/lit/ - Literature

Obligatory William Lane Craig post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AduPVkqbis

>>19453615
>books ... on the historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
This is the authoritative work on the subject.

>>19453615
>tfw not capable of believing jesus is god
I'm going to hell arent I

>>19453681
Yes

>>19453681
What is your issue specifically?

>>19453719
>Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled.

>>19453630
>>19453622
Came here to post these. These are what convinced me. Wright’s book is quite the tome too, but it’s well worth the slog.
>>19453727
https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/601/translation-of-this-generation-will-not-pass-away-in-matthew-2434

>>19453719
I dont have an issue, I just dont believe it

>>19453727

>>19453747
Why?

>>19453772
Hiw are you supposed to explain how you dont believe something? I have a vague concept and feeling which means something like God to me and I am incapable of conflating it with Jesus and really believing he was God, even though his teachings seem much closer to the feeling of God I have than any other religious figure(hence my interest in christianity in the first place).

>>19453681
>>19453747
Have you ever wanted to believe and tried to start a practice of regular prayer and church attendance? Christianity is something lived, not merely read

>>19453615
If I remember right, George Washington wanted to make sure that once he died, they let him lie dead for several days because there was an issue with people announcing people dead despite them not being so, and he feared waking up in his coffin and asphyxiating. If he was buried while comatose or non-responsive but still alive, he'd still be dead of lack of oxygen anyway, so his fear was relatively unwarranted, but nonetheless I'd imagine that since ancient medicine wasn't as advanced as it is now, people could be mistakenly be assumed dead. And given that people have survived worse than a roman crucifixion, I can imagine that if Yeshua was historically accounted as resurrected, it may have been he simply revived and was comatose for 3 days.

Otherwise, like most of the bible, it was just fanfiction to mystify his legend.

>>19453786
What greater way could God show his love for man than to become man and suffer the same things as we?

>>19453740
>https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/601/translation-of-this-generation-will-not-pass-away-in-matthew-2434
This one makes sense to me.
>>19453756
This one doesn't.

>>19453790
I've tried praying every day before, saying the our father and also just spending time sort of "talking to god" in a way. I have not gone to a church because I dont know which to go to, and I feel that I shouldn't go to one if I don't even believe in Jesus because that would be disrespectful. Well that's not entirely true, I have been to church services before when I was younger but I wasn't really paying attention to religious feelings back then. Only one time I remember feeling something, at a Catholic baptism for my cousin in a big church with some kind of music being played but that might have just been the kind of grandeur of it all.

>>19453786
Perhaps see if the Islamic view of Jesus as the messenger of God makes more sense.

>>19453801
Modern medical associations confirm he died at the cross.

Look up "On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ" as an example.

>>19453813
That does indeed make more sense but I'm not so sure about Mohammed.

>>19453801
These theories have been debunked over and over. Jesus was scourged by the Romans prior to the cross, and suffered massive blood loss, especially when we take into account that the Roman whips were embedded with pieces of metal or bone to worse the damage inflicted on impact. In this state, Jesus was forced to carry his cross and was unable to do it by himself because he was so weak and injured, probably from the exhaustion and agony he was in from previous nights when he literally began sweating blood (which is called hematidrosis), and due to the scourging and beatings that he had just undergone. Then Jesus has nails driven through his hands and feet and hangs on the cross for hours, still losing blood, likely hardly able to breathe hanging on the cross. Then Roman soldiers come and drive a spear into his heart, causing a pleural effusion, which is a fluid build-up between the lung and chest wall, leading to a ‘blood and water’ pouring out of him when he was stabbed through with a spear. There’s no way that a man scourged, weakened, nailed through and stabbed through the heart and chest could have walked it off. It’s cope for the fact that Christ rose again

>>19453814
>>19453829
I know the details of what a crucifixion entails, but I'll still look at these, although on the surface I'm still not convinced because it reads like a church pamphlet dressed up with some fact.

>>19453809
I can relate. There was a time when I tried to convince myself of being Christian. I attended mass quite a few times. I read a lot of apologetics and it made sense. But I never felt a spiritual connection. It always seemed like I was praying and focusing on something that wasn't there.
I still have great admiration for Christian art and morality, but at the moment I only feel honest by calling myself agnostic.

>>19453828
I suggest looking up and comparing how different sects of Islam view Muhammad. Some of them reject many things mainstream Islam says about him.

>>19453801
Also, the story would be much more different if he simply had awaken from a coma and kept going on with his life. If I remember correctly, He explicitly appeared to different people as a divine figure and then ascended to Heaven. He didn't keep on living life.

>>19453840
This is the standard course of events for a Roman crucifixion. I’ve never seen any dispute it being true in its details

>>19453856
Yes and no. He is shown performing many supernatural acts such as appearing within a locked house and concealing his appearance for a time, but it’s clear that he was explicitly bodily as well, seeing as how he ate and drank with his disciples after the resurrection and asked people like Thomas to touch the nail wounds on his hands

>>19453872
Ok, what happened next?

>>19453872
Should we really go on accounts of Christ performing superhuman feats like miracles when so many other cultures have a vastly, and I emphasize 'vastly', larger list of accounts of miracles or miraculous powers than Christianity or even the Bible as a whole?

>>19453828
The Qur’an is full of basic historical errors and denies the crucifixion of Jesus. It’s literal fanfiction regardless of what you think of Christianity.

>>19453843
The thing is though, from what I know of Christianity, the reason I don't believe could easily just be that I am so sinful that i have like blocked it out.

>>19453876
Then he ascended into heaven. I’m not denying that he was divine in these accounts, I was merely supplementing what was already said with the important reminder that he was not just some spiritual being, but explictly risen bodily.

>>19453877
I don’t believe because of miracles. Those are really only valuable for the people who witnessed the healings and events firsthand. Very good arguments can be made for the resurrection though: >>19453622 and >>19453630 among the foremost. This is not even to mention the prophetic dimension of the Bible (Daniel 9.24-27, etc) which is present in no other religious tradition

>>19453897
>Then he ascended into heaven. I’m not denying that he was divine in these accounts
I thought you were the "comatose" guy. I just can't imagine the mental gymnastics he must go though to follow though on his theory.

>>19453909
*through

>>19453909
If he keeps digging into what happened, the copes will only keep accumulating until he gives up entirely in orde to preserve his comfortable bubble, or be will be faced with the fact that even on an evidential approach, the best explanation is that He truly rose. It happened to me

>>19453917
I feel like if an evidential approach had serious evidence that Christ rose from actual death there would be far, far, far greater widespread belief and scientific acceptance than there is currently.

Can you detail who is a well experienced authority that believes what you do, and why? And can you also detail the best evidence of someone to not believe what you do and the best evidence to be contrary?

>>19453944
>far, far, far greater widespread belief
Nta, but keep in mind that Europe was almost 100% Christian until a century ago.
There haven't been any scientific discoveries in this past century that refute anything in the Resurrection. So, logically, the reasons are ((political and economic)).

>>19453944
>I feel like if an evidential approach had serious evidence that Christ rose from actual death there would be far, far, far greater widespread belief and scientific acceptance than there is currently.
I don’t. Scientists and academics are more often than not materialists or atheists of some kind, and holding those beliefs (like any beliefs) leads to one interpreting information through an interpretive lens. Atheist / materialist analyses of the death of Jesus are operating on atheist / materialist presuppositions about reality such as the fact that dead men don’t rise from tombs. And if God doesn’t exist, that’s a fair conclusion to draw, because stuff like Jesus rising just wouldn’t happen, especially given the way he died and the state that he was in. Academics and scientists would be extremely wary to admit the existence of a miracle like this. For the average person as well as the scientist, admission of this would upset their whole pattern of life and way of living. It would be a momentous thing to acknowledge. Some people aren’t ready to do that. Some people are just hard of heart. For me personally, I was never well-disposed towards Christianity, but I kept having trouble finding a good alternative explanation, sort of like I wrote here >>19453917.

And for the authorities, I would again point towards N.T. Wright, who has taught for over twenty years in Cambridge, Montreal, and Oxford, and has been appointed Canon of Westminster. He has written an 800 page book on this very topic, as part of a four book set on early Christianity. Also, if I could, I would mention William Lane Craig, who is of course a published philosopher and experienced debater. Richard Swineburne makes similar arguments as well, and he is an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Oxford and has published numerous books on theism and Christianity.
>And can you also detail the best evidence of someone to not believe what you do and the best evidence to be contrary?
If one could decisively disprove God it would kill the theory of course. Or if we could somehow be 100% sure that we located Jesus’ tomb with the body still in it. I wish I could give more specific answers here but I honestly can’t think of any good objections at the moment

Bump

>>19453944
>I feel like if an evidential approach had serious evidence that Christ rose from actual death there would be far, far, far greater widespread belief and scientific acceptance than there is currently.
There would not. Humanity is dead in their sins and hates God. It is not an issue of empiricism.

>>19454383
>Humanity is dead in their sins and hates God.
Basically this

>>19454383
>>19454410
Lk. 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

>>19453944
Humans tend to select and interpret data according to their worldviews. The pharisees saw Jesus perform miracles in front of them and what did they do? Believe? No, they sought to kill him.

how are they "facts"? they are stories wrote by people who never met Jesus
and don't say "it's must be true because of the persecution", when the only account you have of Jesus by a Jewish priest was forged

>>19454590
>the only account you have of Jesus ...
>the Gospels aren't accounts of Jesus because blah blah
Fuck off

>>19454590
These are drawn from multiple independent sources (Gospels, Acts and Paul) on a historical event, so historians widely conclude that they can seen as historical facts.

>43 posts about the historicity of a SPIRITUAL/RELIGIOUS event

I’m sometimes so disgusted by moderns I sometimes can’t bring myself to correct them.

Truth in the religious sense has nothing to do with historicity and nothing to do with material science. No religious person should ever ask whether anything “really happened” because the reality of the Spirit has nothing to do with fossil records or molecular biology. That is not the sphere of religion. The sphere of religion is your spirit and the salvation of your soul. Religion transcends beyond simple material facts and into a higher order of thought. Religion is concerned with IMPORTANT questions, like your role on Earth and the health of your inner being; religion is not concerned with fetishized record-keeping and neurotic uses of language

Religious language is different than everyday language and religious truth is more important than scientific truth

>>19454688
Christianity is a historical religion and if you do not believe that Jesus literally, physically rose from the dead at a specific point in history in the real physical world, then you are going to Hell.

>>19454688
Retarded hippy

>>19454688
>religion is not concerned with fetishized record-keeping
Pay specific attention the genealogies next time you read through the Bible.

>>19454688
>religion is not concerned with fetishized record-keeping

>>19454731
For the Jews it was for tracking tribal bloodlines, for the Christians it is something a little different. You would know this if you read your Aquinas. As the Doctor writes,

>”Abraham begot Isaac, and Isaac begot Jacob," says, i.e. "faith begets hope, and hope begets charity." But charity is love. Therefore love is caused by hope.

I repeat: religious language is not everyday language. You should meditate on what Thomas means when he says Abraham is faith and Jacob is charity, or why this “genealogy” means love is caused by hope.

>>19454715
You are a pig, unworthy of the sacred pearl of Christ. Why does He speak in parables again?

>>19454704
Christianity is not a historical religion and Jesus is not a historical figure. Or do you really think someone would lose faith after seeing Christ in the sky with Moses or turning water into wine or walking on water? Read the early Christians snd think deeper than the literal.

>>19454776
Are you claiming that Jesus being a physical descendant of David and Abraham does not matter?
>>19454786
>Or do you really think someone would lose faith after seeing Christ in the sky with Moses or turning water into wine or walking on water?
Yes, see >>19454444

>>19454776
>>19454786
Catholicism in a nutshell

>>19454776
>>19454786
The existence of a pope in the early church isn't historical either, coincidentally.

>>19454790
If you want to progress in faith, real faith, you believe Christianity from FAITH, not from some bullshit modernist tasteless dusty pseudo-intellectual quest for historicity. Jesus is about faith and He taught faith and he expected those to believe Him on faith. Historical, factual, material, reductionist questions have no place in the religion of Christ. They’re a waste of time and will stray you from the path.

>>19454924
Answer my question. Does it matter that Christ is a descendant of Abraham and David?

>>19454935
To fulfill the promise, yes. Whether it is fulfilled in historical fact is irrelevant

>>19454924
>don't question the talking snakes book, just have faith dood

>>19454953
What is the point of detailing Jesus's ancestry if the historical fact of the matter is irrelevant?

>>19454838
Yeah, and that’s why Orthodoxy is actual Christianity

>>19454924
Ok well I am the messiah then. Don't question it, don't doubt it, don't do your research, don't ask for proofs. I simply am. Have faith in me: Anon, the son Anonymous.

>>19455068
This but Protestantism

>>19453615
Hundreds of these threads and yet no documents that show he resurrected besides the gospels. No Roman records, no court documents, no contemporary sources. If you believe it then by all means please do but you can’t argue this logically.

>>19455438
>no documents
>except all these mutually independent documents that I will conveniently ignore

>>19455461
>something written must be true
the absolute state of christers

>>19455468
Mutually independent

>>19453615
>let’s give the responsibility of Jesus’ burial to Jesus of Arimathea, who is a disciple of Jesus
lmao this is a conspiracy in plain sight. Osho was right

>>19455472
>documents produced by cult members
>documents describing cult members' beliefs about their leader
Ah so the cult members must be correct because we know what their beliefs were

>>19453719
my IQ is over 75

there is no difference between this thread and the "could superman defeat hulk?" threads on /co/

>>19455655
>Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.
tl;dr enjoy hell

>>19455666
*tips fedora*

>>19455684
>get called out for being dumb capeshit
>check the book
>smart people are actually dumb people and will be punished for their sins
we did it christbros

>>19455714
Oh no not the heckin secular pop culture analogy what do I do bros????

>>19455732
So he doesn't have superpowers? Enjoy hell.

>>19455744
DAE think Trump is like, literally Voldemort????

>>19455684
>enjoy hell

bro, i live in, u bet i am enjoying hell

>>19454688
I understand and agree with this sentiment. Pageau says it all the time, and I love Pageau. However, people believe in different ways, and I don't think there's anything wrong with placing even a great emphasis on the physical and historical facts of the faith, as long as you have a healthy understanding of the symbolism as well. They work hand in hand, and just as it's a mistake to focus too much on the physical and historical, it's also a mistake to discount it.

>>19453622
God this kind of apologetics makes me want to fucking puke. Nothing is so insidiously ruining Christian faith as this ridiculous CS Lewisian rendering in which the hope called Jesus Christ is made a happy and coincidental corollary of mechanical human Reason.

And mind you, I like to sing in church.

>>19453615
Going to read Raised on the Third Day soon, it was published in 2020 so it's fairly new.

https://1lib.us/book/16451955/360752

>>19453681
There shall be hope until the day you die, anon. You are literally unable to believe by yourself, because faith is a gift from God (Eph 2:8) and there can be no repentance unless the Holy Spirit wills it (Jhn 16:7-8).

>>19456815
Yeah just uhhh do what you like and then convert when you're ready.

>>19456858
Not how it works. Cliche line of thought though

>>19454688
This.