Greetings,
Jesus probably was crucified for being what the Romans deemed a trouble maker. That is not hard to believe. I will have to see if I can find historical evidence for it though. The resurrection is theological and a matter of eschatology. It doesn’t have to be historical at all because it just takes faith to believe it. The same is true of accepting Christ or Jesus as being divine and being a god or God Himself. If you are a theist like me you would have to be an agnostic theist or an ignostic theist because you cannot prove or know there is a God, Jesus was/is divine how to define ‘God’, or if Jesus resurrected.
With that said I accept Christopher Hitchens’ notion of NOT telling people that they NEED to convert to Christianity in order to be saved. This is a misunderstanding of a Christian doctrine that became known as the ‘Great Commission’ (Mark 16:15) which contradicts being able to be righteous as the scribes (Matthew 5:20). Luke 5:32 also has Jesus saying that there are people that are righteous that he did not even come to. So just from those few passages there is no GREAT COMMISSION. We are not supposed to be making people feel bad to come to Christianity.
Before reading Ehrman’s work and simply reading the works of James H. Cone and Diana L. Hayes I came to realize that there is actually no great commission. Seminary also brought me to this conclusion. Ultimately someone is going to choose what brand of Christianity they want. After they choose they are still going to interpret the doctrines and faith the way they want.
Just some of my thoughts on this subject.
“The resurrection is theological and a matter of eschatology. It doesn’t have to be historical at all because it just takes faith to believe it.”
As an atheist, thank you. I don’t know why so many Christians insist that I must accept their subjective evidence as proof of God. It is a faith claim and one I don’t share. That should be the end of that type of discussion. I do enjoy discussing what others believe and why they believe it but it puts a wall up when I start getting told that I must disprove God or else they are correct by default. It is refreshing to see a believer state this so honestly.
The resurrection is theological and a matter of eschatology. It doesn’t have to be historical at all because it just takes faith to believe it.
Antoine that’s very open minded of you and as an unbeliever I much prefer to deal with folks such as yourself rather than hardcore fundamentalists (like my family). But there is a problem. Namely that’s not what Paul thought. He thought the resurrection was a real thing and if it wasn’t, then what’s the point?
But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised.And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised.For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either.And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost.If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
I Corinthians 15:12-20
Here I agree with Paul. And since I don’t believe in the resurrection then I ask, what’s the point?
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)