Book Plunge: Can Christians Prove The Resurrection?

[Gary]

No, The basics of the Gospel of John were written before Mark as we know it was written, perhaps far away in Rome.
John seems to share the Passion Narrative with the Synoptics, but its other sources are independent of the Synoptics. But John 18 to 20 is precisely the part leading up to and involving the Resurrection, so this common source is relevant.

What proof do you have that the basics of John were written before Mark?? I haven't heard of this claim before.

How do you know that the reason that the Synoptics and John share so few similarities is because the author of John was not writing a history book, he was writing a theological document, with allegories and metaphors, never intended to be taken literally? In other words...the author of John made most of it up.

[Gary]

I'm perceiving a mixed message here.
Elsewhere you asked whether we believe non-Christians can avoid going to Hell. That's one answer (and clear "Yes" from me). Now you seem to be asking a quite different question, what happens to someone who specifically REJECTS Jesus? Given so much about Calvinism and/or other Predestination, maybe those are indeed the non-Elect. But does that mean annihilation, reincarnation, or Hell? (Given that I don't believe anyone I know of has free will, it would be quite much to say that they all go to Hell.)

I'm confused. Could you be a little more clear?

Question: Are people who refuse/reject Jesus as their Lord and Savior punished in any way, shape, or form after they die? If so, how and for how long?

[lilpixieofterror]

So what happens to the person who rejects Jesus as their Lord and Savior and dies????????

I have already explained this to you and you choose to ignore my answer and keep repeating the question that has already been answered. I do like to know though why you're so obsessed with 'torture'. It's almost as if you're not debating any of us here, but your fundy past.

[lilpixieofterror]

Ridiculous and preposterous.

Of course we have to consider any and all possible explanations for similarities in two ancient books. Did they share a common source or sources? Did one author copy or at least borrow concepts from the other? Or were they completely independent eyewitness testimonies of real events?

My point is that Christians cannot prove that John is an independent eyewitness testimony of the Resurrection. The author of John could well have simply built his story around a core Jesus story he had already heard, stories which originated in the earlier three gospels. For all we know, the author of Mark invented the empty tomb. The author of Matthew invented the Roman guards. The author of Luke invented the trip to Bethany. And the author of John invented the story of the appearance on the shores of the Sea of Tiberius. Maybe these stories were never meant to be taken literally. They were theological embellishments. Everyone knew that Jesus' body had been tossed into an unmarked common grave. The earliest belief in a Resurrection was due to perceived post-death appearances in visions, dreams and misperceptions of natural phenomena (bright lights), not an empty tomb. It wasn't until the second century, when all the eyewitnesses were dead, that Christians came to view the Empty Tomb and the detailed appearance stories in the Gospels as literal.

I can't prove that Gary isn't just a computer program that is designed to try to fool people into thinking he's a real human. Therefore, Gary must be a computer program designed to fool people into thinking he's human.



Still incapable of seeing how totally and completely ridiculous your 'logic' is, huh? We can come up with billions of 'possibilities' all day long. Doesn't mean anybody should take them seriously.

[Adam]

I'm confused. Could you be a little more clear?
Question: Are people who refuse/reject Jesus as their Lord and Savior punished in any way, shape, or form after they die? If so, how and for how long?

I accept that the Bible teaches that true Christian believers go to Heaven when they die. Everyone else is punished by being reincarnated to various consequent forms of punishment. This continues until the Second Coming.
I can't believe that anyone who believes all non-Christians go to Hell is ready for Heaven. They particularly need reincarnation to develop broader human feelings.

[Adam]

What proof do you have that the basics of John were written before Mark?? I haven't heard of this claim before.
How do you know that the reason that the Synoptics and John share so few similarities is because the author of John was not writing a history book, he was writing a theological document, with allegories and metaphors, never intended to be taken literally? In other words...the author of John made most of it up.

That the Gospel of John was written very early was argued by Vacher Burch for 37 A. D., C. C. Torrey for 44 A. D., and of course everyone knows that the late bishop John A. T. Robinson argued for the entire New Testament to be before 70 A. D in Redating the New Testament. None of them argued for merely made-up theology. I don't myself argue for the completed Gospel to precede 70 A. D., but the sources were early, both the Passion Narrative (by John Mark) and the Discourses (by Nicodemus) written before the Resurrection.
That an eyewitness wrote most of John is shown by the changing perspective of the author of that source, Nicodemus was a befuddled inquirer in John 3, portrayed Jesus's sermons from a hostile viewpoint until an epiphany in John 12, and thereafter was a convinced believer. He was assigned to investigate Jesus at John 7:50-52. His name appears again at John 19:39.

[Bisto]

I can't prove that Gary isn't just a computer program that is designed to try to fool people into thinking he's a real human. Therefore, Gary must be a computer program designed to fool people into thinking he's human.



Still incapable of seeing how totally and completely ridiculous your 'logic' is, huh? We can come up with billions of 'possibilities' all day long. Doesn't mean anybody should take them seriously.

I'm entertaining the possibility that Gary's alternative Resurrection hypotheses came about when he heard the Gospels being read or preached. They're legends he shaped from Matt 28:13, Lk 24:11,12,37, Jn 20:2,13,15 as a form of midrash. They are not to be taken seriously though, they're only theological embellishments. He intends his readers to read them like that. (Read the passages and laugh it off.)

Do I have evidence for this theory myself? Well, it's possible, isn't it? You can't prove it isn't possible.

[Gary]

I accept that the Bible teaches that true Christian believers go to Heaven when they die. Everyone else is punished by being reincarnated to various consequent forms of punishment. This continues until the Second Coming.
I can't believe that anyone who believes all non-Christians go to Hell is ready for Heaven. They particularly need reincarnation to develop broader human feelings.

So non-believers are punished for years until the Second Coming. What is the punishment?

[Gary]

That the Gospel of John was written very early was argued by Vacher Burch for 37 A. D., C. C. Torrey for 44 A. D., and of course everyone knows that the late bishop John A. T. Robinson argued for the entire New Testament to be before 70 A. D in Redating the New Testament. None of them argued for merely made-up theology. I don't myself argue for the completed Gospel to precede 70 A. D., but the sources were early, both the Passion Narrative (by John Mark) and the Discourses (by Nicodemus) written before the Resurrection.
That an eyewitness wrote most of John is shown by the changing perspective of the author of that source, Nicodemus was a befuddled inquirer in John 3, portrayed Jesus's sermons from a hostile viewpoint until an epiphany in John 12, and thereafter was a convinced believer. He was assigned to investigate Jesus at John 7:50-52. His name appears again at John 19:39.

The consensus among the overwhelming majority of scholars is that John was written near the end of the first century. You have no way of knowing for sure if he had sources other than Mark, Matthew, and Luke. It is very possible that all the stories and details in John for which there is no correlation in the Synoptics are his own theological inventions.

[Gary]

Adam hasn't responded yet to my question regarding what type of punishment non-believers will suffer for rejecting Jesus as their Lord and Savior, but let's say that all it is a sense of shame, as another TW Christian has previously stated.

Ask a modern, western Christian this question, "What type of punishment will non-believers suffer for rejecting Jesus as their Lord and Savior" and you will get a variety of answers. Remarkably, however, unless you are speaking to a fundamentalist, most Christians today will not respond with "eternal damnation in a fiery Hell" as most of Christianity has taught for two millennia. Many modern Christians will say that the punishment for non-believers will be something non-painful, such as eternal shame.

So if my punishment for rejecting Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior is simply a matter of the Christian god shaking his finger at me (and other non-believers) and saying,

"Shame on you for not reciprocating my love as I commanded you."

I can deal with that.

I will respectfully respond by saying,

"Well, Jesus, if you had made yourself known to me personally, as you did to all the disciples and to Paul, then maybe I would have believed in you. But you didn't. You only gave me a confusing holy book, unconfirmed claims of miracle cures, and a bunch of conservative Christians, the vast majority of whom in no way resemble your behavior and attitude on earth. So don't blame me, blame yourself."

I will not feel ashamed one bit.

However, if a sense of shame is forced upon me; something I have no control over; then that is a form of psychological torture. And if Jesus inflicts psychological torture on human beings for all eternity, or even just a few millennia, or just a few centuries, that is unjust and immoral by any standard of criminal justice in the western world.

The punishment does not fit the crime.

Jesus is either not the loving, just, merciful being that the Bible claims he is; he is a sadistic monster; or, the whole concept is a nonsensical superstition.

I'm going with superstition.

I don't believe that Jesus, the man, would ever torture another human being.

[One Bad Pig]

Ridiculous and preposterous.

I'm beginning to think that phrases like this which start a response mean "I have no reasonable answer. Copious quantities of rank speculation to follow."

[Adrift]

Adam hasn't responded yet to my question regarding what type of punishment non-believers will suffer for rejecting Jesus as their Lord and Savior, but let's say that all it is a sense of shame, as another TW Christian has previously stated.

Ask a modern, western Christian this question, "What type of punishment will non-believers suffer for rejecting Jesus as their Lord and Savior" and you will get a variety of answers. Remarkably, however, unless you are speaking to a fundamentalist, most Christians today will not respond with "eternal damnation in a fiery Hell" as most of Christianity has taught for two millennia. Many modern Christians will say that the punishment for non-believers will be something non-painful, such as eternal shame.

So if my punishment for rejecting Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior is simply a matter of the Christian god shaking his finger at me (and other non-believers) and saying,

"Shame on you for not reciprocating my love as I commanded you."

I can deal with that.

I will respectfully respond by saying,

"Well, Jesus, if you had made yourself known to me personally, as you did to all the disciples and to Paul, then maybe I would have believed in you. But you didn't. You only gave me a confusing holy book, unconfirmed claims of miracle cures, and a bunch of conservative Christians, the vast majority of whom in no way resemble your behavior and attitude on earth. So don't blame me, blame yourself."

I will not feel ashamed one bit.

However, if a sense of shame is forced upon me; something I have no control over; then that is a form of psychological torture. And if Jesus inflicts psychological torture on human beings for all eternity, or even just a few millennia, or just a few centuries, that is unjust and immoral by any standard of criminal justice in the western world.

The punishment does not fit the crime.

Jesus is either not the loving, just, merciful being that the Bible claims he is; he is a sadistic monster; or, the whole concept is a nonsensical superstition.

I'm going with superstition.

I don't believe that Jesus, the man, would ever torture another human being.

You remind me of one of the ghosts full of excuses in The Great Divorce. I agree with Lewis that the sad truth is that the doors of hell are likely locked from the inside.

[Gary]

You remind me of one of the ghosts full of excuses in The Great Divorce. I agree with Lewis that the sad truth is that the doors of hell are likely locked from the inside.

Who created Hell?
Who sends human beings there?

[Adam]

Gary, you complained that I had not responded to you within two hours. It never occurred to you that I might be in church? Well I was, singing in the choir.
The people not good enough Christians to go straight to Heaven (and, after all, there are Christian saints) get recycled to whatever new life best suits their punishment and opportunity for new development. I suppose we get sent back to be the very type of people we hate most. Rehabilitation.

[Adam]

The consensus among the overwhelming majority of scholars is that John was written near the end of the first century. You have no way of knowing for sure if he had sources other than Mark, Matthew, and Luke. It is very possible that all the stories and details in John for which there is no correlation in the Synoptics are his own theological inventions.

Yes. They are wrong.