How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[Hypoxia]

The TRUTH of Christ is the truth of Christ - it does not matter whether YOU believe it or not...

Your truth is full of holes. Yeshua's myths are faulty and uncorroborated. Sad.

I trained and worked as a systems analyst i.e. an applied logician. I studied many different logic systems. Some binary systems can encapsulate topics in TRUTH TABLES. but such truths don't necessarily relate to anything external. Your truth of Yeshua is a Xianity game rule, nothing more. Have fun.

Ask me about Jain 7-fold logic and my 31-fold expansion.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Your truth is full of holes. Yeshua's myths are faulty and uncorroborated. Sad.

I trained and worked as a systems analyst i.e. an applied logician. I studied many different logic systems. Some binary systems can encapsulate topics in TRUTH TABLES. but such truths don't necessarily relate to anything external. Your truth of Yeshua is a Xianity game rule, nothing more. Have fun.

Ask me about Jain 7-fold logic and my 31-fold expansion.

It's not full of holes though. It's not a myth. It IS corroborated. It's sad that you refuse to look at the evidence.

If you really have logic, tell me, is it logical to conclude that it's corroborated if the historical writings of His day and shortly thereafter support the eyewitness Biblical accounts? The answer is YES.

 

[ChinoMoreno]

How To Get To Heaven When You Die

man just dont be a dick and youre probably good, lol

 

[IG_88]

How To Get To Heaven When You Die

man just dont be a dick and youre probably good, lol

Mark 5:34

 

[IG_88]

And before one of you idiots points out what mark 5:34 actually says, i just made it up for a joke.

 

[Tryharder62]

Cleopatra, 69BC to 30BC

Julius Caesar, 100BC to 44BC

Marc Antony, 83BC to 30BC

Emperor Wu of Han, 157BC to 87BC

So you are saying that all of these are BC. Hmmmmmm. Before who?? Christ you say? So do you think there is more evidence for them than exists for Christ?

 

[Tryharder62]

And before one of you idiots points out what mark 5:34 actually says, i just made it up for a joke.

Reminds me of this: https://youtu.be/mXJowdPIyvo

 

[phrodeau]

So you are saying that all of these are BC. Hmmmmmm. Before who?? Christ you say? So do you think there is more evidence for them than exists for Christ?

I used BC so you'd understand it. I could use the Jewish calendar instead, if you like.

And yes, there is much more evidence of them than there is for Jesus.

 

[Hypoxia]

It's not full of holes though. It's not a myth. It IS corroborated. It's sad that you refuse to look at the evidence.

Whip it out. Stuff that's not faked, anyway.

Skip the Josephus 'interpolations' (forgeries). Don't forget to corroborate the better apocrypha which church fathers censored because anti-establishment. And harmonize the nativity storyline; it fits no known history.

 

[TeflonGuy]

I'm going to Church again tomorrow just to piss off the LWCJ all the world over.

 

[Hypoxia]

I'm going to Church again tomorrow just to piss off the LWCJ all the world over.

Probably nobody but you cares.

Church attendance is good; keeps bothersome people off the roads and out of stores. Jews and Adventists throw the stats off a bit, especially all the 7th Day-ers up here. But they mostly shop at Dollar General and Family Dollar and we prefer Dollar Tree, an agnostic hangout. WalMart is calm during morning services but booms till evening mass. Sikhs here stay quiet.

The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster should infiltrate here. Of course it'll double as a pasta house weekdays. I'll attend tortellini services, thanks.

 

[Tryharder62]

I used BC so you'd understand it. I could use the Jewish calendar instead, if you like.

And yes, there is much more evidence of them than there is for Jesus.

There was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary, a sorcerer, scoundral and such, but there is no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.

Then you have thousands of Christians in 1 AD. You look at the death of most of the disciples and realize they gave their life for their beliefs and relationship with Jesus.. He existed.

You can deny that he is a diety but to deny that he was a man, a historical figure, is a mistake. He lived.

 

[phrodeau]

There was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary, a sorcerer, scoundral and such, but there is no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.

Then you have thousands of Christians in 1 AD. You look at the death of most of the disciples and realize they gave their life for their beliefs and relationship with Jesus.. He existed.

You can deny that he is a diety but to deny that he was a man, a historical figure, is a mistake. He lived.

I’m just clearing up that historical records do exist for people who lived two millennia ago.

Is there any evidence that Jesus is alive today?

 

[Hypoxia]

There was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure.

Early church fathers criticized Josephus for omitting Yeshua from his history, even though he named (and despised) John the Baptist and scads of other tin-pot prophets. No contemporary accounts record Yeshua's supposed public activities. Nope, definitely NOT a known historical figure. Merely the stuff of legend and myth, some plagiarized.

Josephus didn't mention Nazareth either, even though he grew up next door and named many local villages. Hard to have a Jesus of Nazareth without a Nazareth. The current place was named by Emperor Constantine's mother, a Xian convert who convinced him to make Xianity official.

Did Nazarenes exist? Yes, followers of the mystic ben Nazara ca. 100 BCE. Did a middle-class Galilean building contractor's bastard son make his name as a Nazarene? Dunno.

Then you have thousands of Christians in 1 AD.

Isn't that a bit early? Or did they convert as soon as he was born? That may have been 4 or 6 BCE, or 2 or 4 CE -- gospel timelines don't work. The entire nativity myth flouts known facts. No Roman census forcing subjects to relocate. No correlation with Herodian reign changes. No Herodian infanticide forcing a flight to Egypt.

Remember, Palestine was not a backwater. The Sabatean dynasty of Herods, controlling a major trade route, were the Empire's richest folks. Official notice and records were kept. The area's history is no mystery.

The other end of the story doesn't work either.

You can deny that he is a diety but to deny that he was a man, a historical figure, is a mistake. He lived.

No independent corroboration of this messiah's existence exists. But that's okay. Evidence weakens faith. Faith should exist without evidence, should resist evidence, else it's not a deep faith. Belief trumps facts.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

So you are saying that all of these are BC. Hmmmmmm. Before who?? Christ you say? So do you think there is more evidence for them than exists for Christ?

Absolutely not. Christ is the most documented person in ancient history. More than any of those people.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Whip it out. Stuff that's not faked, anyway.

Skip the Josephus 'interpolations' (forgeries). Don't forget to corroborate the better apocrypha which church fathers censored because anti-establishment. And harmonize the nativity storyline; it fits no known history.

Josephus isn't forged, with that said, what about these writings from Dr. Nelson Price.

http://www.nelsonprice.com/early-secular-writings-regarding-christ/

 

[WrongVerb]

how to get to heaven: don't worry, "heaven" is the natural destination for a vast majority of spirits. By not worrying (don't even be concerned) you will naturally accrue that for which you are destined.

There is no "true religion" on Earth. God exists everywhere at all times. Human life is but a brief nap, away from reality.

It's amazing the "truths" one can discover when he deludes himself into thinking he's not just making it all up as he goes along.

 

[WrongVerb]

It doesn't matter. You can't do repeatable scientific method to prove either one. Come to me in 2000 years and see how George Washington's documentation holds up.

So you're saying that 2000 year old evidence isn't to be trusted. Got it.

 

[phrodeau]

Josephus isn't forged, with that said, what about these writings from Dr. Nelson Price.

http://www.nelsonprice.com/early-secular-writings-regarding-christ/

With two exceptions, none are contemporary to Jesus, and the two exceptions don’t mention Jesus at all.

 

[Tryharder62]

I’m just clearing up that historical records do exist for people who lived two millennia ago.

Is there any evidence that Jesus is alive today?

No. It takes faith that the man who did exist is who and what he said he is. The only evidence I can give you is a changed life. Mine.

So you're saying that 2000 year old evidence isn't to be trusted. Got it.

No, I am saying that the evidence for Jesus has withstood much scrutiny.
I don't think other historic figures will fair as well. My opinion.

 

[WrongVerb]

No. It takes faith that the man who did exist is who and what he said he is. The only evidence I can give you is a changed life. Mine.



No, I am saying that the evidence for Jesus has withstood much scrutiny.
I don't think other historic figures will fair as well. My opinion.

Ok. Well, I'm telling you this isn't how "evidence" works. You don't get to choose something you think is true, then discover evidence for that. That's called "confirmation bias."

Now, that might be how it works in the adversarial system in a court of law, but when it comes to describing what our universe is and how it works, courtroom procedures don't apply.

No, what happens is that you start with direct observation, then use testing to explain what it is and how it works. Thus, if your god existed, we would be able to make direct observations of it. (And those observations wouldn't rely on "feeling Him" which is also known as using your imagination.)

So show me how to objectively, empirically, observe your particular god.

 

[Tryharder62]

Ok. Well, I'm telling you this isn't how "evidence" works. You don't get to choose something you think is true, then discover evidence for that. That's called "confirmation bias."

Now, that might be how it works in the adversarial system in a court of law, but when it comes to describing what our universe is and how it works, courtroom procedures don't apply.

No, what happens is that you start with direct observation, then use testing to explain what it is and how it works. Thus, if your god existed, we would be able to make direct observations of it. (And those observations wouldn't rely on "feeling Him" which is also known as using your imagination.)

So show me how to objectively, empirically, observe your particular god.

I already said this: we can't devise a repeatable experiment capable of demonstrating these facts in a controlled laboratory environment. But that doesn't mean that there isn't plenty of forensic and historical evidence to support them. Far from it.

Also, why can't you look at the evidence for Jesus and decide if you believe that the evidence for him in beyond a reasonable doubt? Because science says so? We use that reasonable doubt to decide someone's life and death in the judicial system. There is no empirical evidence that empirical evidence is required for us to rationally believe something. There are other methods.

I do admit this....You do have to have faith. No way around it.

 

[TeflonGuy]

And before one of you idiots points out what mark 5:34 actually says, i just made it up for a joke.

People have no sense of humor these days

 

[TeflonGuy]

Josephus isn't forged, with that said, what about these writings from Dr. Nelson Price.

http://www.nelsonprice.com/early-secular-writings-regarding-christ/

I'm not 100% into the Jesus thing as so many Christians are, but I do try to go w/God.

My pov on Jesus is far different than the norm. Nor do I buy into the widely misinterpreted Muslim/Allah crap.

Also, Jesus was a rebel. < This much I truly believe.

 

[phrodeau]

I already said this: we can't devise a repeatable experiment capable of demonstrating these facts in a controlled laboratory environment. But that doesn't mean that there isn't plenty of forensic and historical evidence to support them. Far from it.

Also, why can't you look at the evidence for Jesus and decide if you believe that the evidence for him in beyond a reasonable doubt? Because science says so? We use that reasonable doubt to decide someone's life and death in the judicial system. There is no empirical evidence that empirical evidence is required for us to rationally believe something. There are other methods.

I do admit this....You do have to have faith. No way around it.

Let's look at a miracle. Say the wedding at Cana, where Jesus turned water into wine.

Big party, lots of people from different parts of the country. At least a few attending would be literate. The celebrant rabbi certainly would have the resources to write down the experience. Such things get noticed and retained in the memory of the community.

As Jesus grew in fame, the event would be told and retold, written accounts would be read out loud in public, witnesses would be found and interviewed, and appeals made to Jesus for more of the same.

Yet there is only one point where it's mentioned at all, in one gospel. There is no corroborating evidence anywhere. Zilch.