Yeah the Bible is generally considered one of the best historical records because
- It is a collection of dozens of books
- It was written almost immediately after the events
- There are tons of copies in many languages and regions
- It is well maintained
- No objections from hostile witnesses
- It is a collection of dozens of books
- It was written almost immediately after the events
- There are tons of copies in many languages and regions
- It is well maintained
- No objections from hostile witnesses
View 6 more replies »
@suzie1960: Adam and Eve did not write Genesis - Moses did. I'm just going to give a stab at some of the answers to Walabby's post:
1. In that time it was common to skip "unimportant" generations in genealogies, so the Gospel writers could have disagreed as to who was important.
2. It is possible that both happened.
4. It is possible that one of the robbers mocked Jesus then later changed
5. It is possible that he said both things
I just gave a few that quickly jumped out at me.
1. In that time it was common to skip "unimportant" generations in genealogies, so the Gospel writers could have disagreed as to who was important.
2. It is possible that both happened.
4. It is possible that one of the robbers mocked Jesus then later changed
5. It is possible that he said both things
I just gave a few that quickly jumped out at me.
suzie1960 · 61-69, F
@Professional:
If Adam and Eve didn't write Genesis, it wasn't written shortly after the event, it was written very much later so has to be considered unreliable.
Re your answers to Walabby's post -
1) It's not possible to skip generation between father and son.
2) Highly unlikely both could have happened.
3) ?
4) Again, highly unlikely.
5) Three different things were listed, not two. He might have said all three but it's surprising the three witnesses each only heard one of the three things.
6) ?
7) ?
If Adam and Eve didn't write Genesis, it wasn't written shortly after the event, it was written very much later so has to be considered unreliable.
Re your answers to Walabby's post -
1) It's not possible to skip generation between father and son.
2) Highly unlikely both could have happened.
3) ?
4) Again, highly unlikely.
5) Three different things were listed, not two. He might have said all three but it's surprising the three witnesses each only heard one of the three things.
6) ?
7) ?
@suzie1960 That one wasn't written until later - that is correct. Most of the Bible is history and considered very well-maintained. The Gospels were written with just a few decades in between.
To the Walabby ones (now that I have a little more time):
1. At that time when genealogies were written they often skipped generations. Being very interested in genealogy myself I view it as bad practice and would NEVER do it, but just because it skipped generations does not mean it is inaccurate.
2. I would refer you to Matthew 2. This account shows that the wise men did not arrive in Jerusalem immediately after Jesus' birth. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that Jesus and family had some time to stay in Jerusalem prior to fleeing to Egypt. They would have brought him to the Temple during that time.
3. I don't see the contradiction. They both say Thursday he was handed over. John 18 does not explicitly say that they waited until Friday to crucify him, but that does not mean they didn't.
4. I don't see any reason to inherently dismiss it. I was doing a little further research and here is an article I found - http://evidenceforchristianity.org/was-it-one-thief-luke-or-both-matthew-who-mocked-jesus-how-can-you-resolve-this-discrepancyr/
5. Jesus was on that cross for a period of time. It is possible - likely - that he said multiple things. I do not see anything inherently strange there. Like when you go to the scene of an accident - different witnesses saw different things.
6. Here's a pretty good explanation I found - https://www.gotquestions.org/Judas-die.html
7. Bethany is on the Mount of Olives.
It was nice receiving a respectful response for a change, lol. If you want to continue to debate please feel free to respond.
To the Walabby ones (now that I have a little more time):
1. At that time when genealogies were written they often skipped generations. Being very interested in genealogy myself I view it as bad practice and would NEVER do it, but just because it skipped generations does not mean it is inaccurate.
2. I would refer you to Matthew 2. This account shows that the wise men did not arrive in Jerusalem immediately after Jesus' birth. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that Jesus and family had some time to stay in Jerusalem prior to fleeing to Egypt. They would have brought him to the Temple during that time.
3. I don't see the contradiction. They both say Thursday he was handed over. John 18 does not explicitly say that they waited until Friday to crucify him, but that does not mean they didn't.
4. I don't see any reason to inherently dismiss it. I was doing a little further research and here is an article I found - http://evidenceforchristianity.org/was-it-one-thief-luke-or-both-matthew-who-mocked-jesus-how-can-you-resolve-this-discrepancyr/
5. Jesus was on that cross for a period of time. It is possible - likely - that he said multiple things. I do not see anything inherently strange there. Like when you go to the scene of an accident - different witnesses saw different things.
6. Here's a pretty good explanation I found - https://www.gotquestions.org/Judas-die.html
7. Bethany is on the Mount of Olives.
It was nice receiving a respectful response for a change, lol. If you want to continue to debate please feel free to respond.
Irisismynameo · 26-30, F
suzie1960 · 61-69, F
@Celine: They're not capable of original thought. Essentially they work from a script, they can't deviate from it as doing so would require them to think for themselves, something their masters really don't want them to do.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Pfuzylogic · M
@Celine:
Are you cheating with a Science book? You know how that just isn't fair 😂
I have no problem with crowds.
Are you cheating with a Science book? You know how that just isn't fair 😂
I have no problem with crowds.
hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M
Pfuzylogic · M
@Celine: Limit your copying.
I might respond.
It is rude.
I might respond.
It is rude.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Pfuzylogic · M
@Celine:
Again unqualified in knowledge.
At least get an Associates so you can have a job and you can leave Mom and Dad.
Again unqualified in knowledge.
At least get an Associates so you can have a job and you can leave Mom and Dad.
SW-User
how else did he create us? 🙄
Pfuzylogic · M
@Fernie: Don't throw blame on me. Like I said you refused to listen.
suzie1960 · 61-69, F
@Fernie: I thought he was a troll at first but it quickly became apparent he was a complete nutjob.
FreeSpirit1 · F
This message was deleted by its author.
@CopperCicada: Yeah but other evidence points to his resurrection:
- Fulfilled prophecies
- Witnesses
- Criterion of embarrassment
- Empty tomb
- Quality of Bible - it is dozens of books, many copies in different languages and continents, written shortly after event within lifetime of other hostile witnesses
- Fulfilled prophecies
- Witnesses
- Criterion of embarrassment
- Empty tomb
- Quality of Bible - it is dozens of books, many copies in different languages and continents, written shortly after event within lifetime of other hostile witnesses
This message was deleted by its author.
WeighedDown · 41-45, M
Jesus was a real man with a real time machine, think back to the future but with Jesus instead of Marty mcfly and water walking shoes (from the future) instend of hover boards
icyreb · M
yes. he was real. foregoing religious texts, he is mentioned by Roman historians of the time.
okaybut · 56-60, M
@Celine: "Most contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus
It makes sense. I think he was a cult leader whose message spread.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus
It makes sense. I think he was a cult leader whose message spread.
suzie1960 · 61-69, F
@okaybut: Jesus could have been a name adopted by several cult leaders. It's been suggested that the stories of Robin Hood are based on the actions of various outlaws (or freedom fighters) of the time. Something similar could apply in the case of "Jesus".
okaybut · 56-60, M
@suzie1960: Definitely. Especially the bundling together of various myths to create Christianity.
DiamondInTheMud · 31-35, M
Yes he did exist. Watch this documentary
https://g.co/kgs/bvVuKo
https://g.co/kgs/bvVuKo
DiamondInTheMud · 31-35, M
@Celine: yes it was one on the criticism. But is the story burried. That documentary proves that Jesus was just a guy. Normal birth, worked with his dad in his carpentry business. got married. Died. Got burried. That's it.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Fernie · F
@Urchoice: sounds like that Jesus guy was the Bernie Sanders/Jimmy Carter of the times...but not supernatural
SW-User
Is there any good evidence that King David existed?
Tres13 · 51-55, M
[media=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMjqgIZ1_YM]
No. 2.2 billion people are being duped by a hoax perpetrated by a few hundred Jews and Romans. Happens all the time. The real amazing thing is those hundreds of thousands who have gladly gone to painful deaths in the name of a fictional character! Those pranksters must have been some real smart dudes!
suzie1960 · 61-69, F
@puck61: The information I have access to provides no evidence to support the hypothesis that there is a god. It's a matter of evaluating that information, not simply one choosing what to believe.
@suzie1960: Are we talking about a god or a historical figure whose life is not very well documented in non religious texts? All this time I thought we were talking about the existence of a man. That "Son of God" issue is a whole other can of worms.
Pfuzylogic · M
Why don't you stick with evolution because you have demonstrated no knowledge of the Bible, zilch!
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
Pfuzylogic · M
@Celine:
Must be an emotional moment for you.
You shouldn't do these posts when you are so emotional.
I know you are a child and not use to
Self discipline and respect for anyone else beside yourself.
Must be an emotional moment for you.
You shouldn't do these posts when you are so emotional.
I know you are a child and not use to
Self discipline and respect for anyone else beside yourself.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
