> OT = Jewish national literature, not a Jesus code> “Prophecies” are context-stripped rereads> Jesus = apocalyptic Jewish preacher, one of many> Preached imminent end times, demanded total loyalty> Gets crucified as a failed messiah> Followers have grief visions “resurrection”> Paul rebrands it for gentiles, invents salvation theology> Gospels = late propaganda, miracles grow over time> Jesus never returns, doctrine shifts> Constantine backs it> Rivals erased, canon fixed> Result: failed doomsday cult empire religion
How many "prove Christianity wrong" threads do we need a day? At this point you either believe it or you don't, there's 2000 years of evidence and argument both for and against. We're not gonna figure anything out here on /his/.
what happened to the flavian meme?
>>18292847I'm not a Christian but> Followers have grief visions “resurrection”makes me doubt my non-Christianity. Sure this is a phenomenon that happens. But the apostles seem to have seen him multiple times in large groups. There's even the famous 500 witnesses case. How do we explain it away, non-Christian bros?
>>18292978>But the apostles seem to have seen him multiple times in large groupsno, there is no evidence of mass appearances beyond the bible saying so.
>>18292978Not to mention they all went to their bloody graves believing in Him and didn't forsake Him even at fear of death. They truly believed He was the messiah
>>18293021So were the apostles just pretending they saw the risen Jesus to everyone around? Were they conmen?What about the Paul's claim about the 500? Did he believe it or was he a part of the scam?
>>18293029only two people were required to have had a vision separately to spawn the rest, there were no group appearances outside what the bible says, its just hearsayhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUCI3cMJCvU
>>18293025I've heard there is no evidence all of them died a martyr's death. In fact most of the deaths are supposed to be merely Christian tradition-based. At the very least John didn't die a bloody death I think.Someone please fact check me.
>>18293033>Most claims of Christian “persecution” under the Romans are heavily exaggerated. With the sole exception of Diocletian’s edicts, there was never an official sustained targeted persecution of Christians by the Imperial Roman government and what little persecution of Christians that did occur during that 300-year timespan was mostly localized, sporadic, and caused by local tensions rather than official decrees. Most stories of martyrdom are also pure fiction.>By the time Constantine died, Christians only made up less than 10% of the empire’s population and were at best a loud minority. Christianity didn’t become the majority religion until emperor Theodosius made an explicit effort to eradicate traditional pagan religions by forcibly closing down pagan temples and disbanding pagan priesthoods. Even then, pagan beliefs still heavily persisted among rural populations well into the early Middle Ages (where do you think the term “pagan came from”).>Many claims that were made by pagan critics of Christianity like Porphyry of Tyre have been independently verified by modern Biblical scholarship, e.g. the Book of Daniel NOT being written during the Babylonian exile by “Daniel,” but rather during the 2nd century BC under the reign of Seleucid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes, long after it events it was “predicting.”Why do these facts make Christians seethe so much? The vast majority of scholars agree on all this, it is generally accepted that the Christian narrative of "persecution" under the Romans is mostly propaganda.
A reminder, the Bible is literally just a book.By itself, it doesn't prove God exists anymore than the LOTR cycle proves Sauron is real.If you look into Christian narrative, it's quite apparent that nations were allegedly converted because Christian missionaries were doing miracles, not because they were reading from a book
>>18292847You'd first have to assume modern Jews are the same race as ancient Israelites, which they are not, and if they are then there should be no objection to them retaking their ancestral homeland.
>>18292978>There's even the famous 500 witnesses case. How do we explain it away, non-Christian bros?Considering that none of the gospels take the opportunity to mention the story, along with a few other details, there's the suggestion that "more than five hundred brethren" (epanô pentakosiois adelphois) is a scribal corruption of "on pentecost to the brethren" (epi pentêkostês adelphois), where maybe one scribe messed up copying in a way that made the text ambiguous or illegible, and then the next scribe "corrected" it the wrong way. That would then suggest Acts' story of the Holy Spirit manifesting on Pentecost as the matching account. And Acts' story is that 120 brothers were together when they heard a loud rushing sound, flames appeared over everyone's heads, and they spoke in tongues, supposedly new languages. But Acts also mentions that other people thought they were just drunk. Supposing that Acts took the real story but exaggerated it a little, they heard a sound, saw some lights, and spoke gibberish, which is within the realm of what's attributable to normal hallucinations.
>>18293428>spoke new languages*spoke and other people miraculously heard what was being said in their own natives languages
>>18292847you've posted retardation. I can't engage with that
>>18292978Ok, convert to Aum Shinrikiyo, every le impossible feat that apologists use for apostles' faith is X10 grater there Maybe you should also be a black nationalist white segregationist at the same time
>>18293995What's the psychology of bumping threads way down in the catalog just to call the OP stupid?
