The division of the story of God into "Old" and "New" has created a schism of unmeasurable consequences. This debate as to who is right, who is better, and "why do we need" so and so, is what fuels this division, with attitudes of supremacy on both sides. It is about time we view the "old" and the "new" at the same level, with humility and acceptance of our limitations to understand and judge our condition as human beings.
I'm not quite sure how to reconcile Goldingay's claim at 12:09 that "before Jesus came, there wasn't gonna *be* any resurrection" with Martha's anticipation of a final resurrection in John 11.24, well before Jesus's own. Further, I don't see any of the New Testament's repeated references to the Sadducees' unbelief (in resurrection or otherwise) as a positive or otherwise faithful interpretation of First Testament eschatology.
I think that is a fair comment. Goldingday is probably clearer in the book, which I have not (yet) read. It is true that resurrection at the last day was a belief of 2nd Temple judaism, but is hard to find in the 66 books of the Tanakh.
That's a true statement from Goldingay as it stands - there would be no resurrection without Jesus! :) But, his point is is little or no awareness of life after death in the OT (Ps. 88; Ecclesiastes both are indicative). But, it wasn't until the 2nd Temple period as Robert notes, that any sort of idea formed about resurrection. But, that wasn't an OT perspective, it was rather a slow recognition that if God is just, there must be a resurrection in which justice is brought to bear on the world. It was not something the OT taught but was an inference that came into the Jewish culture by the time Jesus arrived on the scene. That belief wasn't an OT teaching (except perhaps Dan. 12 - which has been debated). Of course, there were those who still did not draw that inference (Sadducees). But, even though there was that belief, there would be no resurrection without Jesus. He's the first fruits from the dead as Paul notes.
Jesus is first introduced in the "new" testament, and was a foreign concept to the jewish people at the time. They had no warning or prophecy that Jesus was coming, so naturally they reject him. The Christian Bible was compiled, organized, and ultimately controlled by the Christian Roman Catholic Church, which is the mother Church of all 32,000 + other Christian religious denominations.
O FOLLOWERS of the Gospel! Do not overstep the bounds [of truth] in your religious beliefs, [180] and do not say of God anything but the truth. The Christ Jesus, son of Mary, was but God's Apostle - [the fulfillment of] His promise which He had conveyed unto Mary - and a soul created by Him. [181] Believe, then, in God and His apostles, and do not say, "[God is] a trinity". Desist [from this assertion] for your own good. God is but One God; utterly remote is He, in His glory, from having a son: unto Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on earth; and none is as worthy of trust as God. (Asad)
You say you KNOW what the Biblical God did in Jesus, and that gives you hope that Jesus will come some day? Really? the Jews have equal Faith that the long awaited Messiah will come some day too. Is it at all possible that what you think you know about Jesus comes entirely from stories His followers did not even start writing till 30 years after Jesus was buried? There is no evidence outside those later stories, that at the time Jesus lived, anyone thought He had been of Virgin Birth, or when He died, He had been Resurrected. May I ask an honest question? Can you name the one that was called "King of Kings", "the only Begotten Son" and "the Savior", who was born of a Virgin on Dec 25th, and loved and taught the common people, performing many Miracles? Also, He had !2 Disciples and was later killed and rose from the dead on the 3rd day, after visiting Hades. The last clue is that he could make wine appear magically in jugs, without any water being needed even. Sound familiar at all? Yes, it was Dionysis, the mythical Greek God, who was wrotten about over 1000 years before Christianity even existed. Does it really make sense to you that an Omnipotent Supreme being would decide that the best way to "reveal" Himself and spread His message to a people who were over 90% illiterate would be in confusing stories, that they could not even read, written by fallible men over a period of 800 years, to be argued over and eventually put in a canon by 300 AD, that even the followers of, have been arguing, fighting and even killing each other over, for 2000 years? Does that seem like clear communication from an Infinite God to you? Really? Religion is unGodly. I do have a belief in God, by the way, just not any of the pagan ones, that men created in their image with lowly human attributes like needing to be a male, needing love and worship like Apollo, and having weak human emotions like jealousy, anger and vengeance. I do fully support everyone's right to believe as they choose, but I only ask if people have ever made any effort to find out WHERE the stories they run their lives by, come from. Wishing you God's Love, Truth and Peace
Dan Lewis I agree the Bronze Age fairy tales, have no place in the thinking of 21st Century people, except as an example of how mankind reasoned and coped with Life long ago. I agree with you that religion is unGodly and History proves that.
***** "There is no evidence outside those later stories, that at the time Jesus lived, anyone thought He had been of Virgin Birth, or when He died, He had been Resurrected." -> This is wrong. The vast majority of critical scholars recognise that 1 Corinthians 15v3-7 contains a creed which says that Jesus was raised, dating back to 18th months of Jesus' resurrection (James Dunn, Cambridge scholar). "Yes, it was Dionysis, the mythical Greek God, who was wrotten about over 1000 years before Christianity even existed." -> Quote one primary source for this. There are none.
John Nelson What is a "critical" scholar? If you mean Bible Scholars, the consensus agrees with me that there is not one single written record in existence by ANYBODY actually written in the entire 30+ years that Jesus the Nazarene lived that even mentions his name let alone any supposed Virgin Birth, miracles, preaching to thousands or any supposed Resurrection. If the best you can do is present the false circular reasoning of using the very stories that make the claims such as 1 Corin. as evidence what the tales say must be true, then your cause is lost. But it was lost before you started because Christianity, just like Islam and Hinduism, only claims to be Faith-based in man-made stories. This is because no religion in all of History has ever found and verifiable evidence for ANY of their supernatural story claims. Do you have a strong Faith, sir? If you answered yes, then you are admitting you do not have Truth. Faith, just like belief, confidence, trust and conviction are all words that are defined to have a degree of uncertainty and doubt and NONE of them require any evidence at all to have them. You can verify that in any dictionary. Truth, however, is specifically defined that it MUST conform to Reality and facts, and Truth MUST have real evidence and proof. If you had Truth backed up by undeniable evidence you could happily throw mere Faith and belief out the window! I know of James Dunn and his work with N.T Wright and they are both fine Christian apologists and have made a good amount of money writing books to please the flock by telling them what they want to hear. No, sorry you can not use the book of stories that contains the claims as evidence what the story says must be true. If that weak logic was allowed the Muslims could do the exact same thing with the other Word of God book called the Qur'an, correct? The information on Dionysus, also known as Bacchus is hardly a secret. You can find full details about Dionysus/Bacchus in any major Library. You can look up Horus while your there to see the comparison to the story character Jesus as well. Jesus is believed to be a composite character by the majority of Bible Scholars, Hermeneuticists and Eschatologists. Here is one of hundreds of articles on some of the details about Bacchus/Dionysus. www.truthbeknown.com/dionysus.html Next you'll be telling me you think that there were actually people named Mark, Matthew, Luke and John who wrote the Gospels!! If you look that up you will see that since deep research over the past 30 years by Textual Bible Critics, it is now the consensus that the authors of the Gospels are actually unknown. Those names were added many decades later for convenience by the Church leaders, and Mark, Matthew, Luke and John are believed to be just story characters. If you know a well educated member of clergy that has had recent Bible History training they should be able to verify that for you. Is Christianity honest about the History of how the Bible was fabricated? Of course not! They prefer the time tested neurotheology, also called religious indoctrination, of deceiving the gullible vulnerable minds of the believers, often innocent children, to believing a story must be true just because it says it is. Islam does the exact same thing. honesty would be bad for revenue flow, but people are leaving the Churches in droves because Christianity has poisoned itself with greed and corruption for centuries anyway so it doesn't matter that much. About 2 million Americans are leaving Christianity each year now and it is escalating as people are tired of the deceptions and false claims. As the small Churches close the Hollywood style Mega Churches attract the gullible to see stage performances with bands and fake Faith healers and surround sound systems to wipe the believers into a frenzy of "feeling the Spirit" as the accountants and business backers count this weeks take in the back room. If it weren't for the fact that Jesus was dead and buried, he would be in tears over what greedy men today have made of his simple teaching of "Love one another", which incidentally came from Nepal and India along with "love thine enemy", but I digress. Be happy with your believing believing and believing if it brings you comfort. But please be honest and do not claim "Truth" for Christianity because it only claims to be Faith based in man-made stories just like Islam is. Wishing you Love, Truth and Peace
***** You didn't address either of my points. The fact is that the vast majority of scholars who specialise in historical research of the events surrounding Jesus' resurrection, recognise 1 Corinthians, which is first and foremost an historical document (not a 'Biblical' one - as you point out, the Bible is a fourth century construct), as containing a report which says that Christ apparently died, was buried, and rose again. You then say that "Jesus is believed to be a composite character by the majority of Bible Scholars, Hermeneuticists and Eschatologists", but I study a top secular University where none of the scholars take this position. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to name 10 scholars in the world who do. This is probably why the website you referenced has no academic articles published in peer-reviewed journals. It's pure sensationalism. Goodnight!
John Nelson Maybe you should read it again then. I said you can't use the circular reasoning of using the Bible tales to prove the Bible tales, so what some of the Scholars on the payroll of Christian Universities think about doing that does not concern me in the least. I again tell you it is accepted fact there IS NO written record by ANYBODY dating from ANY time in Jesus entire lifetime mentioning his name or any miracles or any supposed Resurrection. That is all I am claiming and is why is specifically said OUTSIDE the Bible tales later on. If you want to pretend that 1 Corinthians is not outside the Bible you could do that I guess but that is a deception as any argument for what I claimed. I'm sorry to hear that the Scholars at your University are unacquainted with the great many similarities between the character and plotline for the Jesus story character and so many other previous pagan gods and myths. If you are attending a secular University there would be no reason for any staff to have opinions on Jesus that would coincide with religious Universities. I will not baby you to do such simple research, but I suspect you are just trying to be difficult by suggesting there are peer reviewed accounts from 5,000 years ago about Dionysus/Bacchus. He was a mythical character so who cares if every small detail is the same in every account by every scholar. I want to thank you for sharing your ideas and I do respect your right to have your beliefs even though you feel just believing things on Faith, just like the Muslims do, is adequate on such an important matter. farewell Wishing you Love, Truth and Peace
Christ contradicts OT teaching many times. Get real... Jesus brought a new teaching to the world allowing a personal relationship with the Father. “Unless your righteousness exceeded that of the Pharisees you will by no means enter the Kingdom of Heaven.”
