Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Who raised Jesus from the dead?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by JimLamebrain View Post
    Most christians from my experience know very little about the bible so aren't what I would call real christians either.
    Considering your own vast ignorance of scripture, who are you to judge?
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

    Comment


    • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
      I don't get into the business of telling anyone who is and is not a real <insert belief system here>. It's not my concern. As for myself, depending on their definition of "Christian," I was a "real Christian" to some, and not to others. For example, if someone believes "once saved always saved," then I was either never a Christian, or I still am. Given my current beliefs, the latter is a hard case to make, so the former is more likely (to them). If "believing in the bodily resurrection" is necessary (as it apparently is for Chrawnus), then I never met that definition of an "actual Christian."

      Getting into an extended discussion as to whether or not I was an "actual Christian" 30+ years ago doesn't seem to me to be a very good use of my time. At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter.
      For a former Christian, you're pretty terrible at explaining actual Christian beliefs. Then again, belief in a bodily resurrection is pretty fundamental. If you never had that, I can't say I'm at all surprised at your having fallen away from whatever beliefs you did hold.
      Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

      Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
      sigpic
      I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

      Comment


      • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
        For a former Christian, you're pretty terrible at explaining actual Christian beliefs. Then again, belief in a bodily resurrection is pretty fundamental. If you never had that, I can't say I'm at all surprised at your having fallen away from whatever beliefs you did hold.
        Well, to be specific, the belief is that of a "new body" resurrection, the old one comes from the earth and to the earth shall return, remember. Of course that was according to the more ancient Yahweh who said you wouldn't live forever, who threw you out of the garden so you couldn't eat the life sustaining fruit from the magic tree. So, according to the more modern version, can you explain where your immaterial soul will be hanging out prior to resurrection while awaiting its new body, and will you still need to eat of the magic fruit a la Yaweh?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
          For a former Christian, you're pretty terrible at explaining actual Christian beliefs.
          Depends on which ones you're talking about. But I don't claim to be an expert at explaining Christian beliefs - too many years have passed for that to be the case.

          Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
          Then again, belief in a bodily resurrection is pretty fundamental. If you never had that, I can't say I'm at all surprised at your having fallen away from whatever beliefs you did hold.
          I can't say that I'm surprised that you're not surprised.
          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

          Comment


          • The Trinity is one of the most versatile gods known to man and just about any stunt is easy for Him.
            “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
            “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
            “not all there” - you know who you are

            Comment


            • Me: So - If Jesus was wholly man and wholly God, it seems that he would be radically different from any of his brothers.
              Lecturer (Doctorate in Theology): That is correct.
              Me: In that case, I'll have to black out Heb 2:17 from my copy of the Bible
              sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

              Comment


              • Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                The Trinity is one of the most versatile gods known to man and just about any stunt is easy for Him.
                Even if you intended this as mockery by using the words "versatile" and "stunt" you speak more truthfully than you realize here, with the correction that it should be " the most powerful God known to man", and not "one of the most versatile gods known to man".

                But yes, there's not much, if anything, that is hard for God to accomplish.
                ~Formerly known as Chrawnus~

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Christian3 View Post
                  Does this make sense?

                  https://carm.org/jesus-raise-himself

                  Did Jesus raise Himself from the grave or did God do it?
                  by Brad Huston

                  Before this question can be addressed directly, we must first agree upon what we mean when we say “God,” and we must agree upon the nature of Jesus. Jesus is, by His very nature, God (Phil. 2:6). “God” is not a person but a title given to the divine nature. There is only one God (Deut. 6:4, Is. 44:6)--one divine nature. However, God exists in three persons, the Trinity. The first person of the Trinity, whom Jesus called the Father, is often referred to as “God,” and rightly so--the Father is God (1 Pet. 1:2-3). However, people often confuse the title “God” as referring only to the Father. The second and third persons of the Trinity, Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit are also God (Heb. 1:8, Acts 5:3-4). So, there is one God existing in three persons. These persons are all distinct (Matt. 3:16-17). They are all equally God. The divine nature cannot be subdivided; God’s nature is infinite--infinity cannot be subtracted from or added to.

                  Though there is one God in three persons, the person of Jesus Christ has two natures. He has the divine nature (as previously demonstrated), but He also has a human nature and is fully human. He was born (Matt. 2:1) and took on human flesh (John 1:14). He suffered physically and emotionally (Heb. 5:7-8). Even after His ascension, He is called “man” (1 Tim. 2:5-6). So, Jesus could operate out of His human nature or His divine nature. As a man, He ate (Luke 24:42-43). As God, He calmed the storm (Matt. 8:26). So, while Christ’s body was dead, He remained alive (since God cannot die). This should not be a great surprise since human souls remain while the body decays (2 Cor. 5:8). Jesus’ human soul remained in the way that all human souls do, while His divine substance remained unchanged (Mal. 3:6, Heb. 13:8).

                  So, would it have been possible that Jesus through His divine nature even while His human body lay dead could have displayed His power through resurrection? Absolutely. Jesus, speaking of His body said, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” (John 2:19) Certainly, it was “God” who raised His body (Rom. 10:9, 1 Pet. 1:21), and Jesus is God. But Scripture also teaches that the Father raised Him (Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:17, 20). Even the Holy Spirit is said to have raised Him (Romans 8:11). So, the act of raising Jesus from the dead was not the operation merely of one person within the Trinity but was a cooperative act done by the power of the divine substance. The fact that the Bible teaches that God raised Jesus from the dead and that Jesus raised Himself is yet another testament to Christ’s divinity.
                  I agree on the above statement that " we must agree upon the nature of Jesus" therefore, to solve this matter entirely is to go to Revelation 3:21. In Revelation 3:21, Jesus said "I was victorious and sat with my Father on his throne" ;therefore, either (i) "God" Jesus sat with God the Father on his throne in Rev 3:21 and then there is more than one God or (ii) Jesus is not God. Since God is only one in 1 Corinthians 8:4, Jesus cannot be God and sat with God the Father on his throne in Revelation 3:21; otherwise, there is more than one God, which is against the Bible in 1 Corinthians 8:4 that God is only one.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    It depends on what one means by "100% God and 100% human". I take it to mean that Jesus has 100% of the qualities necessary to be God, and 100% of the qualities necessary to be human.
                    But this statement is impossible; according to Christianity Jesus died if it was Jesus the God that died on the cross, then we have an impossibility because God cannot die and it was Jesus the man that died, then his death makes no sense to save us because God commanded "every man is to die for his own sin" in 2 Kings 14:6.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                      Me: So - If Jesus was wholly man and wholly God, it seems that he would be radically different from any of his brothers.
                      Lecturer (Doctorate in Theology): That is correct.
                      Me: In that case, I'll have to black out Heb 2:17 from my copy of the Bible
                      Well, you can't take the bible literally.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        Hence Jesus is simultaneously 'fully God' and 'fully Man', i.e. a logical contradiction.
                        In the interests of better understanding between atheists and Christians: where is the logical contradiction ?

                        FWIW, IMHO, using a category like percentage to discuss the Incarnation is misleading, because the Incarnation is not quantitative. A lot of things are not - such as certainty.

                        The word “simultaneously” may need watching as well, because God, in Trinitarian theism, is not subject to time, nor qualified by it. We humans have to use “tensed” language, because we are subject to time, and qualified by it.
                        Last edited by Rushing Jaws; 12-07-2019, 08:43 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Rushing Jaws View Post
                          In the interests of better understanding between atheists and Christians: where is the logical contradiction ?

                          FWIW, IMHO, using a category like percentage to discuss the Incarnation is misleading, because the Incarnation is not quantitative. A lot of things are not - such as certainty.

                          The word “simultaneously” may need watching as well, because God, in Trinitarian theism, is not subject to time, nor qualified by it. We humans have to use “tensed” language, because we are subject to time, and qualified by it.
                          Was Jesus subject to time?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                            Was Jesus subject to time?
                            Yes exactly. God the Son was presumably “subject to time”, being fully Man.
                            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                            Comment


                            • Speaking as one who --

                              -- has no formal training in "theology" or "apologetics"

                              -- has taken a total of two or maybe three philosophy classes, back in the early '80s

                              -- has never in my nearly 40 years as a believer been part of a church that holds "creeds" and "confessions" in high regard...


                              Discussions like this seem pointless and almost silly. There are certain things that Scripture says pretty clearly. Some of these are hard to reconcile at face value. Attempts to explain or reconcile them involve going beyond what Scripture actually says, and introducing a lot of speculation and magical theologisms like "hypostatic union." And to me, the worst part is that certain of these explanations are taken as uniquely authoritative orthodoxy, on par with the direct words of Scripture itself.
                              Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.

                              Beige Nationalist.

                              "Everybody is somebody's heretic."

                              Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                                Speaking as one who --

                                -- has no formal training in "theology" or "apologetics"

                                -- has taken a total of two or maybe three philosophy classes, back in the early '80s

                                -- has never in my nearly 40 years as a believer been part of a church that holds "creeds" and "confessions" in high regard...


                                Discussions like this seem pointless and almost silly. There are certain things that Scripture says pretty clearly. Some of these are hard to reconcile at face value. Attempts to explain or reconcile them involve going beyond what Scripture actually says, and introducing a lot of speculation and magical theologisms like "hypostatic union."
                                It sounds like you haven't seriously attempted to wrestle with these issues, haven't bothered to attempt to understand other's efforts, and are content to overlook apparent contradictions. Forgive me if I don't find that outlook particularly convincing.
                                And to me, the worst part is that certain of these explanations are taken as uniquely authoritative orthodoxy, on par with the direct words of Scripture itself.
                                The same Holy Spirit who inspired the Scriptures is fully capable of continuing inspiration in the church, yes?
                                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                                sigpic
                                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by eider, 01-14-2021, 06:11 AM
                                21 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by eider, 01-14-2021, 02:47 AM
                                99 responses
                                408 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Rushing Jaws  
                                Started by Starlight, 01-10-2021, 09:38 PM
                                2 responses
                                37 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Starlight  
                                Started by Andius, 01-05-2021, 01:26 AM
                                49 responses
                                345 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Rushing Jaws  
                                Started by Machinist, 01-03-2021, 05:26 PM
                                30 responses
                                161 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Machinist  
                                Working...
                                X