Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
What's to fear? Only the ignorant and the truly stupid fear something that is inevitable.
Do you fear death, Hume? If so, why?
At What Point?
- Thread starter domer76
- Start date
Do you fear death, Hume? If so, why?
Well, that is Christianity.
The fact that the Gospels paint the disciples in an unflattering light surrounding the events of Jesus' arrest makes the account sound more authentic and credible. Christian propagandists would almost certainly painted the apostles in a more favorable light.They clearly went to ground after the arrest and trial but, IMO, that's normal in an authoritarian society when the authoritarians are hunting you.
Agreed on the fact they continued to spread the message of Jesus, albeit in secret since this is also normal given the circumstances. Look at how many years passed with Christians being hunted like the Falon Gong before Emperor Constantine. The "sign of the fish", the ichthys, is a reminder of the persecution. The article on tolerance below points this out in a modern and amusing way.
...It was an eye-opening moment for me, though obviously trivial compared with the experiences of others. Here in this cosmopolitan and self-styled European city, this fellow felt the need to surreptitiously clue me in that he was a Christian just like me (or so he thought).
Evolution of religious bigotry
The cowardice and intolerance of slapping a Darwin fish on your car bumper.www.latimes.com
Traditionally, the fish pictogram conjures the miracle of the loaves and fishes as well as the Greek word IXOYE, which not only means fish but serves as an acronym, in Greek, for “Jesus Christ the Son of God [Is] Savior.” Christians persecuted by the Romans used to draw the Jesus fish in the dirt with a stick or a finger as a way to tip off fellow Christians that they weren’t alone.
In America, the easiest place to find this ancient symbol is on the back of cars. Recently, however, it seems as if Jesus fish have become outnumbered by Darwin fish. No doubt you’ve seen these too. The fish symbol is “updated” with little feet coming off the bottom, and “IXOYE” or “Jesus” is replaced with either “Darwin” or “Evolve.”
I find Darwin fish offensive. First, there’s the smugness. The undeniable message: Those Jesus fish people are less evolved, less sophisticated than we Darwin fishers.
The hypocrisy is even more glaring. Darwin fish are often stuck next to bumper stickers promoting tolerance or admonishing random motorists that “hate is not a family value.” But the whole point of the Darwin fish is intolerance; similar mockery of a cherished symbol would rightly be condemned as bigoted if aimed at blacks or women or, yes, Muslims....
Mark's account of the crucifixion states that Pontius Pilate was surprised to hear how quickly Jesus died. Evidently there was an expectation that it normally takes substantially longer to die from crucifixion
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
QED on the faux Christian tolerance.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
You hate Christianity so much that you are pushing only Christians fear death? A very fascinating position, Hume, but logical, intelligent and educated people know you are wrong.
I do not hate Christianity. Stop lying.
Agree. There was an egalitarian message that was radical for the Time. It must have been very appealing to hear the soul of a slave or a peasant was equal to the soul of an emperor, and eternal salvation must have sounded very appealing
I have a follow up question. Clearly Jesus didn't JUST rise from the dead (or in your view, had some medical issue which made it appear he rose from the dead) but he also ascended to heaven. Clearly since it is in the gospels you must have some exegetical ways to explain:
Luke 24:31 "And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight."
Any explanations for that? It surely couldn't be a made up story...he must have vanished in front of the Disciples.
Litmus
Verified User
Frantically Googling in response to my posts already this morning?
The Resurrection is attested to in all four Gospels, in Paul's epistles, in Hebrews, and in 1 Peter. Basic principles of literary and historical analysis hold that multiple attestations across multiple independent sources likely are more trustworthy than a story told in one or two sources.
Near Death Experiences are real, observed, and documented.
Vanishing into thin air isn't.
Litmus
Verified User
I don't have a plot to eliminate them.
I believe they can be saved.
Jesus does not give up on people.
Last edited:
So you don't think I know that Jesus ascended to heaven????
I get it, this is how you denigrate a point you are unable to address or simply don't want to. But you can't let a chance to insult go by.
And I don't think anyone truly believes the Gospels all represent "independent sources". And what if Paul (who never met Jesus directly) thought Jesus rose from the dead (he did, after all, experience Jesus through VISIONS, ie hallucinations). What if Paul actually thought that about 25 or so years before he ever heard of Christ that this guy who appeared to him in a dream-state rose from the dead and wrote it that way and preached it that way? What if Paul's writings (or whomever crafted things like the Q source) actually THOUGHT Jesus rose from the dead because it helped explain how the Messiah (who was NOT supposed to wind up being killed by the romans like a common criminal) actually was NOT killed so ignominously?
But I understand. This is a very important point for you. I am uncertain why but it seems to be very important to you. If it was absolutely necessary for the Gospels to be literally true about Jesus' empty tomb then your explanation would be as good as any other. I would be fine with it.
I'm just curious why, in a world where people mistake things and make stories up to explain them this couldn't just be one more. But I understand this point is VERY important for you.
You see? That's how you generate accord. I am happy for your hypothesis to be real if it is the only way to explain the existence of a story. I simply disagree with the necessity. It is not an article of faith for me.
Litmus
Verified User
this is what masons do; they focus on the irrational or supernatural aspects to define a faith, and then debunk that as their strawman when it comes time to denigate religion itself, while all the way avoiding a real disucussion on the moral teachings.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
First, it's pretty common for True Believers to paint anyone who didn't literally die on the Cross with Jesus as being cowardly and repugnant. Look at what the MAGAts do to their own who don't toe the line 100%....not that comparing the ideologies of Christians and MAGAts, only that fanatics have predictable behaviors. The LiveScience link below lists how many of the Apostles died. Most while spreading "the Good News".
Yes, It should take days to die from crucifixion.
The apostles: How Jesus' followers founded Christianity
The apostles followed Jesus and after his crucifixion went their separate ways, helping to found the early Christian church.
Simon Peter: Spread the Gospel in Jerusalem and abroad including Antioch. He died by crucifixion, and according to tradition he asked to die upside-down. His death was prophesied by Jesus in John 21:18.
Thaddeus also called Jude: Crucified at Edessa.
Bartholomew: Said to have translated the Gospel of Matthew, is believed to have been beaten then crucified.
Thomas also called Didymus: Went to Parthia and India, where he is believed to have been martyred.
Simon the Zealot: Went to Africa and may have gone as far north as Britain, where tradition holds he was martyred.
John: Travelled and spread the Gospel till he was sent to Rome. They attempted to boil him in oil which failed so he was banished to Patmos, where he wrote the Book of Revelation.
James the son of Zebedee: His death was the second account of martyrdom in the Bible, James was executed in Jerusalem for his faith, as recounted in Acts 12:1-2.
Philip: Served the cause of Christ until his death in Heliopolis.
Matthew: It is believed much of Matthew’s ministry was in Africa, including modern-day Ethiopia, and that he was killed with a halberd.
James the son of Alphaeus: He served until he was stoned for his faith.
Matthias: Not much is known of his ministry, though tradition holds he was stoned and then beheaded.
Andrew: Preached in what is now the middle east and was crucified.
You seem upset and obsessed with the fact I think it's at least remotely possible a near death experience could be a rational explanation for the widely attested resurrection story
People like you are always complaining that Christianity should be more rational. But when a sensible and rational explanation is given, you get very defensive presumably because you are emotionally invested in the story that the New Testament is largely based on lies.
Are you still angry at Christianity after all these years because God didn't answer your prayers?
It really does seem you respond without reading what you are responding to. I said quite clearly I'm A-OK with your hypothesis being accurate if it is the only way to explain the story.
Clearly I disagree.
You do not have a model for people "making stuff up" or "being confused and thinking something was a real story so passing it on". I do.
I think I'm being quite rational in assuming a story about a man coming back from the dead is just as likely made up.
Again, you lack of honesty in the debate is troubling. I told you EXPLICITLY now several times I'm OK with your hypothesis. I simply disagree that it is the only rational explanation.
YOU are the one who is getting defensive and snarky and snippy and nasty.
Again, more dishonesty. I told you many times now that I don't necessarily think anything in the Gospels is a "Lie" in that I honestly don't think the writers were making the story up with the intention of hiding the actual truth.
Moer insults. I guess this is the stage we are at now. You don't like anyone even marginally disagreeing with your own version of events so you start hurling insults.
It is all too familiar with you. I'm really sorry that you aren't up to discussing your own ideas.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Perry claims to desire rational, logical explanations, but only if they fit his emotional beliefs.
You claimed it was the Gospel-era writers who fabricated the resurrection story, decades after the eyewitness were gone.
You obviously didn't know that some of the original apostles and even Jesus' brother James were still alive when the earliest writings of the resurrection were written and circulating -- and as such you haven't explained why these eyewitness did not correct the second generation authors/fabricators.
I said it's fine if you want to believe several dozen (at least) Christian writers and evangelists of the first century got together and conspired to create a fabrication they all were able to maintain for decades.
I see some problems with that theory, and have constructed a perfectly rational and sensible alternative to explain the resurrection stories.
He did say when posting as Perry PhD that he got disillusioned with his Christian faith when God didn't answer his prayers about some crisis.
So I think there grew a deep anger about Christianity, and an emotional need to believe the faith was built on deception and lies.