I f JC (whose existence is seriously doubtable) rose out of this tomb (on a weekend when, we are told, ALL the graves in the area were opened so the dead could take a walk! So it was pretty commonplace!) - then rose to heaven and left no body behind... Does that mean that JC is the only flesh and blood in heaven - cause the rest of us go up as spirits.... don't we?
I can't believe we're spouting this nonsense after thousands of years!!
Early scripture says cave but how romantic is that? A manger with the glowing light of the North star beaming down and all the animals watching on is far more appealing, don't you think? lol
99minerkc: you still have to deal with the fact the 500 people were walking around claiming to have seen, heard and communicated with the risen Jesus... and NO ONE challenged them in ANY first century writings. Which means that 500 people saw SOMETHING... that's what you need to deal with. Millions have made the same baseless arguements you are putting forth, and all have been debunked. You've got an uphill battle disproving the ressurrection, but go for it.
Are you kidding me??!! NOWHERE outside of the bible is there anything mentioned about any of this!! NOTHING, no 500 people, again NOTHING is recorded!! FOR SUCH A MONUMENTAL
event if it did take place it most certainly would have been recored! There was a lot of less important things recorded in that time outside of the bible! It's no doubt fabricated or interpolated at best and I think deep down inside you know it!
"What about Josephus........ or tacitus?" Yes, they both briefly spoke about Jesus. However, The parts about the super natural IS NOT spoken of(written)by these 2 historians or by others! The super natural including Jesus rising from the dead is interpolation! Do you know what that means?
well thats a pretty convenient claim on your part. when ever we bring up anything that counters your argument you say its interpolation. what grounds are there for it to be interpolation? do you have any reason to believe its interpolation other than that it hurts your argument?
Question: WHY DID GOD HAVE TO ROLL THE TOMB STONE IN ORDER FOR JESUS TO WALK OUT?? Why couldn't Jesus walk threw the stone? I have to wonder if the rising from the dead wasn't simply a MYTHICAL STORY as there's too many if or whys
Like supposedly about 500 zombie like people were risen from the dead and walked through the city or town when Jesus rose! Are you kidding me??!! You're telling me that there were NO eye wittnesses
No, we don't know there was a resurrection by God's power!! YOU HAVE FAITH that it happened that way which is a FARRR cry than knowing it!! In addition, you claim that Jesus went thru stone! Why then was the stone rolled away??!! Did God roll it away? If so, why did he need to do that?
I think you need to start reading your bible. After you read and release that no where in the gospels does it say man rolled the stone away, tell me who did?
touche, sailor. You were right, again. I don't know where I got that. The lies of my liberal arts education are starting to catch up with me, probably haha Anyway, Matthew seems to say that an angel did it? But I'm not smart enough to debate past that. I think probably the stone was rolled away so that people could see the empty tomb more easily because it would've been nearly impossible to roll away without God's help, but that's just speculation. Email pastor mark!
I believe one of a few things happened. 1) Jesus' followers rolled it aside, took the body and buried it somewhere else so they could claim he rose. 2) God did it as you said so people could look in.
3) The whole thing is a story(a dang good one)and Christians claim it to be true-if they had to admit he wasn't divine Christianity collapses! If you're a born again christian I would recommend you read the bible thru or people won't take your witness seriously, if you're not christian dis regard this part of my comment.
No, you can't say that Jesus was merely a great holy man. I think C.S. Lewis explained it brilliantly. Lewis stated that, given the extraordinary claims that Jesus made, he is either a lunatic or the Son of God. Therefore, claims that he was merely a great moral teacher are completely ridiculous.
Some of the claims appear to be made by Jesus but weren't! Think about it!! The earliest recorded gospel was written 60-70 AD! That being the case HOW COULD SUCH DETAIL BE IN THE GOSPEL? Simple it was written(interpolation)by men, men that WERE NOT eye witnesses! Do some historical research regarding early christian writing! You will likely be stunned at what you find!
I researched that part and more, have you? If so, please support your reasons why you came to your conclusion so I can compare it to my findings. Thanks! : )
uhm.. 60-70 AD... so you're telling me that someone writing about WWII, who has gone and in interviewed vets and families of vets, is going to have misinfo??
Hmm... Nope! It would be like me asking you the questions! THERE WERE NO eye witnesses to Jesus! Like you weren't an eye witness to wwII Why would I want to believe that you're entirely accurate with the entire wwII account? You may know bits and pieces but I doubt you would be completely reliable.
dude, you just completely missed the point. Someone who interviews someone who fought in WWII is going to get some solid facts and truth about the war. Same thing for someone who interviews people who knew Jesus, 60-70 years after the fact. there's not much difference. Based on what you're saying, we should throw away all of our hisory books, and stop teaching our kids history, because we weren't there ourselves.
My point is that it's only 60-70 years later! that's NOT THAT LONG!!!
Ok let's say I missed the point! How do you know anyone who wrote the gospels got their information from eye witnesses? Fact is nobody even knows the true authors of the gospels! People assume it was Matt, Luke, Mark, John but thats "highly"
unlikely and modern day scholars admit that. Anyway, back to the topic
No having eye witnesses nor known authors to the gospels along with hugh amounts of interpolation (ex: when Jesus prayed by himself 3 times the night before his arrest)for me anyway brings suspicion. Regarding CS Lewis' comment I would have to say that again, there was interpolation! I have read that historians believe that Jesus didn't make claims which would lead one to think
that he was divine. Does that mean he didn't do miracles? Of course not, a number of people did! Again, I believe that if Jesus was real then he was a holy man at best. Was he a lunatic as CS Lewis gave as an option? I would say that was the case more so than Lewis' conclusion that Jesus was divine. That my opinion.
The whole point of Luke is investigation the story. He hunted down all the living eyewitnesses, his book is documenting it. He was a doctor with a passion for research.
It is widely believed that Luke's gospel was penned after Mark's, which is dated in the 60s. Luke's gospel writing parallels Mark's, making it likely that Luke had access to a copy of the Gospel of Mark given that I have to confess that I don't see Luke as much of a researcher! I "STRONGLY" believe he should have given Mark the credit for the parts he copied from Mark!
I don't know if he got it from Mark, if he was there, or another way. Either way, Luke Verified it. He was the one with the financial backing to hunt all these people down. He was the one with the medical degree which probably came in handy with the miracles involving people being healed. Mark and Luke were not in competition, if Luke was after recognition He would have started his opening differently and said who he was when he wrote Acts. They both had the same mission- Get the word out there.
First, modern day historians say that it's unlikely that any of the gospels were written by Matt, Mark, Luke, or John which is why none of the gospels have named authors! Second, you don't know that Luke verified anything. .
You may have an opinion but that is far from evidence or proof. Finally, as I said earlier historians found in their research that there was no eye witnesses to get information from. The gospels are taken from oral communication(no eye witnesses) and the first to be written was about 65-70 AD
So, are we to believe that Plato, Socrates, Homer...pick one. They did NOT write, or say, anything that we attribute to them in the western cannon of literature? Those manuscripts are far more distant, and fewer in number than those of the NT.
When and IF you're ever open minded and would consider dropping your faith if you had enough evidence to do so, then talk to me as I'm tired of wasting breath on theists who have the evidence against Christianity available but refuse to research it!
"dropping your faith if..." That's very closed-minded of you. Also, you never answered my question. May God reveal himself to you in a supernatural way.
Hmm... I see myself as OPEN MINDED to ever have considered dropping my faith! It's people like you who when confronted with tough questions tighten your grip around your faith vs being open!!
Oh yeah, almost forgot, if you are going to use eye witnesses on such an IMPORTANT topic as Jesus you better say that "such and such saw claimed the saw ....... " but that didn't happen! You likely have either fabricated stories or a hugh amount of interpolation rather than true witnesses!
even so: 60-70 years isn't all that long. We all know SOMETHING happened. It's undeniable. If you say that nothing happened, you're being ignorant. Since something did happen, then it's reasonable to say that 60-70 years later, people will still know about it. It's not that big of a time gap.
Have you either read any of Bart Ehrman's books or debates that have been put on you tube? There's also a lecture or two he did which people posted on Y.T. Bart being an expert in the history of the N.T. has some compelling information.
Bart Ehrman is also coming from a completely biased perspective....against faith....so on issues that he brings up you have to listen carefully to what is opinion and what is fact. In regards to 60/70AD that would mean the people following Jesus, who were eye witnesses, were probably still alive at 50 or 60 or 70 years old.
I wish my family and I could have gone on that trip to Israel with Mars Hill. Unfortunately I didn't have the money. But praise God that Mark and others got to go and bring back footage to bring the Bible to life! I'm looking forward to the Sermon Series on Luke! Praise Jesus as Lord and Savior!
I f JC (whose existence is seriously doubtable) rose out of this tomb (on a weekend when, we are told, ALL the graves in the area were opened so the dead could take a walk! So it was pretty commonplace!) - then rose to heaven and left no body behind... Does that mean that JC is the only flesh and blood in heaven - cause the rest of us go up as spirits.... don't we?
I can't believe we're spouting this nonsense after thousands of years!!
Grow up! Evolve!!!
StrumstickJoe 9 months ago
I;ve been looking forward to this series for a while, So far, it is outstanding!
norqvader 2 years ago
Did he said Jesus was born in a cave?
I thought the bible said he was born in a manger?
or is it both.
alehug 2 years ago
The manger was in a cave. It was not a barn.
norqvader 2 years ago
Early scripture says cave but how romantic is that? A manger with the glowing light of the North star beaming down and all the animals watching on is far more appealing, don't you think? lol
99minerkc 2 years ago
99minerkc: you still have to deal with the fact the 500 people were walking around claiming to have seen, heard and communicated with the risen Jesus... and NO ONE challenged them in ANY first century writings. Which means that 500 people saw SOMETHING... that's what you need to deal with. Millions have made the same baseless arguements you are putting forth, and all have been debunked. You've got an uphill battle disproving the ressurrection, but go for it.
preson777 2 years ago
Are you kidding me??!! NOWHERE outside of the bible is there anything mentioned about any of this!! NOTHING, no 500 people, again NOTHING is recorded!! FOR SUCH A MONUMENTAL
99minerkc 2 years ago
event if it did take place it most certainly would have been recored! There was a lot of less important things recorded in that time outside of the bible! It's no doubt fabricated or interpolated at best and I think deep down inside you know it!
99minerkc 2 years ago
What about Josephus........ or tacitus? both were historians who spoke of Jesus and his miracles. one Jewish, the other Roman.
thesamsin 2 years ago
"What about Josephus........ or tacitus?" Yes, they both briefly spoke about Jesus. However, The parts about the super natural IS NOT spoken of(written)by these 2 historians or by others! The super natural including Jesus rising from the dead is interpolation! Do you know what that means?
99minerkc 2 years ago
well thats a pretty convenient claim on your part. when ever we bring up anything that counters your argument you say its interpolation. what grounds are there for it to be interpolation? do you have any reason to believe its interpolation other than that it hurts your argument?
thesamsin 2 years ago
Question: WHY DID GOD HAVE TO ROLL THE TOMB STONE IN ORDER FOR JESUS TO WALK OUT?? Why couldn't Jesus walk threw the stone? I have to wonder if the rising from the dead wasn't simply a MYTHICAL STORY as there's too many if or whys
99minerkc 2 years ago
Like supposedly about 500 zombie like people were risen from the dead and walked through the city or town when Jesus rose! Are you kidding me??!! You're telling me that there were NO eye wittnesses
99minerkc 2 years ago
Comment removed
cats9900 2 years ago
How do you know that Jesus walked thru the stone? The bible doesn't say he did!
99minerkc 2 years ago
Comment removed
cats9900 2 years ago
No, we don't know there was a resurrection by God's power!! YOU HAVE FAITH that it happened that way which is a FARRR cry than knowing it!! In addition, you claim that Jesus went thru stone! Why then was the stone rolled away??!! Did God roll it away? If so, why did he need to do that?
99minerkc 2 years ago
Comment removed
cats9900 2 years ago
I think you need to start reading your bible. After you read and release that no where in the gospels does it say man rolled the stone away, tell me who did?
99minerkc 2 years ago
touche, sailor. You were right, again. I don't know where I got that. The lies of my liberal arts education are starting to catch up with me, probably haha Anyway, Matthew seems to say that an angel did it? But I'm not smart enough to debate past that. I think probably the stone was rolled away so that people could see the empty tomb more easily because it would've been nearly impossible to roll away without God's help, but that's just speculation. Email pastor mark!
cats9900 2 years ago
I believe one of a few things happened. 1) Jesus' followers rolled it aside, took the body and buried it somewhere else so they could claim he rose. 2) God did it as you said so people could look in.
99minerkc 2 years ago
3) The whole thing is a story(a dang good one)and Christians claim it to be true-if they had to admit he wasn't divine Christianity collapses! If you're a born again christian I would recommend you read the bible thru or people won't take your witness seriously, if you're not christian dis regard this part of my comment.
Peace.
99minerkc 2 years ago
Oh yeah, I believe Jesus was a holy GOOD man but died and stayed dead and was buried like any other common man back then. Hence I believe in story 3.
99minerkc 2 years ago
No, you can't say that Jesus was merely a great holy man. I think C.S. Lewis explained it brilliantly. Lewis stated that, given the extraordinary claims that Jesus made, he is either a lunatic or the Son of God. Therefore, claims that he was merely a great moral teacher are completely ridiculous.
Samalamalamdam 2 years ago
Some of the claims appear to be made by Jesus but weren't! Think about it!! The earliest recorded gospel was written 60-70 AD! That being the case HOW COULD SUCH DETAIL BE IN THE GOSPEL? Simple it was written(interpolation)by men, men that WERE NOT eye witnesses! Do some historical research regarding early christian writing! You will likely be stunned at what you find!
99minerkc 2 years ago
What you are writing is not appreciated. Please stop.
Samalamalamdam 2 years ago
The truth is not appreciated? Hmm.... What's wrong with that picture?
99minerkc 2 years ago
What you are talking about is not the truth. That's the problem.
Samalamalamdam 2 years ago
I researched that part and more, have you? If so, please support your reasons why you came to your conclusion so I can compare it to my findings. Thanks! : )
99minerkc 2 years ago
uhm.. 60-70 AD... so you're telling me that someone writing about WWII, who has gone and in interviewed vets and families of vets, is going to have misinfo??
nodnarbassoon 2 years ago
Hmm... Nope! It would be like me asking you the questions! THERE WERE NO eye witnesses to Jesus! Like you weren't an eye witness to wwII Why would I want to believe that you're entirely accurate with the entire wwII account? You may know bits and pieces but I doubt you would be completely reliable.
99minerkc 2 years ago
dude, you just completely missed the point. Someone who interviews someone who fought in WWII is going to get some solid facts and truth about the war. Same thing for someone who interviews people who knew Jesus, 60-70 years after the fact. there's not much difference. Based on what you're saying, we should throw away all of our hisory books, and stop teaching our kids history, because we weren't there ourselves.
My point is that it's only 60-70 years later! that's NOT THAT LONG!!!
nodnarbassoon 2 years ago
Ok let's say I missed the point! How do you know anyone who wrote the gospels got their information from eye witnesses? Fact is nobody even knows the true authors of the gospels! People assume it was Matt, Luke, Mark, John but thats "highly"
unlikely and modern day scholars admit that. Anyway, back to the topic
99minerkc 2 years ago
No having eye witnesses nor known authors to the gospels along with hugh amounts of interpolation (ex: when Jesus prayed by himself 3 times the night before his arrest)for me anyway brings suspicion. Regarding CS Lewis' comment I would have to say that again, there was interpolation! I have read that historians believe that Jesus didn't make claims which would lead one to think
99minerkc 2 years ago
that he was divine. Does that mean he didn't do miracles? Of course not, a number of people did! Again, I believe that if Jesus was real then he was a holy man at best. Was he a lunatic as CS Lewis gave as an option? I would say that was the case more so than Lewis' conclusion that Jesus was divine. That my opinion.
99minerkc 2 years ago
The whole point of Luke is investigation the story. He hunted down all the living eyewitnesses, his book is documenting it. He was a doctor with a passion for research.
PreSim1 2 years ago
It is widely believed that Luke's gospel was penned after Mark's, which is dated in the 60s. Luke's gospel writing parallels Mark's, making it likely that Luke had access to a copy of the Gospel of Mark given that I have to confess that I don't see Luke as much of a researcher! I "STRONGLY" believe he should have given Mark the credit for the parts he copied from Mark!
99minerkc 2 years ago
I don't know if he got it from Mark, if he was there, or another way. Either way, Luke Verified it. He was the one with the financial backing to hunt all these people down. He was the one with the medical degree which probably came in handy with the miracles involving people being healed. Mark and Luke were not in competition, if Luke was after recognition He would have started his opening differently and said who he was when he wrote Acts. They both had the same mission- Get the word out there.
PreSim1 2 years ago
First, modern day historians say that it's unlikely that any of the gospels were written by Matt, Mark, Luke, or John which is why none of the gospels have named authors! Second, you don't know that Luke verified anything. .
99minerkc 2 years ago
You may have an opinion but that is far from evidence or proof. Finally, as I said earlier historians found in their research that there was no eye witnesses to get information from. The gospels are taken from oral communication(no eye witnesses) and the first to be written was about 65-70 AD
99minerkc 2 years ago
So, are we to believe that Plato, Socrates, Homer...pick one. They did NOT write, or say, anything that we attribute to them in the western cannon of literature? Those manuscripts are far more distant, and fewer in number than those of the NT.
norqvader 2 years ago
When and IF you're ever open minded and would consider dropping your faith if you had enough evidence to do so, then talk to me as I'm tired of wasting breath on theists who have the evidence against Christianity available but refuse to research it!
peace to you
99minerkc 2 years ago
"dropping your faith if..." That's very closed-minded of you. Also, you never answered my question. May God reveal himself to you in a supernatural way.
norqvader 2 years ago
Hmm... I see myself as OPEN MINDED to ever have considered dropping my faith! It's people like you who when confronted with tough questions tighten your grip around your faith vs being open!!
99minerkc 2 years ago
Oh yeah, almost forgot, if you are going to use eye witnesses on such an IMPORTANT topic as Jesus you better say that "such and such saw claimed the saw ....... " but that didn't happen! You likely have either fabricated stories or a hugh amount of interpolation rather than true witnesses!
99minerkc 2 years ago
even so: 60-70 years isn't all that long. We all know SOMETHING happened. It's undeniable. If you say that nothing happened, you're being ignorant. Since something did happen, then it's reasonable to say that 60-70 years later, people will still know about it. It's not that big of a time gap.
nodnarbassoon 2 years ago
Have you either read any of Bart Ehrman's books or debates that have been put on you tube? There's also a lecture or two he did which people posted on Y.T. Bart being an expert in the history of the N.T. has some compelling information.
99minerkc 2 years ago
Bart Ehrman is also coming from a completely biased perspective....against faith....so on issues that he brings up you have to listen carefully to what is opinion and what is fact. In regards to 60/70AD that would mean the people following Jesus, who were eye witnesses, were probably still alive at 50 or 60 or 70 years old.
99minerkc 2 years ago
sweetness
ArcticWhiteZ 2 years ago
wonderfull
David578593 2 years ago
all the best with the messages
LStrachey 2 years ago
i would really like to visit there
zitan17 2 years ago
I wish my family and I could have gone on that trip to Israel with Mars Hill. Unfortunately I didn't have the money. But praise God that Mark and others got to go and bring back footage to bring the Bible to life! I'm looking forward to the Sermon Series on Luke! Praise Jesus as Lord and Savior!
ZippyGaloo 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Oh, I cant wait.
gavinovz 2 years ago
I was there :D
prettyfaceanb 2 years ago
Look forward to seeing vids here, thanks God bless
alohawg 2 years ago 2