Gary & Rhinestone's Thread on Burial and Resurrection of Christ

[Meh Gerbil]

I have found that my personal experiences and emotions are no different now than as a believer. I see no difference in a life of faith and a life of no faith. Many former Christians turned atheists/agnostics share this same experience. Obviously, it is within the realm of possibilities that God is getting ready to "lower the boom" on us at any minute, but as of now, I see no difference.

I think God has already forgiven you.

So isn't it possible that the comforting feelings you are experiencing based on "surrendering to (an invisible, non-speaking) God" that has resulted in perceived emotional, physical, and possibly material benefits in your life is simply a pattern of behavior frequently seen by mental health professionals in children who invent imaginary friends?

Yes, that would be possible.

I can't prove that the peace and happiness that you've found in your spiritual belief system does not come from an invisible, non-speaking, supernatural being, but likewise, you cannot prove that these feelings do not come from a psychological event inside your head. So without objective evidence, I personally do not find your subjective evidence for the existence of your god as sufficiently strong enough to convince me of his reality. I want proof that YOUR god exists, not just an unnamed Creator God. I believe that there is evidence for a Creator God and for that reason I respect his/her/it's creation. But I am not going to jump onto any specific religion's bandwagon without good proof that their god is the Creator god and I don't find Christianity's evidence any better than that of any other religion.

Couple of points:
1: It wouldn't be possible for you to prove that your interaction with me on this website isn't a product of your imagination. For all you know you could be locked up in a mental facility, victim of 24/7 hallucinations, and I could be the product of your own insanity. I say that to point out that if we reduce this far enough we can get to absurdity rather quickly. Let's not run down that road.

2: I wouldn't want you to believe because of my experiences. That would be ridiculous. I'd hope that you'd seek out the Creator God (whoever He is) and approach Him with humility and earnestness. I'd also cuss Him out a couple of times - He's pretty big so He can take it. I'd recommend making him a dumping ground for all of your thoughts on the matter and then ask Him to reveal himself. I don't know what form any of that would take but that has always been my approach.

Anyways, I wish you the best in your journey.

[Gary]

This is why I keep telling him to grab a notepad and actually think through some of the bizarre and contradictory things he says on this forum before spouting them off here. Guy doesn't know what "fundamentalist" means, goes to a Theology forum to debate against fundamentalism. Feels like I'm in the Twilight Zone reading some of his goofy posts.

[Gary]

I think God has already forgiven you.

Yes, that would be possible.



Couple of points:
1: It wouldn't be possible for you to prove that your interaction with me on this website isn't a product of your imagination. For all you know you could be locked up in a mental facility, victim of 24/7 hallucinations, and I could be the product of your own insanity. I say that to point out that if we reduce this far enough we can get to absurdity rather quickly. Let's not run down that road.

2: I wouldn't want you to believe because of my experiences. That would be ridiculous. I'd hope that you'd seek out the Creator God (whoever He is) and approach Him with humility and earnestness. I'd also cuss Him out a couple of times - He's pretty big so He can take it. I'd recommend making him a dumping ground for all of your thoughts on the matter and then ask Him to reveal himself. I don't know what form any of that would take but that has always been my approach.

Anyways, I wish you the best in your journey.

I begged God many, many times to reveal himself to me in some fashion other than in warm, fuzzy feelings for many, many years. He never did. I don't think it has anything to do with me not trying hard enough or not "surrendering completely to his will" or anything like that. I believe it is because Yahweh doesn't exist and the man Jesus is long dead.

[Gary]

This is why I keep telling him to grab a notepad and actually think through some of the bizarre and contradictory things he says on this forum before spouting them off here. Guy doesn't know what "fundamentalist" means, goes to a Theology forum to debate against fundamentalism. Feels like I'm in the Twilight Zone reading some of his goofy posts.

Would you give me the moniker/name of any atheist or agnostic who has commented on TW whom you believe to be rational and adequately informed on the teachings of the Bible and Christianity? If you could give me a link to some of this person's comments I would find it interesting to see what they say and how they say it that impresses you.

[Adrift]

This has what to do with your bizarre definition of "fundamentalist"?

[Gary]

This has what to do with your bizarre definition of "fundamentalist"?

It doesn't. It has to do with an earlier comment you made regarding Hell in the OT. If "Sheol" is Hell, Jacob expected to die and go there where he would meet his son Joseph. The father of the nation of Israel is in a place of eternal punishment?? I don't think so.

[Meh Gerbil]

I begged God many, many times to reveal himself to me in some fashion other than in warm, fuzzy feelings for many, many years. He never did. I don't think it has anything to do with me not trying hard enough or not "surrendering completely to his will" or anything like that. I believe it is because Yahweh doesn't exist and the man Jesus is long dead.

I cannot argue with your reasoning.

[Adrift]

Would you give me the moniker/name of any atheist or agnostic who has commented on TW whom you believe to be rational and adequately informed on the teachings of the Bible and Christianity? If you could give me a link to some of this person's comments I would find it interesting to see what they say and how they say it that impresses you.

Again, I have no idea what this has to do with the post you're replying to. There are plenty of rational atheists and agnostics on TWeb (Carrikature, lao tzu, Outis, Chrs, sylas, Boxing Pythagoras, and a number of others I can't remember at the moment) that I believe have a relatively decent grasp on the Bible and Christianity (as far as my interactions with them have gone anyways). They're certainly a lot more rational and adequately informed than you (though that doesn't appear to be saying much).

[Adrift]

It doesn't. It has to do with an earlier comment you made regarding Hell in the OT. If "Sheol" is Hell, Jacob expected to die and go there where he would meet his son Joseph. The father of the nation of Israel is in a place of eternal punishment?? I don't think so.

So, why didn't you reply to that previous post then? Also, that post wasn't an invite to debate the nature of sheol, it was just an example of how acquiring understanding before making a blind faith leap could have saved you these years of bitterness you're currently exhibiting.

If you must know though, Prof. Johnston does cover that passage,

Source: Shades of Sheol: Death and Afterlife in the Old Testament by Philip Johnston, InterVarsity Press, 2002, pp. 81-82

First, then, those destined for Sheol are predominantly the ungodly. They are often described in general terms, as wicked (Is. 5:14; Pss. 9:17; 31:17; 141:7; Job 21:13), sinners (Job 24:19), the foolish rich (Ps. 49:14, despite textual difficulties), scoffers (Is. 28:15, 18) and immoral (Prov. 5:5; 7:27; 9:18). A few are specifically named: Korah and company (Num. 16:30, 33), Joab and Shimei (1Kgs. 2:6, 9). They can also be national enemies: the king of Babylon (Is. 14:11, 15), the Egyptians (Ezek. 31:15-17) and many others (Ezek. 32:18-32). Yet further texts consign the ungodly to the underworld, using other terms for it. Thus identification of the underworld with the wicked is paramount.

Secondly, certain individuals, who are otherwise presumed to be righteous, envisage descent to Sheol, specifically Jacob, Hezekiah, Job and a psalmist (Gen. 37:35 etc.; Is. 38:10; Job 17:13-16; Ps. 88:4). However, they all speak in the context of extreme trial, whether loss, illness, affliction or abandonment; and Hezekiah, Job and the psalmist interpret their circumstances explicitly as divine judgment. Further, the selective use of Sheol in the Joseph Narrative is particularly notable. Jacob twice envisages sorrowful descent there, on hearing of Joseph's death and on fearing Benjamin's harm. But, many years later, after his family has been happily reunited, Jacob's death is mentioned repeatedly and in different ways, but 'Sheol is conspicuously absent'.58 So arguably the righteous only envisage Sheol when they face unhappy and untimely death, which they interpret as divine punishment.59 By contrast, when they face a contented death at the end of a full and happy life, or where this is narrated, there is no mention of Sheol.

58. So Rosenberg (1981: 88). This distinctive use is largely unnoticed by commentators. Von Rad (1972: 354) at least notes a contrast: on the earlier occasions Jacob speaks 'with pathos'.

59. Jacob may also interpret Joseph's untimely death as punishment; cf. Butterworth (1998: 4 n. 3).

© Copyright Original Source

[RhinestoneCowboy]

I can easily see why Rhinestone Cowboy would have no interest in my Thesis of seven written eyewitness accounts of Jesus. I would be refuting his whole timeline.

Seven eyewitnesses? Wow! Have you let the New Testament scholars know? They would be very interested in this considering the only previously known eyewitness account was from Paul! What an amazing discovery!

[Gary]

So, why didn't you reply to that previous post then? Also, that post wasn't an invite to debate the nature of sheol, it was just an example of how acquiring understanding before making a blind faith leap could have saved you these years of bitterness you're currently exhibiting.

If you must know though, Prof. Johnston does cover that passage,

Source: Shades of Sheol: Death and Afterlife in the Old Testament by Philip Johnston, InterVarsity Press, 2002, pp. 81-82

First, then, those destined for Sheol are predominantly the ungodly. They are often described in general terms, as wicked (Is. 5:14; Pss. 9:17; 31:17; 141:7; Job 21:13), sinners (Job 24:19), the foolish rich (Ps. 49:14, despite textual difficulties), scoffers (Is. 28:15, 18) and immoral (Prov. 5:5; 7:27; 9:18). A few are specifically named: Korah and company (Num. 16:30, 33), Joab and Shimei (1Kgs. 2:6, 9). They can also be national enemies: the king of Babylon (Is. 14:11, 15), the Egyptians (Ezek. 31:15-17) and many others (Ezek. 32:18-32). Yet further texts consign the ungodly to the underworld, using other terms for it. Thus identification of the underworld with the wicked is paramount.

Secondly, certain individuals, who are otherwise presumed to be righteous, envisage descent to Sheol, specifically Jacob, Hezekiah, Job and a psalmist (Gen. 37:35 etc.; Is. 38:10; Job 17:13-16; Ps. 88:4). However, they all speak in the context of extreme trial, whether loss, illness, affliction or abandonment; and Hezekiah, Job and the psalmist interpret their circumstances explicitly as divine judgment. Further, the selective use of Sheol in the Joseph Narrative is particularly notable. Jacob twice envisages sorrowful descent there, on hearing of Joseph's death and on fearing Benjamin's harm. But, many years later, after his family has been happily reunited, Jacob's death is mentioned repeatedly and in different ways, but 'Sheol is conspicuously absent'.58 So arguably the righteous only envisage Sheol when they face unhappy and untimely death, which they interpret as divine punishment.59 By contrast, when they face a contented death at the end of a full and happy life, or where this is narrated, there is no mention of Sheol.

58. So Rosenberg (1981: 88). This distinctive use is largely unnoticed by commentators. Von Rad (1972: 354) at least notes a contrast: on the earlier occasions Jacob speaks 'with pathos'.

59. Jacob may also interpret Joseph's untimely death as punishment; cf. Butterworth (1998: 4 n. 3).

© Copyright Original Source

Why did Jacob expect to find the (perceived) dead Joseph in Sheol?

[Gary]

I cannot argue with your reasoning.

I appreciate your honesty (and empathy).

:)

[Adam]

They are not interested. That's my question. Why is no one even interested in whether there are eyewitness records about Jesus?
This issue was last addressed (far as I know and I have posted on this factum many times) by Canon Dennis Nineham in the 1950's. He gave a tentative negative that everyone else has blindly accepted.

[Adrift]

Why did Jacob expect to find the (perceived) dead Joseph in Sheol?

It's in the citation you just replied to.

[DesertBerean]

Again, I have no idea what this has to do with the post you're replying to. There are plenty of rational atheists and agnostics on TWeb (Carrikature, lao tzu, Outis, Chrs, sylas, Boxing Pythagoras, and a number of others I can't remember at the moment) that I believe have a relatively decent grasp on the Bible and Christianity (as far as my interactions with them have gone anyways). They're certainly a lot more rational and adequately informed than you (though that doesn't appear to be saying much).

Boxing Pythagoras is a heathen, but yeah.