The Resurrection of Jesus - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Did Jesus Christ actually rise from dead?

Definitely Yes
16
25%
Probably Yes
1
2%
On the Fence
1
2%
Probably Not
11
17%
Definitely Not
35
55%
#14826720
Well if the historian was a millenial or a digital, they might have limited or no knowledge of the Bible. Genesis, is that a band or CGI game? :lol:

I feel like more and more of this generation cares more about the fossil record, archaeology and geology than those ancient tomes.
#14826725
MistyTiger wrote:Well if the historian was a millenial or a digital, they might have limited or no knowledge of the Bible. Genesis, is that a band or CGI game? :lol:

I feel like more and more of this generation cares more about the fossil record, archaeology and geology than those ancient tomes.

If true, and I doubt it, it would explain their pursuit of things contrary to a functional civilization.
#14826768
One Degree wrote:If true, and I doubt it, it would explain their pursuit of things contrary to a functional civilization.
Really? I wasn't aware that not treating fantasy novels like history is "pursuit of things contrary to a functional civilization."
#14826871
MememyselfandIJK wrote:Really? I wasn't aware that not treating fantasy novels like history is "pursuit of things contrary to a functional civilization."

Eliminate the Bible from our history and tell me our story. I recommend you look up the definition of 'historian'.
#14826882
Really? I wasn't aware that not treating fantasy novels like history is "pursuit of things contrary to a functional civilization."


Again. You have chosen to be childish. The Bible is not a "fantasy novel" by any stretch of the imagination. It has, more than any other book, defined your society and you cannot distance yourself from it. I understand that you intend to anger the religious people. As childish as that is, it is very typical of so-called atheists, particularly teenage ones.

You need not embrace religion to respect other peoples right to practice it. You can muster some kind of fake outrage at ancient and perceived harm you suffer from it. But if you aspire to be an adult with at least a modicum of breeding and class you will come to realize that it is unkind to disparage the deeply held beliefs of others. And in the case of Christianity in the US, something akin to kicking sand in the face of the biggest bully on the beach.
#14826928
MememyselfandIJK wrote:Really? I wasn't aware that not treating fantasy novels like history is "pursuit of things contrary to a functional civilization."

Skeptics have been trying to discredit the history in the Holy Bible for many years. However, when they were actually able to check things out through geography and archaeology, it has turned out to be very accurate.
#14827038
@One Degree There's a distinction between something being history and something influencing the course of history. I am by no means denying that the Bible shaped the course of history, but the events depicted in it are not real. Besides, the history of the West, let alone the rest of the world is much more than just the bible. In fact, millennials and younger generations are favoring other works (Like the communist manifesto :lol:) over the bible.

@Drlee Can we quit with the personal attacks? There's no reason to treat the Bible is real. Hell, if I got ousted as a communist here in the US, I would be attacked to no end! Why don't my beliefs get the same respect as Christians! At least I can point to more evidence than they can!

@Hindsite The events depicted in the bible are not real. The world was not created in 6 days (or in even thousands of years). No one stopped the Sun. The first humans didn't fall out of a magical garden. No one rises from the dead. Rather, scientific evidence shows that the Earth formed over tens and hundreds of millions of years, the Sun can't be stopped by a single human with no technology, and the first humans split off from, and therefore share a common ancestor with, Chimpanzees, and at earlier times, other primates.
#14827042
MememyselfandIJK wrote:@One Degree There's a distinction between something being history and something influencing the course of history. I am by no means denying that the Bible shaped the course of history, but the events depicted in it are not real. Besides, the history of the West, let alone the rest of the world is much more than just the bible. In fact, millennials and younger generations are favoring other works (Like the communist manifesto :lol:) over the bible.

@Drlee Can we quit with the personal attacks? There's no reason to treat the Bible is real. Hell, if I got ousted as a communist here in the US, I would be attacked to no end! Why don't my beliefs get the same respect as Christians! At least I can point to more evidence than they can!

@Hindsite The events depicted in the bible are not real. The world was not created in 6 days (or in even thousands of years). No one stopped the Sun. The first humans didn't fall out of a magical garden. No one rises from the dead. Rather, scientific evidence shows that the Earth formed over tens and hundreds of millions of years, the Sun can't be stopped by a single human with no technology, and the first humans split off from, and therefore share a common ancestor with, Chimpanzees, and at earlier times, other primates.

Many of the events and people were very real and have been documented through other sources. The surprise, to historians, was how much was factual. You are simply selecting excerpts that are arguable. Allegory was used to write history. Historians know this and are capable of ascertaining facts from it.
Edit: I am not arguing it's the history book.
#14827047
@One Degree, just like Jesus's life, a lot of the bible is based on real historial events, just with a religious spin. For example,
  1. Jesus most likely existed, but didn't come back to life
  2. The exodus did happen, but Moses didn't magically get 10 commandments (I like to picture him on top of the mountain, trying to make up rules)
  3. There were three kings of Israel, but they didn't have divine right or whatever it was called then
  4. I'm quite skeptical of this, but some archeologists argue that parts of the world had a severe short term flood, but no one took two of each animal

I'm fine with talking about the bible's connection to history, but I am not fine with treating it as a history textbook. That's were we get patriarchy, creationism, and other flat-faced lies.
#14827057
Meh, I don't care where people find comfort unless they try to force it on me. I see no reason to argue with them about the unknown.
#14827106
MememyselfandIJK wrote:There's a distinction between something being history and something influencing the course of history. I am by no means denying that the Bible shaped the course of history, but the events depicted in it are not real. Besides, the history of the West, let alone the rest of the world is much more than just the bible. In fact, millennials and younger generations are favoring other works (Like the communist manifesto :lol:) over the bible.

@Drlee Can we quit with the personal attacks? There's no reason to treat the Bible is real. Hell, if I got ousted as a communist here in the US, I would be attacked to no end! Why don't my beliefs get the same respect as Christians! At least I can point to more evidence than they can!

@Hindsite The events depicted in the bible are not real. The world was not created in 6 days (or in even thousands of years). No one stopped the Sun. The first humans didn't fall out of a magical garden. No one rises from the dead. Rather, scientific evidence shows that the Earth formed over tens and hundreds of millions of years, the Sun can't be stopped by a single human with no technology, and the first humans split off from, and therefore share a common ancestor with, Chimpanzees, and at earlier times, other primates.


If the world was created by God, it could have easily been created in 6 days and there is no proof that it was not created in 6 days. The creator of the Sun could also make it stand still or cause a strong wind to part the Red Sea. Christianity is not based on so-called science made up by man, but on faith and belief in a creator God. For me, it is just too stupid to believe all life just happened by accident and that frogs and apes are the ancestors of man as speculated by the theory of evolution. For me, it makes much more sense to believe that all life was created and programmed using DNA by a creator God.

HalleluYah
Praise the Lord
#14827152
@Drlee Can we quit with the personal attacks? There's no reason to treat the Bible is real.



Yes there is. A very good one. You will not understand it so I will not bother.

Hell, if I got ousted as a communist here in the US, I would be attacked to no end! Why don't my beliefs get the same respect as Christians!


I'm just going to guess but here is your answer. 80% of Americans are not communist? And communism, for good or bad, has been demonized largely because the two big players in that arena (China and the USSR) set out to be our enemy. Times are changing as so is acceptance of your views.

At least I can point to more evidence than they can!


OF what? Are you somehow claiming that communism is a religion? Metaphysical? Whle we are at it, are you claiming that communism is necessarily atheist?
#14827193
MememyselfandIJK wrote:... The desperation of conquered peoples, and later Romans allowed the new religion to spread like wildfire as people converted from the Greco-Roman faith en mase during the decline of the empire...

The only detail missing here is that the Roman armies were killing the priests of all the other religions in Europe in order to force the people in the continent to become submissive so that they could be enslaved.

It's just a minor detail. I'm sure everyone in Europe would have converted eventually just to get the smell of incense and the shine of stained glass into their lives.
#14827214
Resurrection of Jesus was very well possible, for there is many example of people in modernity that have been dead for even days and then have come back to life, why would it not be possible then with Jesus?

In the end the gospel of resurrection points for us to something very important, that is the power of hope and faith, that with god anything is possible, for he lords over death and life. So why would he not resurrect you life if needed. Essentially this lesson in the bible is repeated all over and all over and all over again.
#14827231
QatzelOk wrote:The only detail missing here is that the Roman armies were killing the priests of all the other religions in Europe in order to force the people in the continent to become submissive so that they could be enslaved.

It's just a minor detail. I'm sure everyone in Europe would have converted eventually just to get the smell of incense and the shine of stained glass into their lives.

Your history education of the Roman Empire is critically lacking the time before Emperor Constantine. Emperor Constantine I is often credited with converting the Roman Empire to Christianity. In fact, though he ended the persecution of Christians under the Roman Empire. In 313 Constantine I and Eastern Roman Emperor Licinius ratified the Edict of Milan, which finally ensured tolerance for Christians throughout the Roman Empire.

At one point, just being a Christian in the Roman Empire was punishable by death. It would be good for you to educate yourself by at least reading this short article on the subject from Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecuti ... man_Empire
#14827341
I consider the Bible like a Philosophy book, just something to contemplate and argue about. But I do not accept it as 100% accurate. And of course, I agree with intellects who call it sexist. Only men are mentioned in detail. The women mentioned are mostly those with interesting reputations and they are not the usual women.

If the Bible was a history book, it would have been used in history class. But in all my history classes in the past, the Bible was not part of the curriculum. I was in private schools for much of my youth and there was a separate class called "Bible class" and the angle was on the stories, not on the historical truth of the book. :)
#14827378
MistyTiger wrote:I consider the Bible like a Philosophy book, just something to contemplate and argue about. But I do not accept it as 100% accurate. And of course, I agree with intellects who call it sexist. Only men are mentioned in detail. The women mentioned are mostly those with interesting reputations and they are not the usual women.

If the Bible was a history book, it would have been used in history class. But in all my history classes in the past, the Bible was not part of the curriculum. I was in private schools for much of my youth and there was a separate class called "Bible class" and the angle was on the stories, not on the historical truth of the book. :)

In early America, the Holy Bible was used as a textbook for all schooling.

“The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.”
– United States Congress 1782

https://www.usa.church/us-history-quote ... the-bible/
#14827385
Hindsite wrote:In early America, the Holy Bible was used as a textbook for all schooling.

“The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.”
– United States Congress 1782

https://www.usa.church/us-history-quote ... the-bible/


I am glad that not all my schools taught the Bible. I went to many schools, 10 or more and that was grade school only.
#14827388
I'm not totally opposed to having a religious history class as an elective. However religion as a matter of faith should be the purview of the family and not of public schools. After all many different faiths and indeed many different sects of christian children go to those schools and it wouldn't do to have the state sponsored view of faith pushed on them.
#14827391
MistyTiger wrote:I am glad that not all my schools taught the Bible. I went to many schools, 10 or more and that was grade school only.

As i understand it, the idea of the Congress was not for the schools to teach the Holy Bible as a religion as was the aim of the churches. There was a shortage of acceptable textbooks in early America, but plenty of Holy Bibles. Therefore, the Holy Bible was approved as a textbook to be used in school to teach reading and such.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 15

EU is not prepared on nuclear war, but Russia,[…]

It is implausible that the IDF could not or would[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]