Today, millions are saying “He is risen!” and echoing back, “He is risen indeed!”
But how do we know He actually rose from the dead?
As Christians, we don’t have blind faith. Our “faith“ or, “trust“, is based on the facts of history.
The resurrection is rooted in Scripture and confirmed by solid historical facts both inside and outside the Bible.
If you’re going to proclaim, “He is risen indeed!”—know that you’re standing on the most well-attested event in ancient history.
9 comments
“Today, millions are saying “He is risen!” and echoing back, “He is risen indeed!”
But how do we know He actually rose from the dead?”
This should be good…
“As Christians, we don’t have blind faith. Our “faith“ or, “trust“, is based on the facts of history.”
Like…what? The total thirteen tons of ’fragments’ of THE original Cross? The dozen burial shrouds of Jesus, including the Turin one? The seventeen foreskins preserved from his circumcision?
“The resurrection is rooted in Scripture and confirmed by solid historical facts both inside and outside the Bible.”
None of the gospels are eyewitness accounts, Nimrod. And they’re anonymous. And Paul never, ever refers to Jesus as a physical person that walked the Earth.
There’s zip point shit of historical fact for his resurrection.
“If you’re going to proclaim, “He is risen indeed!”—know that you’re standing on the most well-attested event in ancient history.””
Your father’s tax history was better attested and he couldn’t avoid prison.
facts of history
Historical facts: the temples, stelae, statues, artifacts etc commissioned/owned by Ramses II. He having a DNA-analysable body does his existence case no harm whatsoever. Archaeologists - who only deal in Facts - have proven he existed. No ‘Faith’ required: because it’s not allowed in that field of historical study. I only accept proven facts. Now prove that your J-boy actually existed with the same amount of forensic evidence: certainly that only accepted in a court of law, and since Kitzmiller vs. Dover refused to accept your so-called ‘Scripture’ as admissible in a court of law.
We’ll wait.
<@C.A.Collins > #222738
Oh sorry, he died in good Friday and rose on Easter. Again I understand why Easter lands where it does. It just shows that Christianity chose existing celebrations for their holidays so it was easier to convert people. Let them keep their celebrations just change the meaning. You would think that a day as important as the death and resurrection of Jesus would have been recorded and they would know the exact date. That's what bothers me.
@Creativerealms #222752
they would know the exact date.
That is an odd assumption. It seems far more reasonable that the Easter complex, as the oldest holidays of Christianity originating when it was still a sect of Judaism, has retained the lunar calendar/link to Passover logic, unlike later holidays originating after it split for good and became romanised.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.