Is Christianity something other than a religion?

I think I already stated that one thing that convinces me is the moving of the stone that entombed Jesus--which could not have been accomplished except by superhuman strength plus a risen-from-the-dead Jesus.

Either that, or a conspiracy, involving numerous people. (And I really do not care for conspiracy theories.)

 

Forgive me, but that's like asking how Lazarus could have walked out of his tomb absent divine intervention. Or how a snake could speak in the Garden of Eden. The question in all these cases is, did these things actually happen? How do you know there was really a stone in the first place? Or that it completely sealed the tomb? Or that it was too heavy for one person to move? You just accept it on faith. That's fine, but it's hardly proof of an actual occurrence.

 

You can't imagine that several apostles got together and removed the stone? This isn't even a possibility? People act in concert all the time. You don't have to be a conspiracy nut to accept this as a possibility.

 

There's no need to repeat yourself, trust me. You don't know the stone was moved, or that there was a stone, or that He was ever in that tomb, or that He ever existed...because all you have is third hand evidence of any of that at best, which means your belief is not based on knowledge. This being the case, what is your belief based on, if not blind faith?

The question is not rhetorical, BTW.

 

You don't need superhuman strength to move a stone if you have a lever that multiples your own strength.

Simply leaving a lever inside the tomb would have provided Jesus with all that he would have needed to move the stone aside.

And yes, the knowledge of levers was well known at the time. The ancient Greeks and Egyptians made good use of them.

 

I believe in the existence of Christ and of his message as something other than a work of fantasy fiction, because of the martyrs. No one denies that they existed or were tortured to death, groups and groups of them, and they were only a generation or two removed from Christ himself.

That's a very short time for the New Testament to have been written. And the authors had no motive to fabricate it.

Presumably we can all agree that the Bible is real and was written when Romans ruled over Palestine.

As for the stone ... I have no idea. It seems an odd way to rise from the dead. If you can do that, why move the stone at all? Just walk through it.

 

If you are impressed by short time frames then let me tell you about someone who had converted one third of the world's population to his teachings in a mere 130 years. 1.5 billion people out of a world population of 4.4 billion in 1980 had adopted his ideas and were living them on a daily basis. That was virtually the same percentage who were Christians after nearly 2000 years.

Can you guess the name of this impressive teacher?

 

Is there really any disputing that Jesus's body was entombed in a cave?

If there is, then that is certainly new to me.

 

Well, you might just start with one that I mentioned earlier--you surely know which one that is--that you just blew off.

As Simon and Garfunkel once sang, in the 1960s: "A man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest."

So I will not attempt to convince you, as you will just reflexively disregard anything I might say.

It seems like just a game to you...

 

And how do you arrive at that conclusion, exactly?

 

Any assertions, devoid of proof, do not impress me--whether "from a pulpit," or elsewhere.

But I think that a very strong case can be made that Jesus was a combination of God and man--a fully objective case. (To accept Christianity on blind faith is utterly ludicrous, in my book.)

 

[QUOTE="Le Chef, post: 1068029117, member: 68600]How do you know there was really a stone in the first place? Or that it completely sealed the tomb? Or that it was too heavy for one person to move?[/QUOTE]

Are you just making up these questions as you go? Because I have certainly never heard doubt before, as regarding these matters.

 

Well, that certainly sounds like a conspiracy to me...

 

I also believe that Hannibal crossed the Alps (circa BC 21.

Is that "blind faith"?

 

So, your theory is that (1) Jesus was nailed to the cross, yet (somehow) survived; (2) He was entombed; (3) He had a lever handy; and (4) despite the strength-depleting exercise already mentioned, He had enough strength left to make good use of that lever.

Do you realize just how absurd that sounds?

 

I don't know why you would believe such a thing when it isn't even established that Jesus even existed, at least as claimed. I don't even know where to begin with the absurd notion that a case could be made that this character was, in fact, a "combination of God and man" when God is another unproven entity with no established characteristics.

What makes sense is that Yahveh is myth and Jesus is either fully myth or a mythically imbued man (or more likely, a number of real men and ideas combined through narrative and given a fictitious life on earth in the gospel narratives). The gospels are full of inaccuracies and absurdities from historical and scientific perspectives. You would have to remain ignorant of these things to maintain any belief in their objective trustworthiness, relying solely on apologists and preachers to tell you what's what.

 

I agree. JC, an avatar, had to use the existing religion, for otherwise his rejection rate would have been tremendous. So, he used the existing religion, which had scripture which would support what he was bringing in, the new ideas, like, we are all sons of god. For he was almost stoned when such a claim was made of himself. But he had the scriputure, jewish scripture which supported what he said, even if the religious authority had either rejected it, or remained mum about it. He also accused the authority of not entering into what he taught of, and therefore keeping others from entering in. It seems the current thought was that the kingdom was away, somewhere else, instead of accessible through the consciousness of man. Yet if every man could discover the kingdom, within himself, what is the need for a religious authority telling you what to do, how to live? Christ actually negated all religious authority except that which is accessible by each mind, from within, put there by the creator. So, when a church was formed after his death, with its authority, ending eventually with a Pope, this was a negation of His teachings, and therefore was a false religion. There is no place in genuine christianity for any authority, be it the pope, priests, preachers, etc. Christianity was supposed to be each person discovering the kingdom within, and being guided by a wisdom which transcends the human ego, transcends all rules and law, yet which is perfect morality in behavior. A non self centered existence.

But this offers no control of man. It provides for no positions of authority and all of the worldly treasure that brings. So it was cast aside by men ruled over by egos for there is no material gain in it. This seems to happen with all religions. Corrupted by what must be transcended, and yet is not transcended.

 

There are the fundamental Christians, and then those from the "Create-a-Jesus" camps.

A "Create-a-Jesus" Christian believes whatever tickles their ears. Usually the "Love thy neighbor" and "Sin no more" passages. Highlight those in a nice color. Moral Laws and Christ's commands that are too much to tolerate can be ignored or marked-out.

 

Even if Jesus was entombed in a cave so what? I can accept that because being entombed is something that can, has and does happen. Rising from the dead is another thing though. Just because a book makes a claim does not mean that the claim is factually correct.

 

Because of lack of evidence. Just saying something is true does not make it true. Where is the evidence that proves for a fact that Jesus was raised from the dead and ascended to Heaven?

Does the above apply to you as well? I am open minded and will become a Christian if you can prove for a fact that Jesus was raised from the dead and ascended to Heaven. I think the above quote applies to you more than I.

Dodge noted. I take said dodge as an admittance that you cannot or will not back your previous claims with fact.

Asking you to back your claims with facts is not playing a game.

 

Actually not all christians are fundamentalists. Nor in the create a jesus camp either. I am rather fond of the Anglican Church, which would be in the other category. Episcopal here in the States. But for pure entertainment value, go Pentacostal. The kind that have people babbling, speaking in tongues, with some running and turning flips, others in trances, plus they generally come with a band with drums, guitars, bass, etc. But regardless of this they seem to be such nice people and would give you their last dime if you asked them for it. When I was younger, I once attended one to be entertained and got stoned on some decent weed before I went. They had a traveling guy there, some pastor who could also read minds. I went for the mind reading. Seems like he could tell you all about yourself without knowing a thing about you. But the people he chose to do this with were only seen that one time. None were members of the church. Then when he went and touched people on their heads, they would fall back in a dead faint. Such was the power of god. Thankfully there were always other people to catch the person fainting from the power of god running through his hands. He also brought his own collection plates, to pass around for donations for his appearance. They were the largest collection plates I have ever seen. I think this might somehow encourage people to give more. And he seemed to rake it in. But I noticed when he arrived, he was driving a Mercedes. I guess god really was good to him. But hey, I had a great time with the show. It was worth the 5 bucks I put into the plate. A movie cost more than that.

 

Using the definitions of the terms that YOU provided!

In post #15 you stated;

Replying to my question you provided this response in #25;

Your allegation in your OP about "Christianity" being an "objective reality" can NOT be verified because, as a Christian yourself, you are automatically biased and cannot be objective as far as making that claim goes.

In order for it to be "true" it must be INDEPENDENTLY verified as FACTUAL by those WITHOUT any personal bias such as yours.

Therefore your contradiction is that you allegedly require unbiased factual verification for all claims but you are accepting a completely unverified claim from a biased source with no factual basis simply because of your own confirmation bias.

 

That you know absolutely nothing whatsoever about levers is patently obvious.

https://plus.maths.org/content/maths-minute-levers

Assume that he weighed 160 lbs then with a 10:1 lever he could just have sat on it and moved a rock weighing 1,600 lbs.

If you believe the unverifiable claim that he rose from the dead after 3 days then why would he not have regained his strength in those same 3 days? Why can you swallow one unverifiable claim but not another? What is the difference between the absurdity of believing he rose from the dead but that when he did so he wasn't capable of healing his own wounds like he healed everyone else?

The absurdity is to only believe what you want to believe and not be consistent in all respects.

 

I think the thing with reality is that none of us know the true nature of reality. We are a subset of the universe therefore we cannot fully define it. No one knows for sure anything with certainty.

Christianity basically says that since you cannot know anything to be true, go ahead and believe this as absolute truth without any evidence and it should make you a better person and give you happiness. So in short the most important thing is to have faith.

The view of a scientist or a philosopher is more like maybe you can't know everything with certainty but you can know a lot and one of the things that makes life fascinating is knowing the reason why things happen. So in short, the most important thing is to gain understanding.

And that's not to say that religious folks don't enjoy some understanding and philosophers don't have faith but generally speaking each group is placing more emphasis on one than the other. Once in a while you get someone who has been confused into thinking that religion is a matter of facts, once in a while you'll meet someone who has made a religion out of science.

 

Well now hold it .... a conspiracy is not just an agreement to do something; it's an agreement to do something illicit, illegal, or at least sinister. It would seem easier to believe that 3 or 4 guys got together to move a stone than to believe that the stone just rolled away on its own.

I can't imagine that you would see anything sinister about the apostles trying to get in to the tomb.

But let's suppose there was something sinister about it: grave robbers looking to cut Jesus's hair and sell it to his followers. You realize there really are criminal gangs, right?