Jesus wasn't resurrected

[Buckalew11]

It certianly seems like you have, since you continue to beat the drum about the poor victimized non-Christians being rudely assaulted and nobody coming to their defense.

No matter how hard I've tried to promote the point that all Christians are not the same and do not speak with one voice, it has been continually ignored in favor of finding reasons to lump all of us together. It's easier that way, so I can see the appeal.

 

[wvrevy]

Then what are your feelings about conservatives as to their ability to not understand (you've mentioned that several times in the past) the liberal way of participating in society? I do recall you agreeing with Kyle that conservatives have some sort of mental deficiency which is what makes them conservatives.

This is probably a topic for another thread, but I'll say this much...I have never said that anyone has any kind of "mental deficiency" just because they disagreed with me, whether the topic was religion or politics. I just don't operate that way, John. Yes, I firmly believe - based on their actions - that conservatives for some reason refuse to see topics with the complexities that they usually have. You look at the middle east and think, "Gee...it'd be nice if we had a friendly democracy right there in the middle", and disregard the fact that it is likely impossible for that to hapen. You look at terrorists and think, "they hate us for our freedoms", completely disregarding the fact that actions of ours led to their hatred. Some of our actions were 100% justified, and some were more questionable. But the point is that it is not as simple as you try to make it out to be.

Still, we're , so I'll let this conversation drop.

 

[The_Horned_King]

Actually, the more I read a thread like this, the more I wonder why non-Christians aren't more confused about Christians beliefs. It certainly confuses me which is why I will not be held responsible for anyone's beliefs but my own.

Exactly....that is why I questioned Jimmie yesterday.

In my belief system (which I am NOT saying is right for anyone but me. As it's an evolving prosess) I think it's insane to follow the teachings of christ simply because he is the "son of god". Just to state that christians in gerenral (from what you guys have told me) would discard them if he was an everday man! Why??? Why discard teachigns if they are worth following?

As for the whole defense and denounce thing...I'm not going to pretend I know what others beliefs are. Nor would I denounce them for those beliefs.
So I feel no need to defend what has been said by anyone christian or non.

On the topic of the show, I sadly had to miss it last night (to me, family must come fisrt over any TV show)

I'm hopeing for a rerun sometime in the next week so I can watch it. What did everyone think of the show? I'm assumeing the believes still think it's garbage and the rest still are interested in hearing more.

 

[cardaway]

It certianly seems like you have, since you continue to beat the drum about the poor victimized non-Christians being rudely assaulted and nobody coming to their defense.

Thanks for making it clear where you stand.

I also don't see anything like the word nobody in this post.

What wvrevy posted is pretty rude, but given what we have seen from Christians in this thread, it's pretty tame in comparison.

As for speaking out about rude posts, as this thread proved earlier after jimmiej's and aquinas' posts, that hardly ever happens. In fact this same practice is pretty much why people like Jerry Falwell are still in business.

Why should one side speak up when the other almost always stays silent?
As the saying goes... if you can't beat em, join em.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Too many commercials!!

There were a lot of "ifs" and "should haves" and qualifying statements, which is natural because the recorded history from that time does not meet up to the standards that we expect today. There's just no way to be absolute about it, even though the thesis is interesting.

I had this weird thought while watching it. What if Jesus' family was a part of the missing years between age 12 and age 30? It's commonly thought that Mary the Mother of Jesus was in her teens at the time of His birth, so would it not have been possible for Jesus to have had a family before his public ministry began? What if Jesus had a wife and child that died before his ministry began?

 

[Buckalew11]

In my belief system (which I am NOT saying is right for anyone but me. As it's an evolving prosess) I think it's insane to follow the teachings of christ simply because he is the "son of god". Just to state that christians in gerenral (from what you guys have told me) would discard them if he was an everday man! Why??? Why discard teachigns if they are worth following?

I am not saying I'd disregard His teachings. They are good teachings. But, He taught scripture from what christians know as the OT. So, while I can believe He was a good man for holdings those beliefs and taching those OT things, it wasn't anything different from what scripture was already teaching. He would not have been anything much different from any other Jewish Rabbi. Certainly not the Messiah coming to fulfill the prophecy of the prophets and fulfill the promise of God (and I know this is only a Christian thought and that Jews do not believe it). He would have been a great man of His time. Respected and all that good stuff. But, it is my opinion, His claims to be God incarnate change everything about it. His sacrifice for sin made Him different, a fulfillment of prophecy.

 

[The_Horned_King]

I had this weird thought while watching it. What if Jesus' family was a part of the missing years between age 12 and age 30? It's commonly thought that Mary the Mother of Jesus was in her teens at the time of His birth, so would it not have been possible for Jesus to have had a family before his public ministry began? What if Jesus had a wife and child that died before his ministry began?

That would have been a very possible time for it to occur. In the jewish faith back then it would have been the norm to have been married by 18 at the latest.

IF you are NOT offended by some harsh language and want a funny read (completely made up) about the missing years of Jesus then I have a book for you too read. It is called "Lamb: the gospel according to Biff, christ childhood pal." by Christopher Moore. It is an extremely funny story about christ from his early years through his return to start a minstry. About his adventures with his pal Biff(aka Levi) and who he sought out to help him understand his mission better. Extremely whitty and well written. Although I have no boudt some many have a problem with language biff uses and some of the stops both him and jesus make. ( A brothel so Jesus can see what temptation is, yet not experiance it himself. Levi takes one for the team! ) A very funny read!

His sacrifice for sin made Him different, a fulfillment of prophecy.

This is actually once place I have argued with people before, just the other day with a coworker in fact. The prophecy was well known. Heck, it was spelled out int he old test and other jewish writings. So to me it is believable, (not saying it's true) that the man took advantage of this knoweldge and self fullfilled the prophecy. Some chose to believe who he claimed he was (those who became christians) others said he was a heritic (those that remained jewish). Just some food for thought.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Thanks for making it clear where you stand.

I also don't see anything like the word nobody in this post.

\

You have worn me out and worn me down. Christians can be rude, so can non-Christians. We all have to deal with it.

 

[mickeyfan2]

I just finished watching this show. I taped the later one, since I wanted to watch Desperate Housewifes. The mitocondrial (sp?) DHA can only show female lineage. It is contained in the egg. We all carry the mitcondrial DNA of our mother's mother's mother's mother's ect. So a male and femal not having the same mitocondrial DNA only proves that they did not have the same mother or she is not his mother.

Ted Koppel's show was far better than the actual show is was about.

I have seen way better archological shows than this one. Too much drama and not enough science.

 

[Fitswimmer]

I think the Koppel show was more interesting than the actual show too. It was interesting, but not the best thing I've ever seen on Discovery.

I hardly think it was worth all the drama that preceeded it.

 

[aquinas]

Here is a non-Christian's opinion on the claims. Contrary to popular belief, other people outside the Christian faith are denouncing these claims as well.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-feiler/the-jesus-tomb-meets-the-_b_42637.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-feiler/the-jesus-hoax_b_42195.html

 

[Fitswimmer]

At Church this weekend, one of our Deacons said that the reason this kind of TV comes on during Lent and Advent is because everyone's mind is on the Christian story at that time. Even what my Dad used to call "submarine" Catholics/Christians surface during Christmas and Easter, so the TV folks can not only draw in the non-Christian by tantalizing them with proof that they are right, but arouse the anger of those who do believe and may be making more of an effort to practice their faith during these time periods.

It's all about the ratings and the money. Would Discovery have gotten anywhere near the number of viewers for this show if it hadn't created all this pre-viewing drama? People who like their programming would have tuned in and caught it, but it wouldn't have gotten as wide an audience without it.

Archeology is interesting, seeing things that existed at the time Jesus walked the earth is amazing. I found that some of the theology was the same as what I've been taught in my college courses, like the idea that Mary Magadalene, the woman caught in adultery and the woman that washed Jesus's feet with her hair were probably 3 different women. It hasn't changed my belief that Jesus rose from the dead. I can handle the idea of a spiritual Ascenscion, although many Christians would not accept that. If there were bones left after the Ascension, just because the Gospel does not mention their burial doesn't mean that they weren't there. Just because bones were found that might belong to Jesus, doesn't mean that the Resurrection didn't happen.

I can also handle a Jesus that was married at one time. I know a Priest that joined the clergy after the death of his wife and child, why could that not have been the same for Jesus? Yes, it does seem odd that the Gospel writers would leave something like that out, but maybe that wasn't the story they were interested in telling. They don't ever mention a wife or a child at all, dead or living. Who knows, really? You can make a lot of cases for a lot of different possibilities based on what was reported.

 

[jaimee1024]

I believe in the divinity of Jesus as a messenger sent from God to teach us how to live. I do not believe that one has to believe that he rose from the dead in order to get into Heaven. I believe that some people get so caught up in Jesus that they forget about God.

 

[cardaway]

I just finished watching this show. I taped the later one, since I wanted to watch Desperate Housewifes.

I also set up the DVR to record a later showing because of the DH conflict. Good thing about these History/Dsicovery Channels, rarely is anything ever aired only once.

 

[aquinas]

At Church this weekend, one of our Deacons said that the reason this kind of TV comes on during Lent and Advent is because everyone's mind is on the Christian story at that time. Even what my Dad used to call "submarine" Catholics/Christians surface during Christmas and Easter, so the TV folks can not only draw in the non-Christian by tantalizing them with proof that they are right, but arouse the anger of those who do believe and may be making more of an effort to practice their faith during these time periods.

It's all about the ratings and the money. Would Discovery have gotten anywhere near the number of viewers for this show if it hadn't created all this pre-viewing drama? People who like their programming would have tuned in and caught it, but it wouldn't have gotten as wide an audience without it.

Archeology is interesting, seeing things that existed at the time Jesus walked the earth is amazing. I found that some of the theology was the same as what I've been taught in my college courses, like the idea that Mary Magadalene, the woman caught in adultery and the woman that washed Jesus's feet with her hair were probably 3 different women. It hasn't changed my belief that Jesus rose from the dead. I can handle the idea of a spiritual Ascenscion, although many Christians would not accept that. If there were bones left after the Ascension, just because the Gospel does not mention their burial doesn't mean that they weren't there. Just because bones were found that might belong to Jesus, doesn't mean that the Resurrection didn't happen.

I can also handle a Jesus that was married at one time. I know a Priest that joined the clergy after the death of his wife and child, why could that not have been the same for Jesus? Yes, it does seem odd that the Gospel writers would leave something like that out, but maybe that wasn't the story they were interested in telling. They don't ever mention a wife or a child at all, dead or living. Who knows, really? You can make a lot of cases for a lot of different possibilities based on what was reported.

What does your church say about the resurrection? Do they just believe in a spiritual ascension or a bodily ascension? You are Catholic, correct?

 

[aquinas]

I believe in the divinity of Jesus as a messenger sent from God to teach us how to live. I do not believe that one has to believe that he rose from the dead in order to get into Heaven. I believe that some people get so caught up in Jesus that they forget about God.

OK, I will bite. How do you believe that one would get to heaven?

 

[Buckalew11]

Those scenerios are possible. However, Jesus did tell the disciples he was flesh and bone and even ate (according to scripture). My belief is that God would not have left the bones of Jesus here because people would start worshipping them. I think that is also the reason why no one knows where Moses is buried and why we will never find the Ark of the Covenant. Can you imagine if anyone ever claimed the Ark?! The very place that God dwelt with the Israelites in the OT? Talk about a circus!

Husband and father? Doesn't change my beliefs about Him as Messiah but in my heart I doubt God would allow their to be an offspring of Christ. Same type reason. People would have worshipped them and their children through the generations. God knew the heartbreak of the people who loved Jesus when He was crucified on that cross. It was horrible for each of them, I'm sure. I just think He knew that as a man, Jesus would have been distraught over leaving a family when He knew all along what His mission here would be. Just my thoughts on the subject.

 

[Buckalew11]

I believe in the divinity of Jesus as a messenger sent from God to teach us how to live. I do not believe that one has to believe that he rose from the dead in order to get into Heaven. I believe that some people get so caught up in Jesus that they forget about God.

I think I'd like to hear more of your thoughts on these comments also. I'm sure I can guess what your thoughts are on getting into Heaven. But I am less sure about the Jesus factor. I really have never saw/heard/or read anyone so caught up in Jesus that they forgot about God. For many believers, Jesus is our way to commune with God. Jesus is God. We are to worship the one, true God and we are able to come to Him and do so because of God's gift of salvation through Jesus. Last I knew, that was a core Christian belief.

 

[Fitswimmer]

What does your church say about the resurrection? Do they just believe in a spiritual ascension or a bodily ascension? You are Catholic, correct?

I've heard both. Traditional Catholic teaching is that there was a bodily Resurrection and a bodily Ascension, but interestingly, the word "bodily" is not included in the Nicene or the Apostle's Creed. There's no distinction made at all. There are Catholic scholars that have put forth the idea of spiritual Resurrection and Ascension, but I've mostly read about spiritual Ascension. Raymond Brown is the first that comes to mind, I read his book Death of the Messiah when I did my theology work, and he suggests that the Ascension could have been spiritual. He's considered a liberal Catholic theologian, and many Catholics would not accept his views. I believe that there are other theologians that would also accept that premise, Hans Kung, Richard McBrien, Roger Haight and Edward Schillebeeckx come to mind and again they are more liberal theologians. I've read their work, and they also would not find a spiritual Ascension a block to the divinity of Christ.

I didn't read anything resembling this until I did college and graduate level work in theology.

 

[jaimee1024]

I believe in a loving and forgiving God. I believe that what we do in our earthly existence determines our place on the "other side". I don't believe in hell or the devil. I embrace what I find good and positive from many different faiths. I have found nothing in all my reading and searching that convinces me that people who are not Christians cannot be with God. I believe that I will see Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims and Christians (as well as those who participate in other God loving religions and those who don't follow any particular religion) when I leave this world for the afterlife. I believe God has sent many messengers to teach people in ways that they would embrace and understand.