A simple---but serious---question

[Athetotheist]

There are numerous god-men who died and rose from death in stories predating the time of Jesus. Considering the notable differences between the gospel accounts, and particularly the differences between the accounts of Jesus's supposed resurrection, here's a question for gospel apologists to think seriously about:

There are four resurrection accounts about Jesus in the Christian gospels. If the exact same accounts, with the exact same differences, were written about Osiris, Tammuz, Attis or any such god-man other than Jesus, would Christian apologists find all of those accounts believable?

And if they wouldn't find all of them believable, would they find any of them believable?

[alexxcJRO]

The only things I assert in my signature are that Jesus is the Son of God, that He was crucified, died, was buried, and rose again, and that these things were wildly counter to the prevailing metaphysical, social, and religious assumptions of the cultural mileu.

An omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being(Yahweh-Jesus) that impregnates a virgin(Mary) to become a human so to be able to sacrifice himself to himself so to be able to forgive the humans and save them from himself.
Makes perfect sense.

You can mock whatever strawman version of my theology you want. I won't engage seriously until you show a better understanding of what and why Christians believe than the man in the pew.

I am curious of your theology. How different can it be from most protestant and orthodox Christians.
Please explain the whole Yahweh is god, Jesus is god, holy spirit is god. One god or three gods?
The whole incarnation in human form.
The whole Jesus sacrifice for our sins to save us from Yahweh wraith and be able to forgive us if we repent.
The whole separation from god and free will theodicy of hell.
I have been a protestant Christian myself till I was 19 years old going to church and church activities for at least 10 years. With most friends being orthodox Christians. Debated here for a year or two. So I am familiar with Christianity dogmas.

Waiting to hear from you.

[David the apologist]

The only things I assert in my signature are that Jesus is the Son of God, that He was crucified, died, was buried, and rose again, and that these things were wildly counter to the prevailing metaphysical, social, and religious assumptions of the cultural mileu.

An omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being(Yahweh-Jesus) that impregnates a virgin(Mary) to become a human so to be able to sacrifice himself to himself so to be able to forgive the humans and save them from himself.
Makes perfect sense.

You can mock whatever strawman version of my theology you want. I won't engage seriously until you show a better understanding of what and why Christians believe than the man in the pew.

I am curious of your theology. How different can it be from most protestant and orthodox Christians.
Please explain the whole Yahweh is god, Jesus is god, holy spirit is god. One god or three gods?

God has hypostatized attributes that emanate/proceed from Him in a particular way. These attributes (Logos and Pneuma - Word/Reason and Breath/Life) are essential to Him, and share in His essence.

That's the form of trinitarianism I accept.

The whole incarnation in human form.

I accept it. Though I don't think "impregnation" is the right word, as it smacks of physical interaction.

The whole Jesus sacrifice for our sins to save us from Yahweh wraith and be able to forgive us if we repent.

I don't think that's the only - or even the primary - dimension of the atonement.

The whole separation from god and free will theodicy of hell.

Nothing particularly implausible about that, until you add a tendentious notion of original sin that goes well beyond what scripture actually has to say.

[alexxcJRO]

God has hypostatized attributes that emanate/proceed from Him in a particular way. These attributes (Logos and Pneuma - Word/Reason and Breath/Life) are essential to Him, and share in His essence.

That's the form of trinitarianism I accept.

Please don’t be vague.

Q: What is your trinitarianism hypothesis?

Be precise, clear and explain in detail.

Q: Is Jesus GOD? (Yes or No)

Q: If yes how does the whole Yahweh-Jesus-Holy Spirit mechanism works?

The whole incarnation in human form.

I accept it. Though I don't think "impregnation" is the right word, as it smacks of physical interaction.

Use of impregnation was mostly metaphorical in a ironic way. Off course I did not imagine Yahweh having sex with Mary.
This story it similar with other stories of Gods(Zeus and so on) "impregnating" mortals and making more demigods or gods.

The whole Jesus sacrifice for our sins to save us from Yahweh wraith and be able to forgive us if we repent.

I don't think that's the only - or even the primary - dimension of the atonement.

Please don’t be vague.

Q: What is your atonement hypothesis?

Be precise, clear and explain in detail.

The whole separation from god and free will theodicy of hell.

Nothing particularly implausible about that, until you add a tendentious notion of original sin that goes well beyond what scripture actually has to say.

Q: So do u believe Hell is separate dimension from Heaven where people go after Judgement day? Or is it Lake of Fire?

Q: Is it possible for a human soul to theoretically leave Hell/Lake of Fire if he chooses?

[David the apologist]

God has hypostatized attributes that emanate/proceed from Him in a particular way. These attributes (Logos and Pneuma - Word/Reason and Breath/Life) are essential to Him, and share in His essence.

That's the form of trinitarianism I accept.

Please don’t be vague.

Q: What is your trinitarianism hypothesis?

Be precise, clear and explain in detail.

I've described it in as much detail as we actually have.

Q: Is Jesus GOD? (Yes or No)

Yes.

Q: If yes how does the whole Yahweh-Jesus-Holy Spirit mechanism works?

What do you mean "mechanism"? There isn't one. Some actions are just basic/fundamental and can't be broken down into "mechanisms."

The whole incarnation in human form.

I accept it. Though I don't think "impregnation" is the right word, as it smacks of physical interaction.

Use of impregnation was mostly metaphorical in a ironic way. Off course I did not imagine Yahweh having sex with Mary.
This story it similar with other stories of Gods(Zeus and so on) "impregnating" mortals and making more demigods or gods.

"I did not imagine Yahweh having sex with Mary, but the story is similar with other stories of gods having sex with people."

The whole Jesus sacrifice for our sins to save us from Yahweh wraith and be able to forgive us if we repent.

I don't think that's the only - or even the primary - dimension of the atonement.

Please don’t be vague.

Q: What is your atonement hypothesis?

Christus Victor.

Be precise, clear and explain in detail.

It's called "google." It's not that hard to use. There's plenty of material out there about Christus Victor.

The whole separation from god and free will theodicy of hell.

Nothing particularly implausible about that, until you add a tendentious notion of original sin that goes well beyond what scripture actually has to say.

Q: So do u believe Hell is separate dimension from Heaven where people go after Judgement day? Or is it Lake of Fire?

Hell is what happens to someone who has spent their whole life denying the Truth and habituating themselves to find fulfillment in all the wrong places when the wrong places are wiped away and the Truth is manifest.

Q: Is it possible for a human soul to theoretically leave Hell/Lake of Fire if he chooses?

Theoretically? Yes, but then they weren't in Hell so much as they were in Purgatory.

C.S. Lewis wrote a book called the Grand Divorce. That's about what I believe.

[alexxcJRO]

I've described it in as much detail as we actually have.
alexxcJRO: Q: Is Jesus GOD? (Yes or No)

Yes.

So we have establish on concrete thing:
Jesus is God.
Q: Who was Jesus the God talking to on the cross: “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do”?
Q: Is Jesus a separate conscious being from Yahweh?
You said nothing of Holy Ghost.
Q: What role does Holy Ghost play in this all thing?

Explain this “God has hypostatized attributes that emanate/proceed from Him in a particular way. These attributes (Logos and Pneuma - Word/Reason and Breath/Life) are essential to Him, and share in His essence.” More clear.
It all sounds like a riddle.
I don’t understand.

"I did not imagine Yahweh having sex with Mary, but the story is similar with other stories of gods having sex with people."

Maybe Zeus was not the best example. The legend of Rhea Silvia and Romulus and Remus sounds more akin to the legend of virgin Mary.

Christus Victor.
It's called "google." It's not that hard to use. There's plenty of material out there about Christus Victor.

Q: So I am to explain your own theology? Really? LOL.
To not have “Your putting words in my mouth" or “You can mock whatever strawman version of my theology you want” please explain your own theology.
Don’t bore me with look on google. This is a debate forum where one has to sustain his own argument and not put the other person to do it.

Hell is what happens to someone who has spent their whole life denying the Truth and habituating themselves to find fulfillment in all the wrong places when the wrong places are wiped away and the Truth is manifest.

Q: So do you believe Hell is a separate dimension from Heaven or like the orthodox Christians, who believe Hell and Heaven are in the same place but the experience is difference?
Q: What do you mean by wrong places are wiped away Truth is manifest?
Q: What is the Truth?

Theoretically? Yes, but then they weren't in Hell so much as they were in Purgatory.

C.S. Lewis wrote a book called the Grand Divorce. That's about what I believe.

Q: The whole separation from God happens in Hell/Purgatory for all eternity?
Q: What do u mean by Purgatory? As Purgatory is Hell?
Q: What about the Lake of Fire?
Q: Do souls in Hell/Purgatory experience forever phycological torment?

[Wootah]

There are numerous god-men who died and rose from death in stories predating the time of Jesus. Considering the notable differences between the gospel accounts, and particularly the differences between the accounts of Jesus's supposed resurrection, here's a question for gospel apologists to think seriously about:

There are four resurrection accounts about Jesus in the Christian gospels. If the exact same accounts, with the exact same differences, were written about Osiris, Tammuz, Attis or any such god-man other than Jesus, would Christian apologists find all of those accounts believable?

And if they wouldn't find all of them believable, would they find any of them believable?

Here's a thought. Assume the above is true and make it about science. If there were repeated observations of an event then shouldn't we take that event more seriously not less seriously?

[Tcg]

Here's a thought. Assume the above is true and make it about science. If there were repeated observations of an event then shouldn't we take that event more seriously not less seriously?

Here's another thought. Not if the "observations" contradict each other.


Tcg

[benchwarmer]

Here's a thought. Assume the above is true and make it about science. If there were repeated observations of an event then shouldn't we take that event more seriously not less seriously?

Here's another thought. Not if the "observations" contradict each other.


Tcg

Or if they are just copying each other.

Can you imagine if a scientific article showed up for review and some sections of it were direct cut and paste from other papers? With some details fiddled of course to show a different point of view. Add that to the contradictions and the articles in question would end up in the rubbish bin pretty fast.

[Wootah]

[Replying to Wootah in post #146]

1) contradictions
2) copying

So which is it? Seems like whatever random punch has the most effect?

For those that want to discern. This is exactly like the left/progressive/communist climbing of power. What is said doesn't matter, that it is said and that it keeps the sheep in line is all that matters and the truth is irrelevant.

My turn at this: Yeah like science works that way! Lol. (expecting lots of likes to this one).

[benchwarmer]

[Replying to Wootah in post #146]

1) contradictions
2) copying

So which is it? Seems like whatever random punch has the most effect?

Why think it's only one? Are you unaware of the snippets that have been copied (in the exact same Greek) from one Gospel to another? Look up the Synoptic Problem.

Are you also unaware of the many contradictions that have been pointed out and debated?

No one is saying that the entire story has been copied or that the whole story is in contradiction. It's the obvious bits and pieces that are copied and/or changed as one author borrows some and modifies other ideas.

For those that want to discern. This is exactly like the left/progressive/communist climbing of power. What is said doesn't matter, that it is said and that it keeps the sheep in line is all that matters and the truth is irrelevant.

No, what matters is that people independently research these issues (copying and contradictions) and see if they hold any water. Only then, make an informed decision.

It's brought up often because some like to sing about the "multiple, independent witnesses" to the gospel story as some sort of solid evidence of truth. However, when one actually does some digging, the independence and multiple witnesses are shown to likely be non witnesses borrowing and upgrading ideas and making bigger and bigger stories.