Jesus Christ and the Resurrection (what does the evidence reveal?)

Started by Imperial_Samura15 pages
Originally posted by docb77
What would you say was the worst form of torture? The rack?

Not especially, but history is full of forms of torture that either aim to lead to death or extract information - using techniques of physical and mental pain that could be swifter then or last considerably longer then crucifiction.

The crucification is a two stage thing - the prestage portion that did considerable damage to the body and the later stage where one is actually attached to the cross, nor was it exclusively Roman, certain Eastern cultures prior to it, and after the Empire used it. Some did is in a similar fashion, others changed what happened before the actual attaching to the cross.

No one denies it was painful, but some suggest it might have been too painful - leading to unconsciousness or coma from loss of blood and heat in a quick fashion - depending on the time of the crucification and the degree of punishment the body had received. One of the things missing if Jesus was indeed killed in such a fashion is the religious belief. One of the reasons why Crucification was so terrible was that it involved damage to the body, which was bad as it affected their beliefs of the after life. It was comparable to the crusaders who fed Muslims to Pigs or the Indian Braman who led rebels who would covered in cows blood before being blown from the guns or whipped to death.

Originally posted by docb77
What would you say was the worst form of torture? The rack?

The song Tiny Bubbles played over and over in differant ways, with Bubbles flying around, and no way to sleep, or cover your ears

Originally posted by Darth Kreiger
JesusIsAlive, you seem to think without God we have no Morals, I am more Moral than 90% of the Religous people I know, yet I have none, why do you keep insisting that?

I want the thread and post where I allegedly "insist" that you (you said "we"😉 have no morals without God.

What I did say (but it perhaps was misconstrued) is that God (the Creator of the conscience) is the Source of all knowledge of right and wrong. God gave each person an innate knowledge of right and wrong via conscience. This is a God-given mechanism that you had nothing to do with having. You don't lose your conscience when you grow up. It just becomes more or less sensitive to morality. Some have ignored their conscience for so long that it has become what the Bible calls "seared with a hot iron." In other words, it has been rendered useless, null and void. I believe people who commit violent crimes or those who sin without any qualms fit this description.

I acknowledge that all of us have been taught morals and ethics from others as well. But I am talking about the inborn feature for morality that we have inherently from God, and that did not come to us through learning or teaching. We all have this from the beginning. Although our minds or understanding are not as developed when we are young (from the time we are infants until we are say five) we know when we have done something wrong. Our discernment of right and wrong is just not as keen.

Originally posted by Darth Kreiger
The song Tiny Bubbles played over and over in differant ways, with Bubbles flying around, and no way to sleep, or cover your ears

Its a great song to sing the Spanish alphabet to.

.

Originally posted by Deano
"The Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the Sun, in which they put a man whom they call Christ, in the place of the Sun, and pay him the same adoration which was originally paid to the Sun."
—Thomas Paine (Anglo-American revolutionary and writer, 1737-1809).

You are still spouting this nonsense?

😆

Why? You never quit. His claims are more credible than yours.

Originally posted by docb77
What would you say was the worst form of torture? The rack?
The Pear is up there.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
The Pear is up there.

definitely one of the more disgusting anyways.

The Resurrection: Miracle or Myth?

This article first appeared in the From the President column of the Christian Research Newsletter, volume 5, number 2 (1992). For further information go to: http://www.equip.org

What was the central truth of the early apostles’ preaching? What was the stimulus to the miraculous growth of the early church? What was the energizing force which spread the gospel across the face of the earth?” These questions, posed by Dr. Walter Martin in his book Essential Christianity, all find their answer in the singular event of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. “He is risen!” was the victory cry of the early Christians, as they spread the message of Christ’s bodily resurrection to the ends of the earth.

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is the very capstone in the arch of Christianity. When it is removed all else crumbles. It is, in fact, the singular doctrine that elevated Christianity above all the pagan religions of the Mediterranean world. And it is precisely because of its strategic importance to the Christian faith that each person who takes the sacred name Christian upon his lips must be prepared to defend its historicity.

Thus the question must be asked, How can we know beyond any doubt that Jesus really rose from the dead — that this singular event is not some queer predilection on the part of the Christian but is rather faith founded on irrefutable fact?

As Christians, we must be prepared to demonstrate that Christ’s resurrection was an event that occurred in time and space — that it was, in reality, historical and not mythological (cf. 2 Pet. 1:16). The importance of this event cannot be minimized, for Jesus Himself proclaimed that His resurrection would prove His power over death, and thus His deity (John 2:18–22). Not only that, but Christ’s resurrection is the very heart of the gospel (1 Cor. 15:1–4).

When I first began examining the evidences for Christianity, I discovered that belief in the Resurrection does not constitute a blind leap into a dark chasm but rather a step into the light. Indeed, the evidence for Christ’s resurrection is so overwhelming that no one can examine it with an open mind desiring to know the truth without becoming convinced of its truth.

Of the many evidences available, none is more compelling than the fact that the resurrected Christ appeared to over five hundred individuals at a single time (1 Cor. 15:6). Christ appeared to numerous other individuals as well, providing “many convincing proofs” of His resurrection (Acts 1:3). Christ in His resurrection body was even touched on two occasions (Matt. 28:9; John 20:17), and challenged the disciples (Luke 24:39) and Thomas (John 20:27) to feel His wounds.

For those who continue to harbor doubts about the veracity of the biblical evidence, one need only point to Dr. Simon Greenleaf, the greatest authority on legal evidences in the 19th century. It is noteworthy that after examining the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ, Greenleaf suggested that any cross-examination of the eyewitness testimonies recorded in Scripture would result in “an undoubting conviction of their integrity, ability, and truth.”

Despite the biblical evidence, some have suggested that Jesus’ body was stolen from the tomb —by either the Romans, the Jews, or the disciples. However, even as we consider such alternative explanations, reason drives us back to the conclusion that Christ rose from the dead. Consider the following: We know that the Romans would have no reason to steal Christ’s body. After all, they wanted to keep the peace in Palestine.

The Jewish religious leaders would also have no motive in stealing the body since that would only stir up the very movement they had tried to crush. Besides, if the Jewish leaders had stolen the body, they could have later openly displayed the body to prove to the disciples and indeed the world that Jesus had not really risen from the dead.

[b]And certainly, the disciples wouldn’t have stolen the body, for why would they choose to suffer and die for a cause they knew to be a lie? While it is conceivable that someone might choose to die for what they know to be the truth, it is inconceivable that hundreds of Jesus’ followers would be willing to die for what they knew to be a lie.[b]

Another theory that has been resuscitated (ad nauseam and ad infinitum) in a desperate attempt to explain away the Resurrection is the so-called “Swoon theory.” This theory says that Jesus did not really die on the cross, but merely passed out and was later revived. However, this theory is hopelessly flawed. Think about it for a minute. Can you imagine that Jesus endured six trials, a crown of thorns, a Roman scourge, a crucifixion, a spear thrust into His side, the loss of a great deal of blood, going three days without medical attention or food, pushing a two-ton stone away from His tomb’s entrance, and then physically overcoming an armed Roman guard while walking on pierced feet? No! The Swoon theory is ridiculous in the extreme. And yet, amazingly, some people continue to hang their hats on it.

After carefully examining all the evidence, one can only come to the singular conclusion that Jesus did indeed rise from the dead and that He now lives to be our Lord and Savior (Rev. 1:18). And let me emphasize that the resurrection of Christ is not just an Easter-time phenomenon to be celebrated in song and service. Rather, it is a truth that should daily fill us with eternal hope. Not only did the resurrection of Christ transform the disciples from cowards to lions of the faith, but His resurrection still continues to transform lives today. Because Christ lives, the Scripture says, we will live also. Indeed, in an instant, in the twinkling of an eye, we shall be transformed into physical resurrected bodies like unto His resurrected body.

— Hank Hanegraaff

Is there a Santa Claus?

I am pleased to present a scientific inquiry into the existence of Santa Claus.

1. No known species of reindeer can fly. But there are 300,000 species of living organisms yet to be classified, and while most of these are insects and germs, this does not completely rule out flying reindeer which only Santa has ever seen.

2. There are 2 billion children (persons under 18) in the world.
* But since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and Buddhist children, that reduces the workload to 15% of the total - 378 million according to Population Reference Bureau.

* At an average (census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each.

3. Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west (which seems logical).
* This works out to 822.6 visits per second.

* This is to say that for each Christian household with good children, Santa has 1/1000th of a second to:
o park,
o hop out of the sleigh,
o jump down the chimney,
o fill the stockings,
o distribute the remaining presents under the tree,
o eat whatever snacks have been left,
o get back up the chimney,
o get back into the sleigh and move on to the next house.

* Assuming that each of these 91.8 million stops are evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false but for the purposes of our calculations we will accept), we are now talking about .78 miles per household, a total trip of 75-1/2 million miles, not counting stops to do what most of us must do at least once every 31 hours, plus feeding and etc.

* This means that Santa's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second, 3,000 times the speed of sound. For purposes of comparison, the fastest man- made vehicle on earth, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second. A conventional reindeer can run, tops, 15 miles per hour.

4. The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium-sized lego set (2 pounds), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons, not counting Santa, who is invariably described as overweight.
* On land, conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that "flying reindeer" could pull ten times the normal amount, we cannot do the job with eight, or even nine.

* We need 214,200 reindeer. This increases the payload - not even counting the weight of the sleigh - to 353,430 tons. Again, for comparison - this is four times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth.

5. 353,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as a spacecraft reentering the earth's atmosphere.
* The lead pair of reindeer will absorb 14.3 quintillion joules of energy. Per second. Each. In short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them, and create deafening sonic booms in their wake.

* The entire reindeer team will be vaporized within 4.26 thousandths of a second.

* Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to centrifugal forces 17,500.09 times greater than gravity.

* A 250-pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the backof his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force.

In conclusion - If Santa ever did deliver presents on Christmas Eve, he's dead now.

😱

Brilliant, simply brilliant

😐

... but also absolutely irrelevant.

Originally posted by docb77
😐

... but also absolutely irrelevant.

I actually think he made an excellent point...the validity in the existance of Santa Clause is pretty similiar to the validity of the resurrection.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You are still spouting this nonsense?

😆

HYPOCRISY the most common of Christian crimes. 🙁

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
[b]Is there a Santa Claus?

I am pleased to present a scientific inquiry into the existence of Santa Claus.

1. No known species of reindeer can fly. But there are 300,000 species of living organisms yet to be classified, and while most of these are insects and germs, this does not completely rule out flying reindeer which only Santa has ever seen.

2. There are 2 billion children (persons under 18) in the world.
* But since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and Buddhist children, that reduces the workload to 15% of the total - 378 million according to Population Reference Bureau.

* At an average (census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each.

3. Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west (which seems logical).
* This works out to 822.6 visits per second.

* This is to say that for each Christian household with good children, Santa has 1/1000th of a second to:
o park,
o hop out of the sleigh,
o jump down the chimney,
o fill the stockings,
o distribute the remaining presents under the tree,
o eat whatever snacks have been left,
o get back up the chimney,
o get back into the sleigh and move on to the next house.

* Assuming that each of these 91.8 million stops are evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false but for the purposes of our calculations we will accept), we are now talking about .78 miles per household, a total trip of 75-1/2 million miles, not counting stops to do what most of us must do at least once every 31 hours, plus feeding and etc.

* This means that Santa's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second, 3,000 times the speed of sound. For purposes of comparison, the fastest man- made vehicle on earth, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second. A conventional reindeer can run, tops, 15 miles per hour.

4. The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium-sized lego set (2 pounds), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons, not counting Santa, who is invariably described as overweight.
* On land, conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that "flying reindeer" could pull ten times the normal amount, we cannot do the job with eight, or even nine.

* We need 214,200 reindeer. This increases the payload - not even counting the weight of the sleigh - to 353,430 tons. Again, for comparison - this is four times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth.

5. 353,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as a spacecraft reentering the earth's atmosphere.
* The lead pair of reindeer will absorb 14.3 quintillion joules of energy. Per second. Each. In short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them, and create deafening sonic booms in their wake.

* The entire reindeer team will be vaporized within 4.26 thousandths of a second.

* Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to centrifugal forces 17,500.09 times greater than gravity.

* A 250-pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the backof his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force.

In conclusion - If Santa ever did deliver presents on Christmas Eve, he's dead now. [/B]

clapping Good job xmarksthespot.

👆

👆 ✅ droolio

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I actually think he made an excellent point...the validity in the existance of Santa Clause is pretty similiar to the validity of the resurrection.

Not really, there aren't any eyewitnesses to flying reindeer (although who would really be able to see them if they were flying as fast as was indicated). There is no evidence for a magical Santa Claus (St. Nicholas however, could very well have existed)

Biblically there were many witnesses of the resurrected Jesus. You can doubt or even disbelieve the evidence, but you can't say that there isn't any.

Originally posted by docb77
Not really, there aren't any eyewitnesses to flying reindeer (although who would really be able to see them if they were flying as fast as was indicated). There is no evidence for a magical Santa Claus (St. Nicholas however, could very well have existed)

Biblically there were many witnesses of the resurrected Jesus. You can doubt or even disbelieve the evidence, but you can't say that there isn't any.

Yes, there is. My cousin who's six says he saw Santa. And so do thousands of little kids. Does that mean Santa's real? No.

It isn't what you think you saw, it's what you can PROVE.