ. You're not the first I suppose you won't be in last.
Through Jesus lifetime he fulfilled over 300 prophecies some of which he was still in the womb.
While on Earth here as the suffering Messiah he spoke prophecy which came to pass.
The signs and wonders which he had done were recognized by the Pharisees and the scribes as a man that come from God.
His death upon the cross can be found in psalm 22 in exact detail decades before the event and even before the invention of crucifixion as a capital punishment.
A Roman spear piercing his heart to make sure he was dead.
Roman guards placed at the tomb whose very lives were at risk should something happen to his body.
4 days after his crucifixion ,death, and burial we have a empty tomb.
Appearing to his followers first then to 500 which witnessed the Ascension.
Some years latter Luke is sent to find out what truly happened. He speaks to eye witness's and talks to those in the know. The story remains the same.
By investigating Luke life is touched by God, meets up with Paul and by grace becomes our 4th gospel account writer.

Almost 2000 yrs latter I can truthfully say that this word of God, this Bible hearing it's message has changed my life and heart forever. Praise God for his son Jesus the Christ. The one and only savior of the world.

 

[UnoiAmarah]

A)Flawed Assumption:

Unless I am misunderstanding you somehow, Moses came down from the smoke-covered Mt. Sinai with two stone tablets containing the Decalogue (written by the hand of God), not the entirety of the Torah.
And, Moses alone (not the whole of Israel) witnessed God writing the 10 Commandments down, because no one else was up on top of Mt. Sinai with God and Moses when He did.

True, but the stone tables contained more than just the Ten Commandments. On the backside were written the statutues and judgments of the LORD.

And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them.
Ex 24:12

And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two tables of the testimony were in his hand: the tables were written on both their sides; on the one side and on the other were they written. And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables.
Ex 32:15-16

And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.
Deut 4:13

So I turned and came down from the mount, and the mount burned with fire: and the two tables of the covenant were in my two hands.
Deut 9:15

But as a side note:
Luke 16:31
And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

 

[DeighAnn]

I think the rest were addressed, so I took on the second part of D. I can't tell you on how many different days and in different threads I have posted the same verses, yet a bit different. Are you assuming the gospels conflict because you assume they were all speaking to the same event on the same day because of similar wording?

The gospels are also putting forth the different aspects of Christs life as in Matthew Jehovah's King is presented "Behold THY KING", Mark presents Jehovah's Servant "Behold MY SERVANT", Luke presents Jehovah's Man "Behold THE MAN", and in John, Jehovah Himself "Behold YOUR GOD". So from these perspectives they can't be the same either.

Rightly dividing the Word is of the upmost importance.

Try and name an event, and give just 3 detailed things that will happen BUT that event has to take place 1000 yrs from now. Now this Psalm was written 1000 yrs before. Gambling for His coat?? That is just way to specific to be anything OTHER THAN DIVINE. Do you think He could forsake Himself, or do you think He was teaching to the very end of His life in the flesh?

Psalm 22:1 My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?

Psalm 22:2 O my God, I cry in the day time, but thou hearest not and in the night season, and am not silent.

Psalm 22:3 But thou art holy, O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel.

Psalm 22:4 Our fathers trusted in thee they trusted, and thou didst deliver them.

Psalm 22:5 They cried unto thee, and were delivered they trusted in thee, and were not confounded.

Psalm 22:6 But I am a worm, and no man, a reproach of men, and despised of the people.

Psalm 22:7 All they that see me laugh me to scorn, they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,

Psalm 22:8 He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him, let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.

Psalm 22:9 But thou art he that took me out of the womb, thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother's breasts.

Psalm 22:10 I was cast upon thee from the womb thou art my God from my mother's belly.

Psalm 22:11 Be not far from me; for trouble is near; for there is none to help.

Psalm 22:12 Many bulls have compassed me strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round.

Psalm 22:13 They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion.

Psalm 22:14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint my heart is like wax it is melted in the midst of my bowels.

Psalm 22:15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.

Psalm 22:16 For dogs have compassed me the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me they pierced my hands and my feet.

Psalm 22:17 I may tell all my bones they look and stare upon me.

Psalm 22:18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.

Psalm 22:19 But be not thou far from me, O LORD O my strength, haste thee to help me.

Psalm 22:20 Deliver my soul from the sword my darling from the power of the dog.

Psalm 22:21 Save me from the lion's mouth for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.

Psalm 22:22 I will declare thy name unto my brethren in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.

Psalm 22:23 Ye that fear the LORD, praise him all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel.

Psalm 22:24 For he hath not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither hath he hid his face from him; but when he cried unto him, he heard.

Psalm 22:25 My praise shall be of thee in the great congregation I will pay my vows before them that fear him.

Psalm 22:26 The meek shall eat and be satisfied they shall praise the LORD that seek him your heart shall live for ever.

Psalm 22:27 All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the LORD and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee.

Psalm 22:28 For the kingdom is the LORD's: and he is the governor among the nations.

Psalm 22:29 All they that be fat upon earth shall eat and worship all they that go down to the dust shall bow before him: and none can keep alive his own soul.

Psalm 22:30 A seed shall serve him it shall be accounted to the Lord for a generation.

Psalm 22:31 They shall come, and shall declare his righteousness unto a people that shall be born, that he hath done this.

 

[Deuteronomy]

...the stone tables contained more than just the Ten Commandments. On the backside were written the statutes and judgments of the LORD.

Hello UnoiAmarah, I've never heard that before. You are saying the finger of God wrote more than the Decalogue on the two stone tablets, or do you mean that Moses engraved the words later perhaps (as the Lord certainly instructed Moses to write what He taught him down for the people, and that more than once (e.g. on the scroll of the covenant, for instance .. Exodus 24:7)

Also, where does the Bible tell us which of the Lord's statues and judgments were written there (on the backside of the stone tablets) as I would like to look into this?

Thanks!

~Deut

 

[jacob_g]

The Reserection:

A)
Flawed Assumption:
Christianity takes for granted the assumption that if we indeed knew for sure that Jesus was in fact resurrected, then this would conclusively establish Jesus’ status as God/the Son of God, thereby validating everything Jesus said and taught, which would in turn set Christianity on a solid foundation – except that there’s a question as to whether or not Jesus actually arose from the dead. But the entire above-assumption is flawed! That is, even if we knew that Jesus was resurrected, and that he affected his own resurrection, it still would tell us absolutely nothing about whether or not Jesus had any special kinship to God or whether or not he was the long-awaited Messiah; and without proof for those specific claims, Christianity doesn’t get off the ground.

B) A logical point which even a Christian would need to agree too, considering its inherent logic.
That is, even according to Christians (who accept the “Old Testament”), death came into existence as a result of very specific circumstances – this being Adam’s primordial sin, the context of which was unrestrained indulgence in physical desires. It follows that anyone who manages to completely rectify this topic, training himself to engage in physical pleasure in complete accordance with God’s will, but not at all for selfish reasons, thereby repairs the damage caused by Adam’s sin – at least as far as what’s relevant to that individual, and he can thereby become exempt of the decree of death.

C)
There are two individuals that even the Christians agree had complete control over death, and yet it has never entered the mind of any Christian that either of those individuals had Divine kinship or were the long-awaited Mashiach. Eliyahu and Elisha. That is, we find that Eliyahu resurrected a child in Melachim Aleph 17:17-24 and that Elisha resurrected a child in Melachim Bet 4:32-36 – narratives that every believing Christian acknowledges happened. Although Eliyahu and Elisha resurrected someone, still, did it ever enter the thought of any Christian that because of this, either one of them is God/the Son of God or the Messiah?! Surely not. And why not? Because that’s just not the logical implication of being able to resurrect someone and having power over death.

D)
Even if the prevouis points are false. Prove it happend:
None of the resurrection accounts were definitively written by eyewitnesses. That is, the Gospel of Mark abruptly stops early-on in its resurrection narrative, and Luke’s author was, according to all opinions, not a direct disciple of Jesus who even claims to have himself seen Jesus in a resurrected state. As for the Gospels of Mathew and John that although there are those who believe that these works were written by the Apostles of those names, the mainstream opinion of scholars – even Christian ones (based on internal evidence) is that in both cases, Jesus’ own disciples who bore those names were not the ones who wrote these two volumes. And even if there are attempts to claim otherwise, still, when fighting the status quo, only definitive information is relevant. As such, since concerning Mathew and John there’s a significant scholarly belief that these Gospels were not authored by the Apostles – and thus not by direct witnesses to Jesus’ supposed arising from the dead, so this alone is enough to make any claims of “eyewitness testimony” to the resurrection inconclusive, and so useless in regards to the need for Christians to bring bonafide proof for their anti-Old Testament claims.

In any event, the open contradictions between the three Gospels that do discuss Jesus’ resurrection (whereby Mathew states that he met with his disciples in specifically the Galilee, Luke states that he met with them specifically in Jerusalem, and John says that he met with them in both), not to mention that at the point where the Gospel of Mark’s narrative ends, the Gospels of Mathew and Luke – which both built off of the text of Mark – significantly diverge, all show how vague the matter is. And here too, it should once again be emphasized that although Christians can theoretically reconcile the aforementioned
contradictions, still, as touched upon , such an “excuse for a discrepancy” is good in a vacuum, but not if you’re coming to argue on the status quo based on the supposed resurrection. In different words, the contradictions alone highlight that we’re dealing with a tradition that’s in-any-event-dubious-enough to not be usable against the status quo.

E)
When God first gave the Torah at Har Sinai (which is again, something that any believing Christian acknowledges happened), it was a nationally witnessed event, that hundreds of thousands, if not millions, saw. In contrast, Jesus’ resurrection was at most witnessed by relatively few individuals whose identity is generally not known. Logic dictates that a non-nationally-witnessed-event does not have the ability to cancel out a nationally-witnessed event – period.

F)
Another point to consider is that even if Jesus arose from the dead, this tells us nothing about Jesus’ own powers (as the Christian claim that it does), since maybe he was resurrected by God, and not that he engendered his own resurrection. You claim that in arising from the dead, it shows that Jesus himself had the power to overcome death. So regarding this detail we’re noting that simply getting resurrected doesn’t prove anything about the powers of the person who gets resurrected. This can be seen clearly from the story of the individuals in Tanach that were resurrected by Eliyahu (in Melachim Aleph 17:17-24) and Elisha (in Melachim Bet 4:32-36), whereby not the slightest claim is made that the individuals that got resurrected by them were in any way special, or possessing of special powers.

let us reason together....

Tell me what what do we know from Torah about Messiah?

Only HaShem can resurrect the dead, Him only. But you are wrong what Christianity claims about Yeshua.... He is the first fruits, of the dead, the resurrection and not die again.

Your post sounds like you don't know much about what Torah says about Messiah...

 

[DeighAnn]

True, but the stone tables contained more than just the Ten Commandments. On the backside were written the statutues and judgments of the LORD.

And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them.
Ex 24:12

And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two tables of the testimony were in his hand: the tables were written on both their sides; on the one side and on the other were they written. And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables.
Ex 32:15-16

And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.
Deut 4:13

So I turned and came down from the mount, and the mount burned with fire: and the two tables of the covenant were in my two hands.
Deut 9:15

But as a side note:
Luke 16:31
And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

What do you think He meant at the end here?
Deuteronomy 5:6 I am the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
Deuteronomy 5:7 Thou shalt have none other gods before me.
Deuteronomy 5:8 Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth:
Deuteronomy 5:9 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,
Deuteronomy 5:10 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.
Deuteronomy 5:11 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain: for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
Deuteronomy 5:12 Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.
Deuteronomy 5:13 Six days thou shalt labour, and do all thy work:
Deuteronomy 5:14 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thine ox, nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates; that thy manservant and thy maidservant may rest as well as thou.
Deuteronomy 5:15 And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day.
Deuteronomy 5:16 Honour thy father and thy mother, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
Deuteronomy 5:17 Thou shalt not kill.
Deuteronomy 5:18 Neither shalt thou commit adultery.
Deuteronomy 5:19 Neither shalt thou steal.
Deuteronomy 5:20 Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Deuteronomy 5:21 Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour's wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour's house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour's.
Deuteronomy 5:22 These words the LORD spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.



.

 

[JesusLives]

I don't get it. What is the exact question? Just because someone else doesn't understand or get the resurrection doesn't mean it didn't happen.... Either you believe Jesus made a sacrifice and was raised from the dead or you don't.