Most important truth

Post Reply New Topic

If it makes you feel better it took me 6 years to finally graduate high school and I've never gone any further.

It took me 7 years to graduate college starting illiterate and taking remedial classes at age 21.

Mostly though brute memorization, not intelligent understanding.

The most important truth is likely ...

You only have 100 years to live (if lucky)

I dropped out of high school and got a GED.Never went to college but read quite a bit.

Here is another New Testament contradiction.

Jesus goes to the desert to tempted by the devil.
The devil offers all the world's kingdoms to follow Satan.

If Jesus is a part of an un-created trinitarian Godhead,then would he not already control the world,why would he need the devil's help to control the world.

In other words, the Devil basically faced a version of the old "What do you give a man who has can do everything?" problem...

Very funny

Serious,isn't that a contradiction though.

Here is another interesting question.
If there was an resurrection and an empty tomb?Why then no investigation by Roman authorities as to where the body went,desecration of a corpse or abuse of a corpse would be as much a crime then as it would be now.Roman authorities would have wanted to know why someone would want to steal a corpse.

Today of coarse police would assume a body was wanted to fake a death so someone could collect on there own life insurance policy,I don't know what Roman's would have thought but abuse of a corpse would have been investigated for sure.

A Roman investigation into the disapearance of a body would have boosted the validity of the resurrection,so why is this not mentioned in any of the gospels.And Mary of Magdala and the disciples would have been prime suspects.

I'm not sure there was a Roman law to deal with that...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_laws

Given the empire was made up of people of many religions, each would likely have its own funeral arrangements, and they would differ based upon the person's "status"...What happened to the body of someone who had been crucified would be unlikely to be of any interest to the authorities, likely considered as important to them as what occurred to the body of a slave.

I could not find a Roman law on abuse of a corpse but imagine it would been illegal,it had to have been,I can't imagine abusing a dead body could have possibly been legal.

The social status of the corpse is irrelevant,it's what someone wanted to do with it that would be of concern.

If the lowest peasant in modern society's body was found missing from it's grave.The police might think that it was stolen to commit insurance fraud.

To use body to fake one's own death to collect life insurance.

The status of a missing corpse is not germane it's more who stole it and why.

I would imagine by common sense that this would have concerned Roman authority.

Just because we have certain beliefs, or place values on certain things, does not mean that those in past ages shared these same values or beliefs.

Without record of an applicable law, or evidence of similar\related issues in that province of the empire, it is possible it was considered inconsequential, or was not outside the laws.

After all, in the 1800's bodies were being exhumed (or procured) for medical experiments\research, so it is not unlikely that there weren't laws (or if there were some, they weren't enforced) surrounding this issue 1,800 years prior to that, with it instead being a "custom" rather than a law, and the community, rather than the government responding.

A lot of the arguments seem to be based on this type of concept where they say, "Well, it couldn't have happened this way, so the only other option is that our explanation is correct."

But, (even assuming that Jesus lived in the first place), I can think of several reasons off the top of my head that a mortal man might not admit it. What if he thought he was God? What if he was willing to die for his cause rather than admit the truth? What if he did admit it, but they crucified him anyway?

The other thing is, they usually say that once you've eliminated all the logical explanations, the only remaining explanation is the particular supernatural one they believe in. But the way I see it, once you put one supernatural explanation on the table, you put them all on the table, including ones that might be outside the ability of the human brain to comprehend.



Sometimes I think these arguments aren't really aimed at non-believers, but at Christians who are questioning their faith or just aren't as devout as the apologist thinks they should be.

There's another C.S. Lewis argument, "Lunatic, Liar or Lord," attempting to force the person into either totally denouncing or totally embracing Jesus. This again seems to me more directed at people who are already believers and might have doubts, but are reluctant to call Jesus a liar or lunatic, than at non-believers who might have less qualms about doing so.



Living in America, most of the people who've tried to convert me to their religion are Christians, so I'm not as familiar with Jewish religious arguments. (Funny enough, my stepfather is Jewish, but he doesn't practice the religion.) My comment was mostly directed at the idea that God is actively trying to recruit me into Christianity, but keeps sending followers with the same arguments I already find unconvincing. I'm not sure if other religions' versions of God are depicted as being as interested in recruitment as the Christian one often is.

If your interested in Jewish arguments Rabbi Stuart Federow does a lot of gentile liaison work.
His website is whatjewsbelieve.org he will answer any question you have as long as it's sincere and not spam.

Well said llamaparakeet,
Those who claim atheist morality have to explain how they arrive at the conclusion that ANYTHING is wrong. The most diabolical actions can be seemingly justified by the "Greater Good". If there is no God and everything was just created by blind/mindless chance, then how can the atrocities of Hitler, Stalin or Mao be criticized? They would have just been doing as they thought best.

The same could be said about any religion, political system, or philosophy.