Joshthefirst:


I believe the raising of Lazarus and the widows son wasn't a final event. As they died later on. Resurrection implies an event where one is raised never to die again.

Joshthefirst:

Trying to insult his credentials or downplay his school of thought doesn't negate the evidence he has presented.

PastorOluT:

I cant just see any good purpose for this thread other than to confuse poeple, what has the authors got to do with the truths embedded in the books?

PastorOluT:


I cant just see any good purpose for this thread other than to confuse poeple, what has the authors got to do with the truths embedded in the books?

shdemidemi:

The question that begs an answer is what will then happen after the world successfully mitigate the integrity, importance and authenticity of the entire scripture as God's word? It will mean we have completed a full circle that brings us back to the time of Noah when all men became depraved and walked away from their saviour.

shdemidemi:

Who is to say if all the purported alterations did not work together for God according to His intended will. In my view the bible remain the perfect gift of God to mankind and I have no reason within the book to question this intricate, balance and inerrant book. God remains true just as the bible remain true. The bible isn't some form of theory but facts and this cut across any subject it deals with.

Image123:
@OP,
God of course, who else.

johnydon22:

what

helpee:
I will wait till this frosbel of a guy start reading the seven books of moses as the true scripture before I comment again. We warned him years ago.....i knew he would end up like this. what foolishness!!! What if the scripture were written a hundred years after the time of jesus, I will definitely believe its account rather than the hypothesis of a professor two thousand years later. There is a clear difference between rising from the dead and appearing to people. Even jesus.....the tomb was long empty before he made his first appearance. why am I even debating with you.....let me say this quickly. I have many patients who are mad from religion. You don't study religion from the angle of research. If you don't believe in the bible, it is not a problem on its own. Too much study of religion will lead you to the study of evil text that can cage your mind. Let me say what I am not supposed to say.....my blood brother is presently in psychiatric home. He was driven there by too much study....he started by questioning God, then bible and later started studying esoteric text till he started saying rubbish. May God help us to deliver him. I know you will call me ignorant you have listened to the best professors in the world but remember we warned you years ago you will get here....

frosbel:


I tire oo.

So God sat down and wrote every word of the bible , duh ? Just like the Muslims claim the Quran fell down from heaven.

I tell you , religion puts the brain into neutral gear, so sad.

helpee:
I will wait till this frosbel of a guy start reading the seven books of moses as the true scripture before I comment again. We warned him years ago.....i knew he would end up like this. what foolishness!!! What if the scripture were written a hundred years after the time of jesus, I will definitely believe its account rather than the hypothesis of a professor two thousand years later. There is a clear difference between rising from the dead and appearing to people. Even jesus.....the tomb was long empty before he made his first appearance. why am I even debating with you.....let me say this quickly. I have many patients who are mad from religion. You don't study religion from the angle of research. If you don't believe in the bible, it is not a problem on its own. Too much study of religion will lead you to the study of evil text that can cage your mind. Let me say what I am not supposed to say.....my blood brother is presently in psychiatric home. He was driven there by too much study....he started by questioning God, then bible and later started studying esoteric text till he started saying rubbish. May God help us to deliver him. I know you will call me ignorant you have listened to the best professors in the world but remember we warned you years ago you will get here....

frosbel:


Read the scripture again and then again.

Let me try , even though you refused to answer the other questions I posed.

In v52, they were 'raised out of their tombs ' after the death of Jesus
In v53 , they 'came out of their tombs' after the resurrection of Jesus.

First off , I hope you know what RAISED means , they were raised from their Death, meaning to resurrect , except of course you want to dogmatically and dishonestly twist this scripture.

Secondly , I repeat my question, did they come out of their tombs in v52 or v53 ?

Please ; stick to facts not subjective and defensive actions. I also trust that as a ' christian ' you will be honest with your feedback.

Thanks.

PastorAIO:

What evidence has he presented? Can you explain it to me in layman terms, in your own words? I suspect that you don't even understand what he presents but you've accepted it because you are not prepared to think on this issue...

PastorAIO:
His method has been criticised by other scientists and I'm yet to see a peer reviewed appraisal of his work. Showing me that some 'research' was submitted to the GSA is no proof. Show me the work that was accepted and acclaimed by other geologists and you'll have my attention.

PastorAIO:


How do you know that they died later on? Please provide sources. Unless you are guessing or presuming based on your preconception.

Joshthefirst:



And you are wrong. Very wrong. In layman's terms, he discovered evidences of two major earthquakes in the region of the dead sea. The second earthquake was dated around the time of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ under Pontius Pilate as the bible rightly records. That should be enough for you.
Thank you for insulting my intelligence because of your preconception of narrow-mindedness and dogmatism on my part.

I might choose to return the favor by asking you if you really understand what all the "mainstream" geologists and archaeologists have really found wanting about the biblical records. Maybe you don't understand them at all. Maybe you just accept their claims because they're simply main stream and massage your point of view?

Joshthefirst:
It was a simple assumption to make things clear you you. But it now seems obvious you would prefer to remain confused on the issue. Oh well.

Joshthefirst:


Nonsense. So it is only when your own convenient authority approves his work that you will accept it as genuine? That is hypocrisy pastor.

How do you even expect them to approve or even put an eye to his work when his school of thought is being persecuted by the mainstream thinkers and their supporters such as yourself? As far as there is no substantial challenge to the very publicized paper, it stands.

And this is just one case you brought up. What about the darkness that was recorded? What about the various cities listed in Luke that have been historically confirmed?

You think uprooting one issue that nothing has been said about will negate the others?

Joshthefirst:
you are the one deliberately trying to dogmatically twist scripture to satisfy your notion of contradiction. Verse 52 clearly states that they were raised, then verse 53 clearly states that they came out of their tombs after His resurrection.

Obviously Jesus was the first to come out of his grave. Alive with a resurrected body.

But, for the benefit of doubt, let us assume that they did indeed rise from their tombs, kindly answer the following questions ;

1. Does this not negate and undermine the following scriptures on the resurrection - Revelation 20:5 , Daniel 12:2 and John 5:29 or should we call this the first resurrection ??
2. These resurrected people supposedly appeared to many and I must emphasize that they appeared to people who would never have recognised them, not in a million years.
So tell us ;
- In what form did they appear to the people
- How come this major event was not recorded in any historical document of contemporary antiquity ? Not even by Josephus Flavius who was a contemporary of Jesus !!
- How come one of the earliest Christian Jewish sects (Essene - Qumran ) did not hear , record or repeat this fable/myth.

frosbel:


confuse ?

Why should apparent truths of God be confusing ? Surely the truth should be clear and direct not confusing , don't you agree !

PastorOluT:


Yeah the truth is clear n direct, bt when the authors of the scriptures r questioned definitely d content would/should also be question, there lies the danger.

If d content of the scriptures be adjudged error, that means we all xtian are in trouble n we have all believed wrongly and there is no longer any reason for the faith!

But thank God the scriptures (the content irrespective of the authors) is true and our hope in Christ is real.

1Corithians 15:19 If we who are [abiding] in Christ have hope only in this life and that is all, then we are of all people most miserable and to be pitied.

frosbel:
^^^

You are too emotional to have an objective debate with , how can you learn when you only see ONE narrow point of view ?

PastorAIO:

stop being a muppet. I haven't stop anyone from appealing to authority. I have only encouraged you and others to do research. But you can take a donkey to the river but you cannot force the donkey to drink.

actually if you are paying attention I did not say that biblical authorship is known to anyone. Wake up and pay attention.

Okay, so what do these brilliant men of honour of yours have to say about biblical authorship, let's examine it. Present their research.

oh, btw, Bart Ehrman also[b] Studied, Preached and Practiced[/b] the Bible for decades.

Image123:

Of course you have. When you call the Bible an erroneous book whose authorship is unknown to us, you have technically stopped us from appealing to it. You have rejected infallible scriptures for a confused man who does not even know where he is going. Who told you we have not done research. What makes you think that you're the only one who has done research or reads or studies, while does not with your view point are the gullible lazy ones? What brings you to the fallacious assumption that only those with your views are critical thinkers while others are dumb donkeys who cannot be forced to think or drink?




Oh so it is not known to you or your authority? And because of that, it can safely be assumed that it is unknown to me?




They all say it is authored by God. You put up a debate video as your research. i'm sorry, you have put up mine too. The video contains two 'scholars' on opposing assessments. i'll put up a summary in my subsequent posts though.


You have to be joking i am certain. Ehrman is 59years old and has being a confused atheist agnostic for more than 16 years. That means he was at most 43years old before he became fully deluded. He had his BA at 23years and MDiv at 26. He claims to have become born again as a teenager and became CONVINCED that there were contradictions and discrepancies inthe Bible DURING his graduate studies. Where then did he preach or practice the Bible for decades? i'm calling Lane, Lewis, Zacharias, Kumuyi and Adeboye. And i didn't mention in name the likes of C.I Scofield, G.K Chesterton, Walter Scotts, C.R Erdman, Dakes and all the unmentioned brilliant men of honour who spent their lives, academia and resources in studying and translating the Bible. And you bring up a learner? For God's sake, i can well bring up my own name and moniker compared to Bart. Don't be preposterous please.i said men who have studied and practiced and preached the Bible for decades, who themselves are intelligent minds with a palpable relationship with God

Image123:

Of course you have. When you call the Bible an erroneous book whose authorship is unknown to us, you have technically stopped us from appealing to it. You have rejected infallible scriptures for a confused man who does not even know where he is going. Who told you we have not done research. What makes you think that you're the only one who has done research or reads or studies, while does not with your view point are the gullible lazy ones? What brings you to the fallacious assumption that only those with your views are critical thinkers while others are dumb donkeys who cannot be forced to think or drink?

Oh so it is not known to you or your authority? And because of that, it can safely be assumed that it is unknown to me?

You put up a debate video as your research. i'm sorry, you have put up mine too. The video contains two 'scholars' on opposing assessments. i'll put up a summary in my subsequent posts though.

You have to be joking i am certain. Ehrman is 59years old

Bidam:
Good job Image123, i remembered calling this confused deluded pastoraio an atheist. He was visibly upset and angry. I wonder which folly of a so called research he made by posting a video that was more of a debate.SMH!

PastorAIO:
[/color]

please explain the logic of this to me, it makes no sense to me. If I call it erroneous with unknown authorship that means that you cannot appeal to it as an authority? You are free to appeal to anything as an authority. that's your business. The bone of contention is your claim that it's authorship is from God. You say God used the people who are traditionally supposed to have written it to write it, but you cannot prove any of this.

There you go, you're doing it again. Even after showing all the areas where your claims for it fail with a capital F you still insist on calling it infallible. Again that's your own private business.

I never said that I'm the only one in the world who has done research you are getting emotional and desperate in your anxiety. I have only asked you to present your research. While I posted a video of a debate where Bart Ehrmann discusses his research in arguments to prove his point, you have presented nothing. Your latest claim now is that God himself wrote the bible. How did you arrive at this conclusion? Can you present any argument to support this assertion? Anyway I'll come back to this spurious claim with some scriptures.

Hah! 'Dumb' donkey. see desperation. I quoted a common saying that you can't make a donkey drink even if you took it to the water. You've added 'dumb' to my words. Please o! unless the shoe fits you leave the shoe alone. However if it fits then feel free to wear it anyhow you like.

Since it is known to you because you have so much inside information that scholars studying ancient documents don't have then you should tell us and provide the evidences to back it up.

You are soooo desperate. If you watch the video you will see therein where Ehrman is talking he is presenting various evidences and arguments in favour of his viewpoint. The strongest point that the opposing scholar made is that he was a private witness of some manuscripts that are not yet in public circulation. And Ehrmann says until such a time that he himself can see the evidence he'll have to suspend judgment on that (or words to that effect).

Have you heard of Parody? maybe you haven't. I was parodying your comment about your Gods and heroes having studied the bible for 'decades'.

[size=15pt]so let us get back to you God authored the bible claim.

Who was 'God' referring to when he wrote the following:
12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away 1Cor chapt. 7

or this in the same chapter:
25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.

When your God was writing this what was going on in his head? Is he a split personality mentally deranged God? He says: "I, not the Lord". So is he God or is he not God, or is there a different lord? If your God has such schizoid tendencies then your behaviour makes perfect sense. You need deliverance, my guy. But first let me wait for you to come and explain why your Author would refer to himself as not being the author of his judgment even as he is giving the judgment.
[/size]

Bidam:
Good job Image123, i remembered calling this confused deluded pastoraio an atheist. He was visibly upset and angry. I wonder which folly of a so called research he made by posting a video that was more of a debate.SMH!

frosbel:


Show us your evidence.

And ;

If these people did indeed rise from their tombs it means that Jesus was not the firstborn from the dead or the first to resurrect fully , since at the time these people resurrected , Jesus was dead.

Also there are no historical facts to backup this event, not even by a historian who was also a contemporary of Jesus by the name of Josephus Flavius , he did not mention this event and neither did any of the Roman historians of that age.

We need raw facts not assumptions and hearsay .

Image123:


Sorry brother, where are my manners. Complements of the Season, and many returns in the precious name of Jesus Christ.

PastorAIO:


How do you know that they died later on? Please provide sources. Unless you are guessing or presuming based on your preconception.

vooks:

How do you know that Lazarus and jairus daughter died later on?