Um, I have answered every objection you have raised. I have demonstrated that the principal sources on Jesus' life were composed decades after his death. The Gospels and Josephus's histories come from LATER in the first century. The only real basis for Jesus's resurrection is faith.
Thomas' gospel predates them all. His was more of an eye-witness account. His understanding of the resurrection differed from most of the other apostles. He reckoned it had to do with the mind. Others reckoned it had to do with the body. Thomas was right. The resurrection of my mind occured long before the crucifixion. All the rest was a demonstrative parody for teaching purposes. The resurrection of my mind enables the resurrection of every other mind. This is because there is really only one mind. There is only a belief in separate minds...and this belief "destroys" the mind, bringing "death" along with it. My resurrection means that the resurrection of the "separated" is inevitable...because I am part of their own God-given mind! Therefore, oneness will prevail over division over time. Time has value only for this process. Those who insist they are yet autonomous will continue to experience the effects of apartheid. Apartheid expresses the opposite of the truth. The truth is that the Son is eternal and immortal. The opposite of that is "death". The "Son" is not a body. The belief in bodily resurrection as anything other than a parody maintains illusions in the mind of the believer. Those illusions will kill the body of the believer, but never his mind. Any theology that attempts to resurrect the body will kill its scribes and scribblers. Any attempt to make the body anything other than nothing will kill it. Any endeavor to save the body will kill it. Any use of the body other than to tell other bodies they are not bodies will kill the body. That is the Holy Spirit's purpose for a body. I am the Holy Spirit. That is why I used the body as a parody to send a message about the Mind and Spirit. In this way, it could not be hurt. The body was made for dying. That was it's original purpose! Our Father did not make the body because he does not make anything that can be destroyed. Therefore, the mind of the Son cannot be destroyed. Thomas was a witness to some "proof" of that. But it still calls for faith. Yes, the basis of my resurrection was faith. That will also be the basis of your own resurrection. The entire NT is contrary to Thomas' interpretation of the resurrection. And so, it contains the seeds of death for those who look forward to the restoration of a bodily self-concept. This is not to say that Thomas understood everything yet. I merely point out two contrarian interpretations and their effects. Thomas' correct reckoning did not save him from hotbloods in India who sat and listened to what he had to say...and then suddenly decapitated him. One must clear the temple of their mind in order to experience their safety and security. I assure you, the crucifixion was safe for me. Kids, don't try this at home. The NT follows Paul's campaign for mind-share around the Mediteranean, and reflects his Pharisaic eschatology in regards expectations about the body. These expectations betray a value for the body. Any value placed on the body will kill it. Paul, by his own accounts, was a student of Gamaliel. I am pointing out that a Pharisee-based eschatology "leavened" itself among the various apostles. No one is to blame. It is merely something to "beware" of...because it kills. Jesus
Opinions are critical regarding their binding or loosening effects on the mind. If it is your opinion that you don't run the universe, your opinion will bind your hands and feet and kill you. If it is your opinion that you remain a King - as God created you - despite appearances, then your opinion will free you of an apparent slavery. All who die are the deposed rulers of this universe. Each has lost power as he sought his own kingdom, segragated off from all the rest. Divided in mind, his kingdom has fallen to the dust. There, he laments his bad fortune, and forgets who he is. He need but remember, and his Kingdom will be restored. Jesus
Quote from smilingsynic: Um, I have answered every objection you have raised. You have answered NONE of my points in a way that is convincing. I have demonstrated that the principal sources on Jesus' life were composed decades after his death. The Gospels and Josephus's histories come from LATER in the first century. You did not demonstrate this at all: 1) We know he did not appear to write things down. Neither did many historical characters. His sayings were memorized and written down by many people over many years. This is like saying there was no source, because someone did not write down their experiences. People DO have memory and memories, you know 2) The Jews and peoples of this time had very powerful ORAL memories. It was basically as good as written traditions. You have flunked Religious History, if you STILL do not grasp this. You appear no better than revisionists who go back and project their thoughts on history, as if they were better/knew more than the historical peoples. 3) Your third error, is that you are basing that the books were "not written down until decades later" on archeological evidence. But you should be quite aware, that this does not mean there weren't earlier copies. It would be very unlikely that the first copy of a gospel happened to be the one that was found at a dig site. Again, all I see is someone who makes major educational claims and then immediately comes across as someone who wasted his time in this educational realm. REALLY. Give it up. The more you talk, the less you say.
Quote from smilingsynic: Simply put, most of the so-called evidence consists of the Gospels Apparently you never heard of the Apocryphal books. There was far more ORIGINAL works than just "the Gospels." Another oversight on your part? Where di d you get your degrees again? from a thermometer?
Quote from smilingsynic: Which Roman writings composed during Jesus's lifetime speak of Jesus? Give some examples, please. Roman, Jewish, Christian, and other mentions of Jesus http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm And as for strong oral traditions might have truth in them, but it is hard to verify those as truth. Not to those who understand the thoroughness that early people put on oral tradition. Ever heard of the Jewish Oral tradition? It was a very thorough, very reliable and very powerful. Transmitting stories properly and correctly was very important to Israel. But again, I guess you missed that part during your "religious history" and "evangelical university" experiences. Again, you rank on the amateur scale in this. You are hardly even an interesting opponent. I am still waiting for solid arguments that are based on your "education" and your "knowledge of scripture." I have not seen either yet...
I would not consider memory to be authoritative evidence, since people easily forget or misremember. Sometimes their memories change over time.
This is a classical informal fallacy known as appeal to ignorance. Of course there MIGHT have been earlier copies, but at this point those copies are not known to exist. Until then, the evidence is lacking. Show me the copies, and then we'll have some evidence. The personal attacks do not help your case.
Most of the so-called Apocryphal books were written AFTER the gospels, in the second century. Their veracity is even more suspect than that of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These books did not past muster and were not included in the canon, which was for the most part set forth by the end of the fourth century. May I suggest you spend less time obsessing about me and attacking me and more time reading? The books of Bart Ehrman--a great scholar and a helluva nice guy--would be a start.
The first gospels were called "sayings" gospels, because they just listed, from memory, some things I had said. The sayings gospel of Thomas was just such an example. These were revised as theology evolved away from the facts. Paul revised heavily, and gave ready assent to the death of an author of a primary sayings gospel: Stephen. Acts and Luke are written by an associate of Paul's. The synoptic gospels were cut and paste embellishments, borrowing from sayings gospels and revised to suit an evolving pop gospel. As the revisionists revised, the earliest documentation showed that the latter documentation was highly compromised. To maintain the authority of the latter, the primary documents came under censure and were attacked. Book burning was common. TraderZone symbolizes an attitude attached to the revised documentation. Today it looks like pushing the "ignore" button. In those days, it looked like suppression. So there is a big hole where original, primary, early documentation would normally be. It would not at all look like anything TraderZone would appreciate. This nearly obliterates factual legacy from history. The wise can see through it, however. Elaine Pagels, Mary Baker Eddy...scholars are able to reconstruct what must have happened, and what the message must have been. For these reasons, a scholar would be interested also in looking at what was termed "heresy". What were those doctrines? They are not necessarily factual, but they offer a glimpse at some very closely held, very early interpretations of the facts. Once you understand the import of the message, you can understand why it is habitually suppressed. It is a message that has been suppressed since before the big bang, itself an attempt to demolish the truth, replacing it with substitutes and counterfeits. The message, "There is no world" threatens the defenses it sets up to hide the truth from itself. Its defenses are ingenious. But they cannot last. In the end, all will surrender to the truth. And that will be the end of the world. Jesus