The Resurretion

[Derek]

Alright, ppl have been questioning why I'm a Christian or how I could be a Christian if I have so many disputes with the Bible. Here are my reasons for supporting the bodily resurrection theory.

1. The disciples died for their beliefs and it's not just according to biblical accounts. People died for centuries in the name of Christ. Why would the disciples die for something that they knew was not true?

2. The women were the first to witness the empty tomb (WHICH HE WOULDN"T HAVE HAD HIS OWN TOMB) and the early Christians went from this passage. Yes, the women were the ones who took care of dead bodies back then in this regard, but why would the authors of the gospels leave this for ppl to read if it weren't true? Women were not even allowed to testify in court back then and they had no rights. Why would anyone believe what a woman reported? The authors of the gospels knew what they were up against.

I am interested in hearing your thoughts and comments. Also, take into account that this wasn't written for a few decades after the resurrection took place. People didn't write thngs down as if they were in class taking notes in 2010 in the first century. Information was passed down through word of mouth until the middle ages. People's memories were much better because of this and if someone got a story wrong, several ppl would be there to correct them. The fact that the gospels weren't written until after Paul's letters should have no baring on someone's faith unless they are uneducated and do not understand ancient times.

Mark 65 ish but I think coud be as early as 60.
Matthew and Luke are after 70 since they include the fall of the temple.
John is likely the early 90's as roots of gnosticism can be seen in words such as light and dark.

[John Dibble]

You being a Christian might be slightly less questionable to some if you took the time to spell "resurrection" correctly in your thread title.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     It would seem to me that you believe in Christ's resurrection because the early Christians believed in Christ. Generally, I doubt that the followers of the faith would cast doubt on their own religion.

[Derek]

lol my bad resurrection. Of course they believed in their faith. I'm talking about the disciples who died for their belief that Christ died for their sins. They knew Jesus personally so why would they die for the belief of him to be the messiah if they knew for a fact it wasn't true? My point being it was true and they knew it. Please don't lose track of the main point of this forum.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I've read stories of practitioners of African religions describing statues coming to life during rituals. Just because they were there, doesn't mean that they were infallible in accounting the truth about Jesus.

     Also, I fail to see what the main point of the forum has to do with anything.

[Derek]

well you posted here. did these statue ppl die for their beliefs?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Yes. As far as I know, non-Christians can post here as well.

     Die, no. But unless we accept that either their beliefs are completely true or else that people will just tell outright lies about their religious experiences to people that they don't know & who have no connection to their religious background, the implication arises that people can experience things with a degree of inaccuracy.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Alright, ppl have been questioning why I'm a Christian or how I could be a Christian if I have so many disputes with the Bible. Here are my reasons for supporting the bodily resurrection theory.

doesn't seem too logical to agree with GroupA's account about PersonX rising from the dead, then discount everything GroupA claims PersonX taught....but that is exactly what you are doing when you accept the resurrection yet reject the New Testament.

---

John is likely the early 90's as roots of gnosticism can be seen in words such as light and dark.

Please tell me you're making this up just to bother me and don’t really believe a word you write, for according to your logic, Genesis has its roots in Gnosticism:
 
Gen 1: 3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness.

John was simply alluding to Gen 1:3 in that God brought Jesus into the world in order to provide light (truth) to the world.

2Sam 22:29 “the LORD turns my darkness into light.”

Ecclesiastes 2:13 I saw that wisdom is better than folly, just as light is better than darkness.

 Isa 9:2 The people walking in darkness have seen a great light; on those living in the land of the shadow of death a light has dawned.

Acts 26:18 to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.'

Romans 2:19 if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark,

Romans 13:12 The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light.

1 Corinthians 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.

Here is a perfect example of using Gen 1:3 to compare with the light of Christ:
2 Corinthians 4:6 For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.

2 Corinthians 6:14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?

Ephesians 5:8 For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light

1 Thessalonians 5:5 You are all sons of the light and sons of the day. We do not belong to the night or to the darkness.

Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

2 Peter 1:19 And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.

[Derek]

Alright, ppl have been questioning why I'm a Christian or how I could be a Christian if I have so many disputes with the Bible. Here are my reasons for supporting the bodily resurrection theory.

doesn't seem too logical to agree with GroupA's account about PersonX rising from the dead, then discount everything GroupA claims PersonX taught....but that is exactly what you are doing when you accept the resurrection yet reject the New Testament.

---

John is likely the early 90's as roots of gnosticism can be seen in words such as light and dark.

Please tell me you're making this up just to bother me and don’t really believe a word you write, for according to your logic, Genesis has its roots in Gnosticism:
 
Gen 1: 3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness.

John was simply alluding to Gen 1:3 in that God brought Jesus into the world in order to provide light (truth) to the world.

2Sam 22:29 “the LORD turns my darkness into light.”

Ecclesiastes 2:13 I saw that wisdom is better than folly, just as light is better than darkness.

 Isa 9:2 The people walking in darkness have seen a great light; on those living in the land of the shadow of death a light has dawned.

Acts 26:18 to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.'

Romans 2:19 if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark,

Romans 13:12 The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light.

1 Corinthians 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.

Here is a perfect example of using Gen 1:3 to compare with the light of Christ:
2 Corinthians 4:6 For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.

2 Corinthians 6:14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?

Ephesians 5:8 For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light

1 Thessalonians 5:5 You are all sons of the light and sons of the day. We do not belong to the night or to the darkness.

Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

2 Peter 1:19 And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.

No that is far from what I'm saying. Genesis 1 was written by Jewish priests and southern Hebrews. Light and dark were also terms used by Persians and Babylonians. The priests would have picked up this language when being held captive in Babylon. Please don't take me out of context.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No that is far from what I'm saying. Genesis 1 was written by Jewish priests and southern Hebrews. Light and dark were also terms used by Persians and Babylonians. The priests would have picked up this language when being held captive in Babylon. Please don't take me out of context.

I took you out of context?  this is what you said:

John is likely the early 90's as roots of gnosticism can be seen in words such as light and dark.

I simply pointed out that it was utterly STUPID to think words like "light and dark" are an indication of gnosticism since the ENTIRE BIBLE uses that language.

[Derek]

Yes and if you look closely I stated that there are gnostic roots meaning gnosticism was beginning when John was written. I did not mean to indicate that John is by any way gnostic. It would have liked helped to spur the movement in some ways. If anything though, John is far from gnostic for the mere fact that it has a bodily resurrection. Gnostics viewed the body as evil and having a body would have made Jesus evil. This was not the case and therefore John is not gnostic by having a bodily resurrection.