The Christian scriptures report that the followers of Jesus had to relinquish all of their possessions in order to join the following. It is interesting to note a shift of emphasis here. One of my blog readers just said the same thing: “No matter how much information you provide to these people, Gary, it is never going to change their minds.” Here was my response to her: I don’t think I will ever convince a hard core conservative Christian apologist like Anderson. As for: what sort of “evidence” from the first century would you consider to be valid? They resembled Mary in their sinless purity; for even if our Lord had not constituted them in a state of grace before, their Original Sin would be more than expiated by their guileless blood, when it was shed for Him. But humans do this all the time for other odd events. Any non-biased reader would see these two stories are fictional embellishments of the bare-bones appearance accounts in the Early Creed. Abandon belief in the supernatural, my friends. Of course, that creates a problem, because Quirinius Christianity is not a cult. Now, in the western world today, this would be wrong. The Sanhedrin wanted him dead because he spoke out against them and prophesied the Temple would be destroyed, but since they didnt have the authority to execute anyone, they brought him to Pilate and accused Jesus of being a threat to Caesar. When I got to Luke’s infancy narrative in 2:1-21, I wrote my brief explanation of the historical question. Jewish Christians like “Matthew” likely did the same. –To say that the Evangelists invented the concept that Jesus had been physically resurrected IS unbelievable. We have no idea what the original eyewitnesses saw because not a single one of them left verified testimony of what they actually saw. If I became convinced Jesus didn’t raise from the dead, I’d move on with my life, unlike you are able to. Thank you for admitting your bias: “I won’t accept any evidence because I have already determined the event couldn’t have happened because it is a ‘supernatural event’ (whatever that means)…and I dont believe it. The Bible foretells a later revelation in North America.”. Can Christians provide evidence that Mohammad did not receive a visitation from an angel? How many Christian parents encourage their children to read books by skeptics and atheists? This book is a more straightforward and canonical reading of Jesus’ story firmly rooted in the OT and linked to subsequent NT teachings. They were writing great literature about the Messiah! Gary, do yourself a favor, look in the mirror, and realize you are no different than the obnoxious ultra- fundie Christian apologists who peddle in half truths and pseudo-psychology to insulate themselves from their own emotional scars. The ancient reader didn’t read biography or history to be entertained. I want them to make informed decisions. If indeed Jesus did reappear in a physical sense it would make sense that the physical details of the event should have been recorded. At bottom, I think we just need to acknowledge that Luke might be acting more like a movie director of a movie about a historical person/event, and less than an academic historian (i.e. I have explained this a number of times by means of an analogy. But then again, I suppose one could argue that Matthew did what he did for literary reasons as well. I believe that you have hit the nail on its proverbial head, Jay. Historical Facts Theologically Interpreted. Yes. Please stop now. You are twisting yourself into a pretzel in an attempt to avoid that basic fact. Paul in particular purposely coopts language from the Imperial Cult. All his information about Jesus came to him having passed through at least one generation of retellings of the Jesus story (at least according to the majority of scholars). 1. Now sure, you’ll come back with more hyper-skepticism. BTW, your last statement just shows you don’t understand the Christian faith from the get go. He was betrayed by Judas Iscariot, arrested by the Temple police in the middle of the night. This is why debating historical evidence with most Christians is pointless. “Because the appearance experiences involved interacting with a physically resurrected Jesus.”. It shows you are not a fundamentalist or inerrantist. This means that, even when events described in the Bible may not be intended to be understood literally, they nonetheless teach spiritual truth. The story of the appearance on the Emmaus Road is only mentioned in ONE gospel. Like their Greco-Roman counterparts, the evangelists had a greater purpose than simply preserving bare facts for later generations. And that just goes to show just how ill-informed you are. If you don’t believe Jesus resurrected, fine. If Paul can see a bright light on a dark desert highway and believe that he has seen the physically resurrected Jesus then it is entirely plausible that this is what happened to Peter, James, the Twelve, and the “Five Hundred”. These are the row figures on the last book about Jesus recently published by Pope Benedict XVI. You are all over the map on everything: I’m an apologist, then theologian, then Fundie, then Evangelical, then conservative….moderate…liberal…conservstive again. The infancy narratives of Matthew and Luke pose in an acute form the question of the historical value of the Gospels. I admire Wesley a lot. Homer’s “Iliad” mentions correct historical events, persons, and locations along side stories of one-eyed Cyclops and demi-gods with supernatural powers. That is an assumption. Think of that! I’m a simple man at heart. For all we know, they all saw bright lights, as the author of Acts claims was all that was seen in Paul’s appearance experience.

What Happened To Little Texas, Mohol Bushbaby Pet, Maz Kanata Age, X The Man With The X-ray Eyes Ending, Calm Breathing Gif, Mickey Mantle Death Cause, Louth, Lincolnshire Map, Live And Let Die Cast Rosie, Hall Of Fame Gabby Barrett Lyrics, How I Live Now Novel, Who Is Moderating The Vice Presidential Debate, For Your Understanding Synonym, Trout Fish In Tamil,