The Capture of Christianity

We know that four different men, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John each wrote their gospels containing their accounts death and resurrection of Jesus decades after the event.
By the modern rules of what constitutes sound evidence concerning testimony of witnesses, had all four of these Gospels recorded the events exactly alike, it would be strongly suspected that their accounts are not the result of separate eye witnesses, but rather, a collusion from a commonly accepted source. If four people observed the same accident, you would expect their testimony in court months later, or even on the day of the event, to differ one from another as to what they saw, with certain elements of their testimony in common. The differences give credibility to their statements. By taking all four statements into account, a fairly accurate account can be ascertained as to what actually what happened on that day Jesus rose from the grave.

Here is the chronology of the events on the day Jesus resurrected from the grave as based upon all four gospels:

1. Mary Magdalene, another Mary, and other women go to the Tomb just at sunrise to anoint Jesus body and wondering who might remove the Stone that seals the tomb.

2. Before they get there, There was a violent shaking of the ground around the tomb, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.

3. Mark 16:1-7
"Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might come and anoint Him. Very early on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen. They were saying to one another, "Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance of the tomb?" Looking up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away, although it was extremely large.

3. The angel in white, having the form of a young man, says to the women:

"Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: `He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you."

4. Mary Magdalene does not enter the tomb, but runs to the disciples to tell them the news. Mary Magdalene eventually runs into Peter and John. They race to the tomb.

5. The other women entered the tomb and did not see the body of Jesus, and were perplexed about it when suddenly in dazzling light appeared what seemed to be two men. They did not get a good look at these two because they were terrified and bowed their heads. However the two who
appeared as men in dazzling light spoke to the bowed women: "Why do you seek the living One among the dead? He is not here, but He has risen. Remember how He spoke to you while He was still in Galilee, saying that the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again. "

They saw a young man sitting at the right, wearing a white robe; and they were amazed. And he said to them, "Do not be amazed; you are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has risen; He is not here; behold, here is the place where they laid Him. But go, tell His disciples and Peter, "He is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see Him, just as He told you.'" NASU


6. The women leave the tomb and go to look for the disciples to tell them what they saw and heard.

7. John is first to arrive at the tomb but does not enter. Peter arrives and he enters the tomb and John follows. They observe the empty tombs and the wrappings and face cloth that had shrouded Jesus when he was dead and buried. They head home.

Part 2 The evidence for Jesus resurrection:

First of all let me mention four crucial books, namely Luke, John, Acts, and 1 Corinthians, which purport to be written by eyewitnesses and/or contemporaries. Luke was an educated contemporary of Christ who said: "That just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word (namely the apostles), so too it seemed fitting for me as one having a perfect understanding of all things from the very first to write you an orderly account." John the apostle claimed to be an eyewitness in chapter 21; Paul affirmed that he was a contemporary of Christ and a witness of his resurrection (1 Corinthians 15), noting that there were over 500 witnesses most of whom were still alive when he wrote.

Second the claim of being written by contemporaries is supported by the freshness, vividness, and accuracy of the accounts (giving specific geographical, topological, and cultural details that are known to fit the time period of which they speak). Although the Gospel writers offer different perspectives, they all present the same basic facts about the death and resurrection of Christ. Further, all mention of real historical places of the times (such as Bethlehem, Nazareth, Jerusalem) all utilize the names of actual places of people such as Pharisees, Sadduccees, Herodians. In addition, names of real historical persons of the period are mentioned (like king Herod, Pontius Pilate, and Caesar Augustus).

Third, the science of archaeology has confirmed the basic historical accuracy of the Gospel record. To take but one example, there are the writings of Sir William Ramsay, whose conversion from a skeptical view of the New Testament was supported by a lifetime of research in the near-eastern world. He wrote, "I began with a mind unfavorable to it. More recently I found myself often brought in contact with the book of Acts as an authority for topography, antiquites, and society of Asia minor. It was gradually born in upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth." As a result, Ramsay discovered that Luke was a first-rate historian. In Luke's references to 32 countries, to 44 cities, and 9 islands, there were no errors. This being the case, Luke's prior narration of Christ's death and resurrection (which are integral parts of his Gospel) should be accepted as authentic as well. And since it is in accord with that of the other Gospels on the basic facts about the death and resurrection of Christ we have here an archaeological confirmation of the basic historicity of these documents on these essential facts.

Fourth, the manuscript evidence points to a first century date for the basic Gospel material. The John Rylands papyri, being an early second century copy of portions of John found in Egypt, points to a first century origin of John in Asia. Likewise the Bodmer papyri from the end of the second century and the Chester Beatty papyri from only a half century later form crucial links in a manuscript chain that takes us right back to the threshold of the first century when the books were written.

Fifth, the writers of the New Testament books on the resurrection like Luke, John, and Paul were known to be honest men. They not only expounded a high moral standard of honesty and integrity, but they lived by it and died for it. While some people have been known to die for what they believed to be right but was wrong, few people have been willing to die for what they know to be wrong. What is more, the other Gospels (like Matthew and Mark) with no direct claim of authorship give the same basic message about Christ's death and resurrection.

Sixth, the testimony of the early second century writers directly link the Gospels with the eyewitnesses and contemporaries of the events. The Oracles of Papias (125-140) for example, make the significant affirmation that the apostle Matthew wrote the Gospel of Matthew, that Mark the associate of Peter wrote the Gospel of Mark shortly after the middle of the first century.

Seventh, the immediate successors of the apostles beginning in the late first and early second century cite Gospels and epistles as authentic including sections on the death and resurrection of Christ. In A.D. 95 Clement of Rome cited the Gospels. Around A.D. 110 Ignatius quoted Luke 24:39 (a crucial text on the resurrection of Christ). Polycarp, a disciple of John the apostle cites the synoptic gospels as authentic. The Epistle of Barnabas (135) quotes Matthew. Papias (125 and following) speaks of Matthew, Mark, and John writing Gospels saying three times that Mark made no errors.

Eighth, highly reputable contemporary scholars date the New Testament books within the lifetime of eyewitnesses and contemporaries of the events. Archaeologist Nelson Gleuck wrote: "We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after A.D. 80." The renown paleographer William F. Albright declared that every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew between the 40s and 80s of the first century and very probably between 50 and 75. More recently, even the radical "death of God" theologian Bishop Robinson of Honest to God fame declared that the New Testament was written by contemporaries beginning only seven years or so after the events and were circulated among other eyewitnesses and/or contemporaries of the events.

Ninth, the known time lapse between the actual events and the time of composition of the first document is too short for mythological development. One expert, Julius Meuller, declared that it takes at least two generations for a myth to develop. Whereas there is only 20 years or so in the case of the New Testament. He also notes that myths do not develop when there are still contemporaries of the events to debunk them (such as there were at the time of the basic New Testament documents). Furthermore, the New Testament record shows no sign of mythological development (such as are present, say in the 2nd and 3rd century apocryphal gospels).

Tenth, and last, even radical critics of the New Testament acknowledge that the apostle Paul wrote 1 Corinthians about A.D. 56. But this is only 22 years after Jesus was crucified in A.D. 33. and well within the lifetime of the eyewitnesses. Further, Paul indicates that his material is based on an even earlier creed which he received (1 Corinthians 15:1) that comes from within a few years of the events themselves. In this text, Paul affirmed that the majority of 500 witnesses were still alive when he wrote (implying that his readers could confirm for themselves if they wished).

In brief, there is nothing like this kind of evidence for any other historical event from the ancient world. Now, if the New Testament documents are reliable, it remains only to show that they affirm that Jesus died and rose from the dead a few days later.

A brief review of the New Testament evidence will suffice to support these two truths.

First of all, Jesus announced many times during His ministry that He was going to die. Typical is Matthew 17 where He said the son of man is about to be betrayed into the hands of men and they will kill Him and the third day he will be raised.

Second, the nature and extent of Jesus' injuries indicate that He must have died: he had no sleep the night before He was crucified, he was beaten several times and whipped, he collapsed on the way to His crucifixion carrying His cross. This in itself, to say nothing of the crucifixion to follow, was totally exhausting and life-draining.

Third, the nature of the crucifixion assures death. Jesus was on the cross from 9 a.m. until just before sunset, he bled from wounded hands and feet as well as from thorns that pierced his head. There would be a tremendous loss of blood from doing this for more than six hours. What is more, crucifixion demands that the victim constantly pull himself up in order to breathe (thus inflicting excruciating pain from the nails). Doing this all day would kill anyone even if they were in good health.

Fourth, the piercing of Jesus' side with a spear from which came blood and water is proof of His death. For if he had not already died, this fatal spear wound to the heart by trained executioners would have certainly finished the job.

Fifth, Jesus affirmed the very moment of His death on the cross when He declared, "Father into thy hands I commend my spirit." And having said this He breathed His last (John renders this: "He gave up His spirit"). Indeed Jesus' death cry was heard by those who stood by.

Sixth, the Roman soldiers accustomed to crucifixion and death pronounced Jesus dead. It was a common practice to break the legs of victims so they could no longer lift themselves and breathe. But since these professional executioners were so convinced that Jesus was actually dead, they even deemed this unnecessary in Jesus' case.

Seventh, Pilate double-checked to make sure Jesus was dead before he gave the corpse to Joseph.

Eighth, Jesus was wrapped in 75 pounds of cloth and spices and placed in a sealed tomb for three days. If he was not dead by then (which He clearly was) He would have died from lack of food, water, and medical treatment from three days in the tomb.

Ninth, medical authorities who have examined the circumstance and nature of Christ's death have concluded that He actually died on the cross. In an article in the Journal of the American Medical Society, March 1986 concludes: "Clearly the weight of historical and medical evidence indicated that Jesus was dead before the wound to his side was inflicted and supports the traditional view that the spear thrust between his right rib probably perforated not only the right lung but also his pericardium and heart and thereby insured his death. The interpretations based upon the assumptions that Jesus did not die on the cross appear to be at odds with modern medical knowledge.

But, not only is this an established fact that Jesus died, it is also a fact that He rose from the dead, which he offered as confirming of His unique claim to be the son of God. Let's look briefly at the evidence.

That Jesus rose from the dead even leaving behind an empty tomb and grave clothes is verified by all four Gospels, Acts, and 1 Corinthians.

These historically reliable documents record 12 different appearances of Christ beginning three days after his death to over 500 people over a 40 day period of time during which Jesus was seen, heard with the natural senses. His tomb was visited, found empty, indeed no one ever found his dead body. Jesus dined with His disciples four times eating physical food himself. He was touched and offered Himself to be touched four times (including His challenge to Thomas to put his finger in his hand and to see the crucifixion wounds).

To save time, the following is from Christian apolgist, Dr. Norman Geisler. In the first part he provides evidence for the credibility and reliability of the Christian Scriptures.

The argument for the historical reliability of the New Testament accounts has two parts.

First, the existing manuscripts of the New Testament are accurate copies of the original ones -- in particular those relating to the death and resurrection of Christ. Second, the writers of these documents (specifically the Gospels, Acts, and 1 Corinthians) were either eyewitnesses or contemporaries of the eyewitnesses providing an accurate account of the fact that Jesus died and rose again.

The documentary evidence for the reliability of the New Testament is greater than that for any other book from the ancient world. Hence, employing the same criteria used on other ancient documents, the New Testament is an accurate representation of the first century original. Three lines of evidence combine to demonstrate this conclusion. First, the New Testament has more manuscripts. It is not uncommon for great classics to survive on only a handful of manuscripts. According to the noted Manchester scholar, F.F. Bruce, we have about nine or ten good copies of Caesar's Gallic Wars, twenty copies of Livy's Roman History, two copies of Tacitus' Annals, eight copies of Thucydides' History. The most documented secular work from the ancient world is Homer's Illiad -- surviving on 643 manuscript copies. By contrast, there are over 5,366 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, most of which include the Gospels. The New Testament is the most highly documented book from the ancient world.

Second, the New Testament has earlier manuscripts. One of the marks of a good manuscript is its age -- generally, the older the better, since the closer to the time of the original composition the less likely it is that the text has been corrupted. Most books from the ancient world survive only in a handful of manuscripts that were written about 1,000 years after the end of the first century. And one portion of the Gospel of John survives from within about a generation of the time it was composed. No other book from the ancient world has as small a time gap between composition and the earliest manuscript copies as the New Testament has.

Third, the New Testament is more accurately copied. The New Testament is one of the most -- if not the most -- accurately copied books from the ancient world. The great Greek scholar A.T. Robertson said that the real concern is only with a thousandth part of the entire text. This would make the New Testament 99.9% free of significant variants. The noted historian Philip Schaff calculated that of the variants known in his day, only 50 were of real significance, and not even one affected an article of faith or a precept of duty. By comparison with the New Testament, most other books from the ancient world are not nearly so well authenticated. Professor Bruce Metzger, of Princeton, estimated that the Mahabharata of Hinduism is copied with only about 90% accuracy and Homer's Illiad with 95%. By comparison, he calculated that the New Testament is about 99.5% accurate. So even by conservative standards, the New Testament survives in a 99+% reconstructed text with all the essential truths about the death and resurrection of Christ not being affected.

In summation, the evidence, the British scholar Sir Frederick Kenyon declared, that the number of manuscripts of the New Testament, of early translations from it, and of quotations from it in the oldest writers of the church is so large that it is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved in someone or another of these ancient authorities. This can be said of no other book from the ancient world. In addition to abundant and accurate manuscripts, there is also equally good evidence that what these texts affirm about the death and resurrection of Christ is historically reliable. It should be noted that it is not necessary to this argument that they are inspired or inerrant, but only that like other good works of antiquity they are accurate. Again, the evidence for this is greater than that of any work from that period.

I am exhausted now. I confess that I am brain damaged, I have had 2 strokes recently, it has affected my memory, especially short term. it leaves me tired at unusual times. I also have a double herniated disk in my neck which doctors tell me that attempts to fix the herniated disks could leave me crippled. So I also live with a steady oain in my neck and shoulders, a pain which is tolerable, except when it slides down into my left arm, then it is very painful. I've also lost one third the strength on the left side of my body. But I am ok and have nothing to complain about. Just that I'm tired right now.

I'll write my comments on Jesus ressurection perhaps tomorrow when I could think more clearly.

I agree with muradbaig that Jesus, during his lifetime, preached only to His fellow Jews. Jesus referred to the gentiles as 'dogs' and 'unworthy of the bread given to His children - the Jews'. If Jesus had preached to the gentiles, He would, in effect, be abolishing the Mosaic Law. Jesus came 'not to ablolish the Law of Moses, but to fulfill tha Law of Moses.' His sermon on the mount and other speeches were addressed only to Jews.

He convicted them publically of their sins and failure to keep the Mosaic Law. Like nearly all of us humans, the Jewish leadership self-justified themselves before God, arguing that their good works outweight their sinful works. The Mosaic Covenant does not work that way, the contract called upon them to keep the entire Law, every joy and title of it. Something no human (except Jesus) could do. To make clear their failings, Jesus revealed the full intent of the Law when He said things like, If you lust in heart on a married woman, you are guilty of commiting adultery, if you hate someone in your heart then you have committed murder', etc. etc.

Re: # 176

Ok, I'm back.

Greetings Tahir, pleased to meet you.

I would not call this website a 'sinkhole'. I see it as an oppurtunity for all of us to communicate and to seek to understand one another, and more so, to love one another.

That is one of the new Laws under the New Covenant of Jesus, that we love one another and that we love God with our whole being. It is called the royal Law of Love in James. And it includes the Law of the Prophets, that we do unto others as we would like others to do unto us. That mercy triumphs over judgement, and that by what measure we measure unto others, so shall we be measured by our own standard and conduct. As God has forgiven us, so shall we forgive others, even our very enemies. These things and many others Jesus taught.

The Second Law of the New Covenant is the Law of Liberty. For Jesus fulfilled the Mosaic Law on our behalf. And in keeping that whole law, rather than receive the Blessing promised for keeping the Mosaic Law, Being the only human who ever did keep all of it, He took upon himself the curses of violator of that law which He suffered on our behalf. He took upon Himself the stripes and punishment we so deserved for our ungodly unrighteous behaviour. Thus Jesus redeemed us from the Law of Sin and Death. For we are now children of God. And we been set free and placed in a wide place, free to make many different choices.

The 3rd Law of the New Covenant is the 'law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus'.

Romans 8 1-7

1. Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace,
NASU

These three laws work together well. The Law of Liberty gives us much freedom to make many choices. The Royal Law of Love keeps us from hurting one another with our words or deeds, or if we do, it will leads to make amends with those we hurt. And the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus is the receipt of the indwelling Holy Spirit in those who accept Jesus finished work on the cross, 'God in me.'

And it is very wonderful what God does in me day by day.

From 1 John 1 - 10

1. What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life — and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us — what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ. These things we write, so that our joy may be made complete.

5 This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.

If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us. NASU

So our scripture tells us Christians that we will never be sinless in this world, it is not our goal to become sinless, a rock is sinless, howeve holiness is the presence of God in our life, and not the absence of sin. but if we confess our sins, that God is not only faithfull to forgive us, but in the New Covenant with Him through Jesus, it now becomes God's work in us to make us righteous, that is not our job. And He does this through His indwelling Holy Spirit who transforms over time our very inner nature so that it will be natural for us to do the good that God created us to do. This is God's gift to us.

When Jesus died on the cross an was ressurected, This enabled God to cancel the Mosaic Covenant.

Zech 11:7-14

"So I pastured the flock doomed to slaughter, hence the afflicted of the flock. And I took for myself two staffs: the one I called Favor and the other I called Union; so I pastured the flock. Then I annihilated the three shepherds in one month, for my soul was impatient with them, and their soul also was weary of me. Then I said, "I will not pasture you. What is to die, let it die, and what is to be annihilated, let it be annihilated; and let those who are left eat one another's flesh."

"I took my staff Favor and cut it in pieces, to break my covenant which I had made with all the peoples. So it was broken on that day, and thus the afflicted of the flock who were watching me realized that it was the word of the LORD. I said to them, "If it is good in your sight, give me my wages; but if not, never mind!" So they weighed out thirty shekels of silver as my wages. Then the LORD said to me, "Throw it to the potter, that magnificent price at which I was valued by them." So I took the thirty shekels of silver and threw them to the potter in the house of the LORD. Then I cut in pieces my second staff Union, to break the brotherhood between Judah and Israel." NASU

When Jesus died, The veil in the Temple that separated God from man was torn asunder. Thus our fellowship that we lost in the garden of Eden was restored to us. For Jesus says whoever abides in Him He will abide in them. And we have the Holy Spirit in us, God in me, and I have fellowship with Him. and it is this daily walk I take with Him by which He transform me to do the good He desires that I do. I'm not sinless by any means, but I am one who loves God and I love His presence in my life.

Christian brother Artur, welcome to the sink-hole called ChowQ.

We will see how much of Jesus do you follow.

:)

Reply to Baig sahib,Post 173.

Yes I realize I'm mainly writing to an Islam audience who sees it all quite differently. But at least your witnessing the best case that can be put forward for Christianity. Perhaps you can explain to me about how a Muslim obtains eternal life under Islam.

I shall take a break now and write my third comment later. I'm sorry my posts are so long. But on the other hand, in my summer between 5th and 6th grade (10 yers old) I read William Faulkner's 'Light in August', a book of over 500 pages with no pictures, in just under two days.

Best Wishes Always,

Artur

I would like to share a rather different view on the importance of the Mosaic Law.

Yes, some of the Ten Commandments overlap Hammurabi's Code that preceded Moses. It does not take any special insight for humankind to realize that shaming ones parents, stealing, the taking of an innocent life, coveting, etc., are causes of pain, hurt and suffering. I happen to believe that from Noah, that early civilizations consisted of rather moral people and that the growth of unethical conduct (sin) has been on the increase, more or less, ever since, which I showed in part in my prior comment.

Even if people credit the Hammurabi code as containing many statutes found in the later written Mosaic Law, these laws, of themselves, are useless in regards with respect to making people righteous.

It is my view that God gave Moses the Ten Commandments et. al. (there were many more than just 10 commandments) for Moses to give to the people of the exodus, because the people were hard hearted. God wanted them to trust not their own understanding, but to walk with Him by faith and not by sight. They did not know how to walk and live by faith; they wanted a visible clear contract so they would know exactly what God required of them in order for them to receive all of His blessings. Indeed, the people of the exodus received this Law most enthusiastically, declaring at least twice "All that the LORD has spoken we will do!" and entering into this covenant (i.e. contract) with God based on their pledge of full adherence to the Mosaic Law and the sprinkling of the blood of sacrificed young bulls upon them.

Ex 19:7-9

7 So Moses came and called the elders of the people, and set before them all these words that the LORD had commanded him. All the people answered together and said, "All that the LORD has spoken we will do!" And Moses brought back the words of the people to the LORD. The LORD said to Moses, "Behold, I will come to you in a thick cloud, so that the people may hear when I speak with you and may also believe in you forever." Then Moses told the words of the people to the LORD.
NASU

Ex 24:3-8

3 Then Moses came and recounted to the people all the words of the LORD and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one voice and said, " All the words which the LORD has spoken we will do!" Moses wrote down all the words of the LORD. Then he arose early in the morning, and built an altar at the foot of the mountain with twelve pillars for the twelve tribes of Israel. He sent young men of the sons of Israel, and they offered burnt offerings and sacrificed young bulls as peace offerings to the LORD. Moses took half of the blood and put it in basins, and the other half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. Then he took the book of the covenant and read it in the hearing of the people; and they said, " All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient!" So Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people, and said, "Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words." NASU

The Mosaic Law proved itself to be weak and useless in that it perfected no one, but rather, it proved to be a source of curses for those under the Mosaic Covenant. Rather than decrease sin, the Law increased sin among the people. Every person under the Mosaic Covenant proved himself to be unrighteous, except for one person - Jesus.

To understand more completely God's plan for offering and providing salvation and blessings to All peoples on the earth, it is important to note that there is a limited value of the Mosaic covenant between God and His chosen people Israel.


"Oh that they had such a Heart in them...�

Thus God knew from the beginning, at the very giving of the Mosaic Law, that they were incapable of keeping the Mosaic Law.

Deut 5:28-30

28 "The LORD heard the voice of your words when you spoke to me, and the LORD said to me, 'I have heard the voice of the words of this people which they have spoken to you. They have done well in all that they have spoken. Oh that they had such a heart in them, that they would fear Me and keep all My commandments always, that it may be well with them and with their sons forever!" NASU

Indeed, even after they committed themselves to keeping all the commandments of God, they repeatedly showed what little faith they had in God. All the men over twenty years of age would perish over the next 38 years, not being allowed into the promised land due to their disobedience to God's commands and their lack of faith in God.

Once again, after 40 years in the wilderness, Moses addressed all the people of the Mosaic Covenant who were going into the Promised Land and reiterated the importance of keeping the Torah, the Law, and advised them that the reward for keeping this covenant would be great blessings, and he told them specifically what these blessings would be. Deut. 28: 1-14.

Moses also informed Israel of the punishment (the curses which would befall them) for breaking the covenant between them and God, and he told them specifically what these curses would be. Deut. 28:15-68.

Though the curses included banishment from the land which God gave them and great suffering and persecution in foreign lands, restoration was also promised to Israel at the conclusion of this time of punishment, per Deuteronomy 30.

Then Moses instructed the people about the Covenant that bears his name,

"See, I have set before you this day life and prosperity, death and adversity. ... I call heaven and earth as a witness against you today that I set before you life and death, blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants." Deut. 30: 15 & 19.

In hindsight, we can see that Israel had chosen death and adversity. But this was no surprise to God, for He knew even as Moses was reiterating the Covenant, that His people were incapable of keeping it and would be, in effect, choosing death and adversity.

"Then YHWH said to Moses, "Behold, the time for you to die is near, call Yeshua, and present yourselves at the tent of meeting so that I may commission him". ... And YHWH said to Moses, "Behold, you are about to lie down with your fathers; and this people will arise and play the harlot with strange gods of the land, into the midst of which they are going, and will forsake me and break My covenant that I have made with them". Deut. 31:14 & 16.

So if the Mosaic Covenant is inadequate to provide Life to God's chosen, and so to the other peoples of the world, then what is God's plan to bless Israel and the peoples of the earth with life. (Remember, when G-d cast Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden, He sent a cherubim and a flaming sword, which turned every direction, to guard the way to the tree of life so that man may not eat of it and live forever).

The answer is given by Moses in Deut. 18:15-19

"YHWH your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your countrymen, you shall listen to him. "This is according to all that you asked of YHWH your God in Horeb on the day of the assembly, saying, 'Let me not hear again the voice of YHWH my God, let me not see this great fire anymore, or I will die.' "YHWH said to me, 'They have spoken well. 'I will raise up a prophet from among their countrymen like you, and I will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command him. It shall come about that whoever will not listen to My words that He shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of him. NASU (Caps mine).

This prophecy, along with many others to follow, focuses on that male descendant, the seed of Eve, who will crush the skull of the serpent, who will be a great blessing to Israel and the peoples of the world, the redeemer, the Saviour, the Messiah.

Who is this Prophet? That has been the big search throughout history. It is clear that ever since Moses, Israel has sought and been awaiting this Prophet. In Yeshua's (Jesus’s) day they asked him, 'Are you the Prophet whose coming is foretold?'

Yet, even in Moses day, God let it be known what the name of that Prophet is via a shadow of what was to come.

Deut 1:37-38
Not even you shall enter there. “Yeshua (i.e. Joshua) the son of Nun, who stands before you, he shall enter there; encourage him, for he will cause Israel to inherit it.�
NASU

On a larger scale, I take the promise land to be a metaphor for eternal life in heaven.

The above underscores that salvation, redemption, life itself, can not been achieved through ourwilful observance and adherence to the Mosaic covenant, and seems it was not intended to be, but somehow is directly related to this expected Messiah.

Gal 3:19-29

19 Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions, having been ordained through angels by the agency of a mediator, until the seed would come to whom the promise had been made. Now a mediator is not for one party only; whereas God is only one. Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law. But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith of Jesus the Messiah might be given to those who believe."

But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith, which was later to be revealed. Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise.
NASU

We, who are Christians, are no longer under the Mosaic Covenant. We can still agree, as people in Hammurabi's day did also, that things like shaming ones parents, stealing, the taking of an innocent life, coveting, etc., are causes of pain, hurt and suffering. But the keeping of them is not the basis of our redemption, salvation, and righteousness. As it is written in Hebrews, Yeshua is a High Priest, not of the order of Aaron, but of Melchizedek, Where there is a change of Priesthood, there is also a change of Law. Whereas the Mosaic law was a long list of commandments and statutes that we were required to keep, The laws of Christ keep us and accounts to us righteousness.

Heb 7:11-22

Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron? For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also. For the one concerning whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests. And this is clearer still, if another priest arises according to the likeness of Melchizedek, who has become such not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life. For it is attested of Him,

"YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER
ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK."

For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness (for the Law made nothing perfect), and on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. And inasmuch as it was not without an oath (for they indeed became priests without an oath, but He with an oath through the One who said to Him,

"THE LORD HAS SWORN AND WILL NOT CHANGE HIS MIND, 'YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER'");

so much the more also Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant. NASU

Even among my fellow Christians, few fail to understand that the Mosaic Law has been replaced by a far superior Laws by which we may obtain everlasting life and true fellowship with God. The Catholics in particular still seem to married to the Mosaic Law.

The Mosaic Law is a set of Laws that man must keep and do all the works thereof in order to redeem Himself in God eyes so as to obtain eternal life, and none will be saved by that path. However, through the new laws of Jesus Christ, God keeps us, forever.

Baig sahib,

Tread the path of believers who were guided aright, and not of those who went astray long ago.

Regards.

Greetings and good will to all. Most pleased to meet you. I hope what I write english transfers well, for I am very precise in my choice of words. FYI, I am a Christian.

My purpose for signing up on chowk was to have verbal intercourse with people who think differently than I. My original intent was to defend the statement: "In the beginning, God Created the Heavens and the Earth" As being the most accurate scientific statement ever made. For modern science knows nothing about the materialistic Theories of Evolution (i.e. 'The General Theory of Evolution' that says all creatures extinct and extant share a common ancestry; and 'Darwin's Theory of Evolution's mechanism' that says the mechanism of evolution is natural selection and survival of the fittest).

But since that thread topic discussions have come to an end some time ago, I have come across this thread and I wish to share my views of Jesus as related to the topic at hand, ressurection. Please be advised that i am not very well informed on Islam and wish to make no comments related thereto. It is understood that our beliefs are different and no comments from any of you will I take offense, and I hope that you will not take any offense to my expressed beliefs.

I will begin my comments starting from the beginning.

Let me begin with a bit about the book of Genesis:

"In the beginning..."

The book of Genesis does not contain any mention of Moses. Yet it does give a record of events, people, places, conversations, and exact circumstances which all occurred before Moses was born. Nor is there any mention of Moses receiving a revelation from G-d about what the book contains.

But there is plenty of evidence that Genesis is an edited compilation of approximately 11 books. Each `book' was most likely written on clay tablets, and though long periods of time may have intervened between the writing of one book to the next, the history `toledot' is a continuous one as the books are connected to each other by colophons, a colophon being an a connecting link between clay tablets. The books and possible authors are as follows:

Book 1. Genesis 1:1 to 2:4. Adam? (Perhaps as revealed to him by G-d, before the fall, or perhaps by direct revelation to Moses)

Book 2. Genesis 2:5 to 5:1 Written by Adam
Book 3. Genesis 5:1 to 6:9 Written by Noah
Book 4. Genesis 6:9 to 10:1 Written by Sons of Noah
Book 5. Genesis 10:1 to 11:10 Written by Shem
Book 6. Genesis 11:10 to 11:27 Written by Terah
Book 7 & 8. Genesis 11:27 though Genesis 25:19
Written by Abraham, Isaac, & Ishmael
Books 9, 10, & 11. Genesis 25:19 to 37:2
Written by Isaac, Esau, Jacob.

The remainder of Genesis deals with Joseph and was probably written in Egypt on Papyrus instead of clay tablets. The minute details in these later chapters indicate the author was either Joseph or someone who received this history directly from Joseph, such as one of his sons.

The history recorded in the book of Genesis was most likely written over a few thousand years. Names of places change over time. This is one indication that Moses did indeed edit the above `books'. He gives the (then) modern names to ancient sites; e.g. Gen, 14:2,3,7,8,15,17 Gen. 16:14, Gen. 23:2,19, 35:19. Plus, Moses writes of cities that had
cease to exist long before his time (e.g. Sodom and Gomorrah) giving their exact locations, and this he knew because he had possession of these ancient books which had been passed on to him.

Since this history contains the revealing of G-d's plan of restoration and salvation for all hunmankind, undoubtedly the writing and preservation of this history over time was from G-d.

From the above, it can be seen that Noah's record of the great flood was the most ancient and the most reliable record of this flood. The retelling of the events such as the Creation or Great Flood became distorted and corrupted over time as it was retold and passed down by developing and changing civilizations which began to worship the
creation rather than the creator.

For example, the Ebla tablets (dated to about 2,300 BC) attributes creation to one great being, but also mentions other `gods'.

The Babylonian records of the creation and the flood (i.e Epic Enuma Elish and the Epic of Gilgamesh), written hundreds of years after the Ebla Tablets, though they still contain some similarities with the much older Bible texts, show further deterioration of the original event with elimination of one Creator, the `gods' reflect much human weakness having been made by man in man's image, and they contain superstitions, magic, and grotesque absurdities. The Biblical record is clearly superior and historically acceptable.

Other translated Creation and/or flood tablets include the Sumerian list of Kings (which declares that ancestors had extraordinarily long lifespans), and the Babylon tablets of the Epic of Atrahasis and the Epic of Emmerkur. The Epic of Emmerkur is interesting in that it describes an Eden-like land which translated reads "a clean and bright place where the lion kills not, and the wolf snatch not the lamb." The
Ebla tablets also make reference to Dilmun as part of a list of known places.

A record of the Creation and Flood are also to be found preserved in the ancient chinese written language (Pictographs). For instance:

The Chinese characters for `to Create' consist of the pictographs for; `dust', `mouth' (mouth means person or speech), `movement of life', and `able to walk'.

The Chinese characters for `boat' consist of the Chinese
pictographs for: `Vessel', `eight', and `mouth'. The Chinese word for `to continue' or `to hand down' is `eight persons' with three wavy lines underneath (making it appear as if the `eight people' are on water).

Mankind + one + Mouth(speech) = united
Secret + man + garden + alive = devil
devil + trees + cover = tempter
eight + united + earth = total
total + water = flood
eight + Person = common to all

Note the strong similarity to the Biblical story of the tower of Babel:
United + Grass = Undertake
Undertake + Clay= Tower
Thus Tower = Mankind + one + mouth (speech) + Grass + Clay
Grass and clay were used to make the bricks for the Tower of babel.

There are many others. Please note that the origin of the chinese pictographs (their written language) precedes the later Chinese tales of Creation, which are quite different than the Genesis account. It seems that while they were fabricating their creation story, little did they
know that their ancestors had preserved the Genesis account within their `alphabet'!

On a more personal level, I believe that from Adam's time, humankind has been separated from God by sin emanating from a sinful nature inherent in us. That God put into effect a plan to make reparation for our sins(crime requires punishment for there to be justice), to make an end to sin, to transform our sin nature into His Holy nature, and to restore us to fellowship with Him as well as to one another in true love.
The Bible tells of this plan, from the tree of Knowledge of good and evil of which Eve and Adam ate of in the garden and was cast out and cursed to live by the sweat of his brow until death, to the tree the Messiah who 'is sent to die' in order to redeem us from death, and to pay the penalty of our sins in our place, and then to the tree of life that all who believed God and received His mercy shall partake of at the end of the age.

My next comment has to do with the purpose of the Mosaic Law, it will surprise many to hear it. My third comment will address the historicity of the ressurrection.

Friends, I have enjoyed reading both your comments. I will respond in a couple of days. Thank you for your patience.

Re: # 165
Kalchakra. You are either dishonest, delibertely insulting or you do not read my articles carefully. May I ask what is `denegrating' about what I wrote about Shankara in my article on the persection of Buddhists and Jains (May 2008)?


Quote:
There is no evidence that Shankaracharya directed such persecution but what is likely is that grasping local rulers may have used his great name to lend legitimacy to their own destruction and looting. Many local hill rajas now invited Brahmins to their domains to get themselves elevated to the rank of Kshatriyas. And many were encouraged to attack Buddhist monasteries.

Several Nepalese accounts state that the followers of Buddha were ruthlessly persecuted, slain, exiled and forcibly converted. Though many converted rather than face death, humiliation or exile. The attackers tested their faith by making them perform ‘Hinsa’, or the sacrifice of live animals, that was abhorrent to Buddhists and Jains. Many bhikshunis, or nuns, were forcibly married and the learned Grihasthas were forced to cut off the distinguishing knot of hair on top of their heads. 84,000 Buddhist works were searched for and destroyed.

It is believed that Shankara introduced pilgrimages to these holy places in the Himalayas for the first time to prevent their relapse into Buddhist or animist ways. As sufficient local Brahmins could not be found who were willing to preach in such remote places he imported Nambudri Brahmin priests from Kerala who, to this day, officiate at Badrinath, and Kedarnath

Come on you other interactors. Is this fair???

But why are you talking about me? The article is about the facts or myths about Jesus.

And forgive my ignorance but what is Mirzaism??

Kaal bhai,

I realize I misunderstood your “based on little logic� comment. My apologies. However, the point about unnecessarily maligning others, with duplicity and deception, stands.

Speaking of your animus tendency, here are some thoughts to round out the discussion, at least for now:

+++

You seem to have an ideological, illogical, and even a fanatic association with being Indian. And you seem willing to go to lengths to fulfill your perceived role as a dutiful, loyal, honor-bound Indian … even engaging, at least seemingly, in duplicity and lowly and subtle propaganda as a recourse against any element you suspect of diluting the Indian ways.

As a side comment: This is how a wide-eyed jihadi approaches Islam - your loyalty to the Indian land/culture is very similar to the allegiance a jihadi feels towards Allah/Islam.

Moving on …

I’d venture your dilemma against Mirzaees is a deeper, more complex one than you let on: You are comfortable in your opposition to mainstream Islam since the bulk of its adherents follow a predictable pattern: they can be easily identified, labeled, provoked, and manipulated. You know your enemy well ... as you have spent quite a bit of time and effort analyzing it and studying its mindset and behavior.

However, Mirzaees are engaging with different rules … and you are unable to handle them. You’ve been caught off guard and are starting to feel uneasy. Your desire to twist facts against Ahmadis comes off more as borne out of fear and anxiety.

Your issue has little to do with character of Mirzaees, Mirza’s sexual conduct, purity of faith, philosophical arguments, or Islam. These are irrelevant issues, designed to mask a deeper, sinking feeling: You are feeling threatened like you have not felt in ages. And you no longer have the tools to fight this battle. And that’s the crux of your dilemma.

+++

All this is only a guess. May be I am wrong … time will tell.

Some of the phrases I have used here … (rules of engagement, feeling threatened, fighting battles, etc.) … are a too dramatic for my taste. However, they do communicate the message in the language and context of group identity and survival dynamics – something you seem to instinctively relate to; hence my choice of words ...

We’ll pick this up later … have a good one …

Sattar bhai

There is something in what you say.

Give me a bit of time. I am leaving town for a few days and need to put chowk totally out of my mind during this period. When I return, I will try to capture my thoughts on this subject.

Again, I might not agree with everything you wrote, but agree with parts of it - particularly with unfair characterization of Mirza ji. It was deliberate, unecessary and avoidable. It reflected a basic animus beyond reasonable.

Best.

Kaal bahi, I was hoping you would take the time to clear things up. Yes, perhaps murad bhai is being intellectually dishonest; this should be looked into. However, we should not associate such behavior with you … esp. after seeing how this dishonesty and duplicity upsets you.

I am sure you can explain the issues I have raised …

Kaal bhahi (#152), you tried, but you still have not addressed the issue.

I understand your apprehension of Mirzaism: They are a cult bent on destroying Islam and Hinduism, etc.; but then you admit to having firm belief based on little logic in drawing your conclusions!

All along you have distorted/made up facts and taken cheap shots at Ahmadis, which border on lowly propaganda: Taunting the “Punjabi� prophet, associating sexual misconduct with him, raising suspicions about his character and the character of the adherents, etc. This is where I want to draw your attention.

Having philosophical differences is one thing (which again, is based on a very narrow interpretation of Islam, admittedly based on firm belief and little logic). But why distort facts and raise undue suspicions?

Can you tackle the issue on facts? Or have you been nursing a hidden agenda, couched in pretentious terms, resorting to propaganda when you fail to make your case?