Historical evidence for the resurrection of Christ

Kalvaer

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
3,859
Well on the same topic but different point.

In the new Tesitement in the Gospel of John, he goes on to speak about Jesus healing people at the Pool of Bethesda. He goes on to speak about the 5 porticoes as well. However this place doesn't exist.. At least everyone though so until Archaeologists found it buried underground, complete with the 5 walkways.

This at least goes to show us that John was at least there at the time to have been able to give an eyewitness account of a location that in modern times, we thought was made up
 

Nick333

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
34,342
Well on the same topic but different point.

In the new Tesitement in the Gospel of John, he goes on to speak about Jesus healing people at the Pool of Bethesda. He goes on to speak about the 5 porticoes as well. However this place doesn't exist.. At least everyone though so until Archaeologists found it buried underground, complete with the 5 walkways.

This at least goes to show us that John was at least there at the time to have been able to give an eyewitness account of a location that in modern times, we thought was made up
At best it proves that John heard about the five porticoes from another source. I can tell you that there is a place called the Voortrekker monument without having been there.
 

Neo

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
1,168
Well on the same topic but different point.

In the new Tesitement in the Gospel of John, he goes on to speak about Jesus healing people at the Pool of Bethesda. He goes on to speak about the 5 porticoes as well. However this place doesn't exist.. At least everyone though so until Archaeologists found it buried underground, complete with the 5 walkways.

This at least goes to show us that John was at least there at the time to have been able to give an eyewitness account of a location that in modern times, we thought was made up
You can easily write a story today and include some actual, real detail in the story to give it more credence. Authors of novels do this all the time. They write a completely fictional story but in a historical setting. (DA Vinci code being a good example)

So you can write a story today and give relative accurate detail on, say the wall of China.

Does that mean you were there?
 

Kalvaer

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
3,859
All Correct, but now we have 3 other people all writing about the same thing again as well. Plus countless others mentioning these things. 1 person's credibilty you can doubt, but when you start having an entire army of people writing about something, you can no longer to doubt the 1 person.

Even if you doubt him though, there has to be something to the story he was talking about in the first place with so many accurate discriptions and different sources.

Writing a story today would be much easier due to the means of research we have available to us. 2000 years ago, it was a whole different ball game, You usually had to write about things you yourself had seen, or at least known somebody else who had directly themselves. Its not like you could pick up the sunday paper and read about what was going in Iraq while sitting in Isreal
 
Last edited:

nthdimension

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
763
We have three gospels that are too similar to each other giving the appearance that the stories all came from one source or they copied from each other. And we have John which is completely different to the other three.

The fact that the places are real does not mean the story has to be true.
 

ghoti

Karmic Sangoma
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
45,668
Well on the same topic but different point.

In the new Tesitement in the Gospel of John, he goes on to speak about Jesus healing people at the Pool of Bethesda. He goes on to speak about the 5 porticoes as well. However this place doesn't exist.. At least everyone though so until Archaeologists found it buried underground, complete with the 5 walkways.

This at least goes to show us that John was at least there at the time to have been able to give an eyewitness account of a location that in modern times, we thought was made up
Umm.. John did not write the Gospel of John.... eyewitness? Right. Someone who lived after John wrote the "eyewitness" account.
 

The Cosmos

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2007
Messages
5,725
Ok, here's a site with regards to the subject of the thread !

anchorstone.com & click on the garden tomb link.

also check out:
surprisingdiscoveries.com

There's some DVD's for sale if i'm not mistaken. I've got the videos and watched them all, and it's wonderful !
 

Electrra

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
146
Everyday proofs for evolution:

All living creatures have parents. Parents pass on their genome combinations to their progeny. We kinda look like our parents. Not exactly, the combos create differences.

Different genes are involved in the pigmentation of skin. Those living in the north, far from the equator, lighter skin is important for producing vitamin D, which is often formed in the body following exposure to the sun's ultraviolet rays. These genes developed 14 000 years ago.

Humans have food intolerances, particularily wheat and milk, due to rapid changes in society (changing from hunter gatherers to farmers - rapid in evolutionary terms). Those without the intolerances have dominate mutated genes adapted to their dietry changes.
These genes developed 10 000 - 8 000 years ago.
 

Kalvaer

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
3,859
@ Electra : I never said anything about "evolution", or even disputed it :p

We have three gospels that are too similar to each other giving the appearance that the stories all came from one source or they copied from each other.
So if everyone who was at the Rugby game this weekend all gave the same story did they all copy each other? Or as you said.. is it possible that they were all at the "source" and were actually there at the time. :)
 

nthdimension

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
763
So if everyone who was at the Rugby game this weekend all gave the same story did they all copy each other? Or as you said.. is it possible that they were all at the "source" and were actually there at the time. :)
If you read up on this you'll find that the similarities are of the sort that do not occur in the circumstance where three people see the same even and write about it indepedently. What we see in the gospels is exactly the sort of thing that is evidence of copying.

No, there may have been one source for the story, i.e a possible person who actually saw or claimed to have seen the events firsthand, and this person told the same story to all three writers. The source is not the event itself.
 

Kalvaer

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2004
Messages
3,859
Myself I think that there are just way to many "storys" for it made up. Regardless of, if you believe in what Jesus stood for or not. Even those opposing him didn't dispute that he was alive or certain events happened.
 
Top