Religion or Science - How do they compare?

The obvious answer is because he failed. He wasn't the messia. That why the Jews are still waiting. It's why the ressurection story had to be invented and why it's now so important for Christians.The simple facts are that a man was killed, stayed killed and the claims he made about a second coming didn't happen. The whole thing failed. Hence Paul's shame - he was flat out wrong but had to carry on with the claim.He's was just doing what Faith does now believing something despite the evidence and spinning stories to make it fit the belief.

I haven't noticed a second coming, have you?

Just another weak story invented to cover up the fact that the 'god' was afterall simply mortal. And that the prophecies failed and remain failed. It's very obvious from the bible itself that Jesus's followers expected the second coming pretty immediately. Didn't happen and people like you have been forecasting it to be 'soon' for 2,000 years. Hasn't happened, won't happen. It's just a bedtime story Faith.GDR loves CS Lewis. He's as big a fraud as the rest of the apologists but he at least got this right.

quote:

---

Say what you like, we shall be told, the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, ‘this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.’ And he was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else.

​

It is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.

---

C.S. Lewis, "The World's Last Night" (1960)

I don't believe a word of the entire story, it's just a story. You can very easily find it if you want to.He goes on to say that Jesus - even though he said the second coming would be within the lifetimes of the people listening - was also unable to say exactly what particular day in their lifetime the big event would happen, and because he can't do this it's strong evidence that it's true! It's hilarious stuff.

quote:

---

Say what you like, we shall be told, the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, ‘this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.’ And he was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else.

​

It is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.

​

Yet how teasing, also, that within fourteen words of it should come the statement But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. The one exhibition of error and the one confession of ignorance grow side by side. That they stood thus in the mouth of Jesus himself, and were not merely placed thus by the reporter, we surely need not doubt. Unless the reporter were perfectly honest he would never have recorded the confession of ignorance at all; he could have had no motive for doing so except a desire to tell the whole truth. And unless later copyists were equally honest they would never have preserved the (apparently) mistaken prediction about this generation after the passage of time had shown the (apparent) mistake. This passage (Mark 13:30-32) and the cry Why hast thou forsaken me? (Mark 15:34) together make up the strongest proof that the New Testament is historically reliable. The evangelists have the first great characteristic of honest witnesses: they mention facts which are, at first sight, damaging to their main contention.

---

If you take the view that someone called Jesus was indeed crucified it's not ridiculous at all to report it. He'd have to report it because those around at the time would know.But having reported that the messia was dead, he then had to make it all ok again by inventing the whole cock-and-bull story about a subsequent resurrection. THAT's the ridiculous part. So what? He believed his own story. There are people blowing themselves for their mistaken beliefs every day. It's a common place.

You're making my point for me. If you can kill a messiah, he's not the messiah. It's the ressurection that 'proves' the messiah. Inventing a resurrection was absolutely necessary for the thing to work.The problem, of course, is that he was supposed to come back again quite quickly in all his glory but they couldn't pull that trick off could they? He disappeared forever. Almost as though he'd died just like every other failed messiah.

Right, and not perform strings of miracles then? Why on earth not? It's all part of the story. So they created the ressurection myth to fix the problem. It doesn't have to be a lie, it could be something they believed to be true. Or just something they wanted to believe was true. Or it could just be a lie that they used to carry on with their beliefs. There's any number of ways to spin it. The very least likely being that it actually happened.

Only for you and your beliefs. Obviously it's necessary for you to change the meaning of a word that makes the entire Christian belief system a nonsense.Unfortunately for you it doesn't matter what liberties you take with the meaning of words, it's clear that everyone thought the second coming was soon - just like you. And just like you, they were wrong.

Now that is a truly crazy thing to say. Pretty obviously you performed the miracle. And did it several other times too - raising dead, feeding thousands without a supermarket erc. Sure you can claim it ain't me but it sure looks like it. You mean that these people didn't believe anymore? When the modern-day prophets predict the end times but they don't happen, they don't jusy give up, they carry on and make all sorts of excuses about why. They have every motive to continue, they're deluded, just like Faith. You think she's ever going to be persuaded by amything at all? Of course not. No it doesn't, it only depends on the evidence. You simply substitute an irrational belief for evidence.

Charlatans tell lies. Who knew?In the stories when JC performed his miracles, they didn't happen randomly as he was passing alon minding his own business, he made the decisions to raise the dead, create the wine, feed the crowds etc.It wasn't something that just happened without his knowledge or desire to do it. And it wasn't something that anyone else could do. *He* did it. Or so the story goes.

JC did them. Whether he used the power given to him by god, the White Witch of Gondor or the power of a magic ring, the story is that he did them.ABE. Maybe an analogy that you're fond of will help. Guns don't kill people; people kill people.Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Yes they did.

These word acrobatics only occurs because you guys try to hold impossible contradictions together as though they were totally sensible.The 'logical’ position is that when JC performs a miracle - note that that is what we say - it's him that's doing it with his own powers.
But the problem is, he's only a mortal man that will eventually die like everyone else, so there has to be another word game that can be played that allowshim to act like a god whilst not being one. I know, we'll say that another god is doing it through him. Pure Hollywood.But also,he's not a puppet, he's a man making his own choices...yeh, right. That all makes total sense.

And, as you say, I really don't care what's written in your book or what apologists or phd students say about what's written in it. Until and unless the book itself can be shown to be a verified factual account of real history, it's just another book of fiction, like all the rest. If he hadn't died and was still walking around, are you sure that wouldn't make a difference? I reckon it might. Just a bit. It's not hard to grasp at all, I'm just pointing out that it's a necessary plot device - a McGuffin - because JC turned out to be mortal.If this wasn't fiction, JC would simply be the god and then everything would be straightforward and unambiguous. Why make it all so difficult, convoluted and unbelievable? The point of the whole thing was apparently to save the world; there are a thousand better ways to do it.

We're doing ok, there's nothing wrong with do as you would be done by and love your neighbour. That's all you need.But the point was that if your god really felt the need to intervene to help us, he chose a truly ridiculous way of doing it.