You take this on faith ALONE. There isn’t any “proof”. Muslims claim the Koran is “His message”, too, but the record contradicts the Bible. The Mormons claim that the Book of Mormon is “the record” of ACTUAL FACTUAL CLAIMS! You assume the Bible is true, and that is your reference point. If you allow it for yourself, allow it for the Muslims, too, because that’s only fair.

But this argument goes nowhere. “My book is from God.” “No, MY book is from God.” Both sides are in a bubble of belief. Yes, you DO need to prove your text, but it can’t be argued coherently. There are too many contradictions, mistakes, etc. for most skeptics to even BEGIN to believe that there’s even A SLIGHT chance that it was authored by God. And I make that claim for EVERY BOOK, because it’s a nauseating idea that God revealed Himself to us through a book. Yuck.

If you then want to make the claim that God reveals Himself through revelation, then you have to allow it for the Muslims as well.

If you want to make the claim that God reveals Himself through nature, then you have to allow it for the Muslims as well.

You are at a STALEMATE with EVERY convinced believer of opposing faiths. There is a lack of evidence, therefore I am happy to say that I am free from the chains of ANCIENT SUPERSTITIONS. (And that includes ALL ancient texts.)

It is fairly well documented that the word that Jesus often used that translates as “hell” in English is the Hebrew word “Gehenna” which was a literal place where garbage was dumped and burned outside of Jerusalem. There is also good cause to argue that Jesus was borrowing from the current language of the time, especially that used by the Pharisees against the “sinners” around them that they thought were the possible cause of Israel’s current occupation by Rome. And if you consider the politics of Jesus’ subversive message, his attacks on the powers that be (the religious leaders), and put this in the context of his typical way of turning things upside down, then we no longer need to blame Jesus for introducing the idea of eternal torment.

Yes, I’m familiar with this “work-around” and the myriad other, similar attempts that liberal believers make to interpret or contextualize away the darker teachings of the “Prince of Peace.”

Simply put: I don’t buy them. If there’s an omnipotent, omniscient divinity who wants to reach out to humanity, he surely could do it in an unambiguous way that wouldn’t cause doctrinal wars, hatred, violence and confusion for thousands of years. Can you imagine the suffering and death that could have been avoided in our world if Jesus had made a radical, society-altering pronouncement against slavery during his ministry?

It’s inconvenient and embarrassing today to attempt to follow an ancient text that endorses slavery, considers women property and condemns non-adherents of a narrow, complex philosophy to eternal torment. So I understand why it’s convenient to go back and explain away verses where Jesus talks about separating the sheep and the goats and sending people to eternal torment.

But it just doesn’t feel honest to me to do so. In pop culture circles, these kinds of contortions are called “fan wanks”: Making huge efforts to reconcile bad writing with the overall premise and integrity of a particular television show, movie or novel so that the fan can stay engaged rather than get disgusted and go away.

Maybe I would have to want to believe more than I do in order to accept those “modern interpretations,” and I just don’t have the desire any more.

It is fairly well documented that the word that Jesus often used that translates as “hell” in English is the Hebrew word “Gehenna” which was a literal place where garbage was dumped and burned outside of Jerusalem. There is also good cause to argue that Jesus was borrowing from the current language of the time, especially that used by the Pharisees against the “sinners” around them that they thought were the possible cause of Israel’s current occupation by Rome. And if you consider the politics of Jesus’ subversive message, his attacks on the powers that be (the religious leaders), and put this in the context of his typical way of turning things upside down, then we no longer need to blame Jesus for introducing the idea of eternal torment.

I don’t have my fingers in my ears, repeating the phrase “I’m not listening”, but I’ve simply gotten over the ability to believe ANY of these so-called religious texts. And for every “proof” that a Christian brings up, there is a counter that a skeptic can use against the proof. There are also “proofs” used by other religions, and they will try to convince you how their claims can be proven, too. You take it on faith alone, not “proof”, be it the Koran, the Bible, the Book of Mormon, etc.

The impact around the world can not be denied. Something happened 2,000 years ago. Jesus is clearly not a myth. Every time you write a check, you write the approximate number of years since His life.

Every time you look at the calendar you have Thursday, named after Thor. The almighty Thor still influences our world today…. and Mars, Venus, and Saturn, too.

It isn’t an argument, because ANY religion can do it.

(after writing, this is off the top of my head, I am sorry it has gotten so long, but this is an important and legitimate question. I hope you read through)

1) Tomb was guarded by Roman Centurians approved by Pontious Pilate at the request of Jewish leadership the Pharisees. (That Pontious Pilate was a govenor at that time over that provence is confirmed in many historical documents outside of the Bible. )

The reason I view this as important is because of the rise of the early church. Based on the claims of the empty tomb, from the point of view of the Pharisees and Romans it was a rebelion that threatened their power. If they could have produced a body from the tomb that they were watching they would have to put a stop to the lies.

2) The presence of the Roman Guards, death was the common punishment for failure of duties. It is unlikely that an ordinary event would have caused them to lose the body. Theft is not a good explanation, they would have had to subdue the roman guards and get the large stone out of the way. The locatin of the tomb was well known. Many would have gone to see the empty tomb for themselves. There is no document in the roman or jewish records that indicates any controversy over whether or not the tomb was empty.

3) In terms of historical reliability, the use of woman as the first witnesses of record. Not to disparage woman in any way but in that day and culture womens testimony did not carry much weight. If you were trying to convince people of a story that was made up, they would have certainly used the more (what they percieved as ) reliabel and convincing testimony of men. This show honesty in reporting.

4) The Sanhedrin was desperate to convince people that the resurrection did not occur. Again if they could have produced the body they would have. Instead they tried to lie about it Matt 28:12-15. People must have seen through the ploy or the movement would have stopped.

5) An arguement that Jesus was not dead, just passed out. Does not make sense. a) The Roman Guards in charge of crucifixion were good at the business of death b) Records shows that Jesus was additionally pierce through the side after death on the cross c) The appearance of a badly beaten and broken body would hardly have been an inspiring sight

6) The resurected Jesus was witnessed by many. 1 Corinthians 15:6 records that at one time more than 500 saw Him. The record makes a point of indicating that some of them were still alive and could deny it if it was not true.

7) The story of “doubting Thomas” in John 20:24-31 shows that Thomas did not believe the stories of his best friends and refused to belileve until he saw Jesus. When Jesus appeared to Him He did not rebuke Him for His lack of believe but simply showed the evidence. This to me exemplifies that Christian faith is not expected to be a blind faith, but a faith based on proof and reason.

8) The changed lives of people. Recorded on the books of Acts we see major change. Before the cross and at the cross the followers of Jesus failed and abanded him miserably. They acted as cowards. Then in the book of Acts they were preaching in the same streets that killed Jesus boldly. The effects of their teaching and the impact on the world is still felt today. But WHY??? It would have made more sense for them to be stronger when Jesus was with them, yet they failed Him then. They must have had an experience that changed them to the core. Solidified their belief in Jesus in an awesome way. The only explanation I see for this change is an encounter with the risen Jesus Christ and seeing that all He taught was true. Same thing with Saul. He was among the greatest persecutors of the early church. Then something happened and he became the greatest champion of the early church. The only explanation for this reversal of character is an encounter with the risen Christ (as recorded in Acts 9)

I still see the changing effect on people today. I have seen lives changed in ways that go beyond the power of positive thinking. God is still writing and doing miracles today, it is simply in the lives of people. In my own life. I was a good person by any standard. Then I had an experience with Jesus ministring in my life. There has been a change ever since. Since I did not desire it, it could not have come from within me.

The impact around the world can not be denied. Something happened 2,000 years ago. Jesus is clearly not a myth. Every time you write a check, you write the approximate number of years since His life.

I hope you have read to this point. Thank you for your attention and consideration.