The Resurrection of Jesus Is Probably Real

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember Romeo and Juliet. People can think you’re dead and you’re not actually back in the day.

Very true. There must have been some emotionally-charged impetus for the explosion of Christianity. He could have woken up from a coma, been in acceptable health for a while, and died suddenly from a clot to his brain or lungs, from the strain his body had been subjected to when on the cross. The resurrection was interpreted as a miracle, and the second death as the ascension of Christ to Heaven.

If you are interested in medical mysteries, you can find an explanation.

OP here. This is a nice illustration of my point. To deny the Resurrection is to wade into conjecture; there’s not some obvious rival explanation.

You can choose to believe what you want or need to believe and there is value to religion beyond whether it’s real or not…

But much of what was thought of as miracles back in the day now have scientific explanations. The PP gave you one for what could have happened. Do we know? Nope. No cell phones those days.

Then again, we have cell phones now. Lots of ways to prove what happened. And people still choose to believe what they want to….

What’s the value of religion beyond its truth?

Community, teaching morals to kids, having something to lean on when things are uncontrollable. None of that means that Biblical stories are completely accurate. That’s not to say there isn’t truth behind them, but it was mostly people’s way of explaining what was then unexplainable.

One wonders then Who put the urge into humans to “explain[] what was then unexplainable.” Seems that humanity yearns for an ultimate cause in much the same way it seeks out other essential needs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember Romeo and Juliet. People can think you’re dead and you’re not actually back in the day.

Very true. There must have been some emotionally-charged impetus for the explosion of Christianity. He could have woken up from a coma, been in acceptable health for a while, and died suddenly from a clot to his brain or lungs, from the strain his body had been subjected to when on the cross. The resurrection was interpreted as a miracle, and the second death as the ascension of Christ to Heaven.

If you are interested in medical mysteries, you can find an explanation.

OP here. This is a nice illustration of my point. To deny the Resurrection is to wade into conjecture; there’s not some obvious rival explanation.

You can choose to believe what you want or need to believe and there is value to religion beyond whether it’s real or not…

But much of what was thought of as miracles back in the day now have scientific explanations. The PP gave you one for what could have happened. Do we know? Nope. No cell phones those days.

Then again, we have cell phones now. Lots of ways to prove what happened. And people still choose to believe what they want to….

What’s the value of religion beyond its truth?

Does religion even have to have any truth? If I believe my God will protect and help me and feel calmer and more able to go about my day does it matter if that's true? If my God exists for others? What others believe or not? The whole delusion/sky fairy rant theme for atheism seems to hinge on organized religion. I haven't been in a church since 6th grade.

Atheism is not just about religion. It’s about not believing in a supreme being who lets you live forever.

Ok but the paragraph you responded to didn't have any of that. Not every believer has the same bag of ideas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember Romeo and Juliet. People can think you’re dead and you’re not actually back in the day.

Very true. There must have been some emotionally-charged impetus for the explosion of Christianity. He could have woken up from a coma, been in acceptable health for a while, and died suddenly from a clot to his brain or lungs, from the strain his body had been subjected to when on the cross. The resurrection was interpreted as a miracle, and the second death as the ascension of Christ to Heaven.

If you are interested in medical mysteries, you can find an explanation.

OP here. This is a nice illustration of my point. To deny the Resurrection is to wade into conjecture; there’s not some obvious rival explanation.

You can choose to believe what you want or need to believe and there is value to religion beyond whether it’s real or not…

But much of what was thought of as miracles back in the day now have scientific explanations. The PP gave you one for what could have happened. Do we know? Nope. No cell phones those days.

Then again, we have cell phones now. Lots of ways to prove what happened. And people still choose to believe what they want to….

What’s the value of religion beyond its truth?

Does religion even have to have any truth? If I believe my God will protect and help me and feel calmer and more able to go about my day does it matter if that's true? If my God exists for others? What others believe or not? The whole delusion/sky fairy rant theme for atheism seems to hinge on organized religion. I haven't been in a church since 6th grade.

Atheism is not just about religion. It’s about not believing in a supreme being who lets you live forever.

Ok but the paragraph you responded to didn't have any of that. Not every believer has the same bag of ideas.

No, but eternal life is a pretty big deal.

[Anonymous]

What happened to the Apostles?

James, brother of John: Beheaded by King Herod around A.D. 44.
Peter: Crucified upside down in Rome, a death he requested as he didn't feel worthy to die the same way as Jesus.
Paul: Beheaded in Rome during the persecution under Emperor Nero.
Andrew: Crucified on a diagonal cross in Greece after preaching for two days.
Thomas: Martyred in India, reportedly speared to death.
Bartholomew: Flayed alive and then beheaded in Armenia.
James the Lesser: Thrown from the temple in Jerusalem, stoned, and clubbed.
Jude (Thaddaeus): Killed with arrows or an axe in Armenia or Lebanon.
Simon the Zealot: Sawed in half while preaching in Persia, according to tradition.
Matthew: Executed with a sword in Ethiopia for condemning the king.
Philip: May have been crucified or suffered other forms of martyrdom.

https://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1-300/whatever-happened-to-the-twelve-apostles-11629558.html

People don’t die for lies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Remember Romeo and Juliet. People can think you’re dead and you’re not actually back in the day.

yup- that is a better explanation, especially since Jesus was on the cross for 3, excruciating, hours but it takes 3 days for someone to die in that position and the Romans really wanted this headache to go away (they thought of jews the way we think of Muslims, crazy religious nut jobs). so would be amenable to bribery.

one theory is that he left Israel and went looking for the lost tribes. there is a town in what is now Pakistan that claims that Mary is buried there. It's a pretty accepted "fact' which is really weird.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unknown_years_of_Jesus

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m Christian but I still recognize that nothing revitalizes a dying movement as much as a martyr. It doesn’t prove anything one way or another except that it was a story that found resonance with a lot of people at that time. The fact that the Roman Empire was in a slow collapse during that time period also probably contributed to a general political/social instability that made people want to find a new way of thinking about their world and group membership. Power voids are great for messianic movements, throughout history.

the Roman Empire was just getting started at that time- the first century they were still in the rule of Augustus,tiberius and other various descendants of the family of Julius Caesar. just a small historical correction. It's probable that the year 1 in the BC/AD timeline actually is rooted in the destruction of the roman republic and the beginning if the empire. the Pax Romana started in 31 bc