That is not the view of (liberal) scholars. The majority hold that the gospels were all written in Greek, and not by eye witnesses. I know that conservative Christians take issue with this, but there are good reasons for understanding it this way. The information is available if you are at all interested in looking into the details.
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I don't know anything about him except what I can locate on line, but it really looks as though all we have is speculation. It is not much to go on. The work you quote here was, I think, written about him, not by him. It suggests he was bitter toward the gods. If so that is not the same as disbelief.
Thought and Faith: The concept of divinity - Vassilis Vitsaxis - Google Books
Thought and Faith: The concept of divinity - Vassilis Vitsaxis - Google Books
It's the view of the Bible.
So the NT writers were lying in
1Jn 1:1; 1Pe 5:1; 2Pe 1:16; Ac 2:32, 4:20, 5:32, 13:31; Lk 1:2, 24:48; Jn 15:27; 19:35?
That's rich.
There is only reason for understanding it this way--unbelief.
The misinformation is available.
I don't have to look any further than the Scriptures to know the truth of the matter.
So 2,000 years after the fact, some "scholars" come along and decide that,
contrary to their testimony, the NT writers weren't really eye witnesses after all?
I've got a piece of the Brooklyn Bridge I'd like to sell you also.
So the NT writers were lying in
1Jn 1:1; 1Pe 5:1; 2Pe 1:16; Ac 2:32, 4:20, 5:32, 13:31; Lk 1:2, 24:48; Jn 15:27; 19:35?
That's rich.
There is only reason for understanding it this way--unbelief.
The misinformation is available.
I don't have to look any further than the Scriptures to know the truth of the matter.
So 2,000 years after the fact, some "scholars" come along and decide that,
contrary to their testimony, the NT writers weren't really eye witnesses after all?
I've got a piece of the Brooklyn Bridge I'd like to sell you also.
Last edited:
That's okay. I have no problem with that. It is not a big issue to me. This all started because of the claim in Psalm that fools say in their hearts that there is no god. Where's that coming from? There is no mention of atheists anywhere else, is there? The text though seems to tie these "fools" to the unrighteous. Further the author says God is still with the righteous and will justify them in the end. It looks as though he is blaming the unrighteous Jews for the fall of Jerusalem and it seems to me these unrighteous Jews are the "fools" that he's blaming for the destruction. Archeologists have found ample evidence for a cult of Asherah in Israel, and perhaps also in the temple, and I am wondering whether these are the individuals the author is accusing of not believing in God? The date of writing seems to line up nicely with the period during which the cult existed.
The violence depicted by Moses, Joshua, etc., also troubled me. I wondered, how could a God of love order the extermination of innocent children? How can Jesus, who taught forgiveness and love for our fellow man equate Himself with a God who slaughters the innocent? This is what I was shown and I hope you will ponder it:
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Ge.1:1
"If I were hungry, I would not tell you, for the world and all that is in it is mine." Ps.50:12
I understand that you don't believe in God, but you understand the concept of lending and how an owner expects that his property will be returned. Even our loved ones are not ours to hold forever. Knowing what the Bible says about God and our relationship to Him, is key to making sense of the stories recorded in the OT:
"Take heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be given; and whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have." Lk.8:18
"And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man's, who shall give you that which is your own?" Lk.16:12
Again, I stress that I know you don't believe this. The stories of the OT are simply examples of people losing everything God gave them:
"Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come." 1 Co.10:11
God will restore life to those who believe in Him. I do hope you come to know that my friend.
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Ge.1:1
"If I were hungry, I would not tell you, for the world and all that is in it is mine." Ps.50:12
I understand that you don't believe in God, but you understand the concept of lending and how an owner expects that his property will be returned. Even our loved ones are not ours to hold forever. Knowing what the Bible says about God and our relationship to Him, is key to making sense of the stories recorded in the OT:
"Take heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be given; and whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have." Lk.8:18
"And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man's, who shall give you that which is your own?" Lk.16:12
Again, I stress that I know you don't believe this. The stories of the OT are simply examples of people losing everything God gave them:
"Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come." 1 Co.10:11
God will restore life to those who believe in Him. I do hope you come to know that my friend.
No, I would say it is the view of very conservative thinkers who misunderstand the Bible.
When people proclaim what they believe is true, I would not call that lying. That does not mean they were not mistaken.
No, greater understanding is the explanation. The studies are there if you wish to examine them. Note, I am simply giving you the counter point to your accusation.
If a Muslim were to say to you that he did not need to look beyond the Koran to know the truth, you would immediately detect the flaw in the reasoning. Think about it.
There is a very good book titled AD 381: Heretics, Pagans, and the Christian State, which explains how the Orthodox/Catholic Church grabbed power and eradicated all opposition to its doctrine. It became impossible, upon pain of death, to question church orthodoxy. Note, for example, the excesses of the the Albigensian Crusade which eradicated an entire people for the crime of adopting Christian views contrary to that of the Catholic Church. Another example was the firestorm reaction from the Church over reforms in religious thinking initiated by Martin Luther. The investigations and the answers they raised were not possible in earlier centuries for reasons of personal safety. The reforms in understanding got underway in the 1700s and have proceeded apace. The notion that the New Testament is not an eyewitness account was established, I think, well over a hundred years ago.
When people proclaim what they believe is true, I would not call that lying. That does not mean they were not mistaken.
No, greater understanding is the explanation. The studies are there if you wish to examine them. Note, I am simply giving you the counter point to your accusation.
If a Muslim were to say to you that he did not need to look beyond the Koran to know the truth, you would immediately detect the flaw in the reasoning. Think about it.
There is a very good book titled AD 381: Heretics, Pagans, and the Christian State, which explains how the Orthodox/Catholic Church grabbed power and eradicated all opposition to its doctrine. It became impossible, upon pain of death, to question church orthodoxy. Note, for example, the excesses of the the Albigensian Crusade which eradicated an entire people for the crime of adopting Christian views contrary to that of the Catholic Church. Another example was the firestorm reaction from the Church over reforms in religious thinking initiated by Martin Luther. The investigations and the answers they raised were not possible in earlier centuries for reasons of personal safety. The reforms in understanding got underway in the 1700s and have proceeded apace. The notion that the New Testament is not an eyewitness account was established, I think, well over a hundred years ago.
Last edited:
This next story is quite interesting. Rat brains briefly go into overdrive when the animals are euthanized. It seems that when the heart stops the body directs resources to the brain in an effort to protect it. If the same thing is happening in humans this might account for the NDE.
Clue to Near-Death Experiences Uncovered
Clue to Near-Death Experiences Uncovered
Yea it's truly amazing how fast religion can spread at the point of a sword huh? I sometimes wonder how much of the Muslim faith comes solely out of fear. I've imagined if all that Muslim faith was pointed at Jesus alone what a addition to the body they would make, but I would be curious to see how many would simply walk away if they no longer had to fear death as a consequence for their own choice to believe or not..
That's the difference see. That's maybe a reason why Christianity hasn't got a sharp incline. There might be a bit of indoctrination going on but like you said.. nothing at the point of a sword.
It could be argued that a Christian could also walk away if they didn't fear hell.
However walking away from Islam in some cases carries a very immediate penalty.
It could be argued that a Christian could also walk away if they didn't fear hell.
However walking away from Islam in some cases carries a very immediate penalty.
Plus I usually don't take much notice of these types of statistics. Some Idiot will always think it's funny to put JEDI down as a religion or some prople might just put Christianity down by default. That's why the numbers don't fluctuate that much. But again... For Muslims to rise like that there is definately a movement taking place.. and it's probably by proverbial gun point.