One Cubic Meter of Space

[Churchwork]

What's important is you have no evidence for your hypothesis. And I am thankful.

It's possible Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written immediately after said events. Their final form though was established within a few decades at the most.

Since you can't find the originals for anything in antiquity, to make this demand just on the Word of God is telling.

Mary did not need to be told Jesus arose on two separate occasions. You misread something.

These are not four different set of events, but four different perspectives to verify authenticity.

Notice how you are always wrong in your assessments.

I am comforted that you disagree with 95+% of scholars, but have no evidence for your beliefs.

Your answer can't be to everything it was dreamed. One good reason for this is that Paul said people he mentioned that agreed with him could have contested their agreement, but of course, none did. Nobody documented in the first or second century denied the existence of Jesus.

Atheism denies the evidence for God and claims there is no uncreated Creator. But, atheists don't have anything to support something happens all by itself. Quantum physicists don't say something happens all by itself, but say it is so complicated, they don't know the causes of some things on a quantum level, which is reasonable, since it is quite complicated. I heard there is are as many different theories in the quantum world as there are scientists who study it. That doesn't sound like a basis of strong evidence for puff the magic dragon in order to reject Jesus as your Lord and Savior.

One thing you can't do is deny the historical Jesus based on lack of documentation, because nothing in antiquity is more well documented. For example, Jesus is documented four times more within the first century and a half than the Emperor of Rome who died the same decade.

John wrote John. Paul wrote the epistles. Peter wrote Peter. James wrote James. Matthew wrote Matthew. Luke wrote Luke. Mark wrote Mark. Jude wrote Jude. Until shown otherwise, we should not claim otherwise two thousand years after the fact. While we can doubt the other books in the 2nd and 3rd centuries which contradict the books of the Bible, the authenticity of the 66 books of God's Word remain God's revelation for the ages.

If Christ did not to return for a million years, the most cherished book in the history of mankind would still always be the Bible.

Praise the Lord!

[DD_8630]

What's important is you have no evidence for your hypothesis.

I have cited observed phenomena, textbooks, and world famous physicists, all of which agree with me unanimously. You have done nothing to refute any of this, and have provided no evidence of your own. For this, I am thankful.

And I am thankful.

It is my understanding that the Christian God looks poorly upon the prideful.

It's possible Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written immediately after said events. Their final form though was established within a few decades at the most.

Possible, but improbable. That is the point.

Since you can't find the originals for anything in antiquity, to make this demand just on the Word of God is telling.

Since we can find the originals, your whining is pointless. We have love letters, divorce papers, execution documents, all from the time of Christ. We have a Jewish historian documenting theological and political movements around the time of Christ, and who lived during the time of Christ. Oddly enough, there is no mention of Jesus.

Mary did not need to be told Jesus arose on two separate occasions. You misread something.

Matthew 28 tells us how Magdalene went up to the tomb and was told that Jesus was risen. This occured at dawn on the eve of the Sabbath.

John 20 and Luke 24 detail the same thing as Matthew 28, but this time on the Sabbath.

Mark 16 details the same thing again, but this time after the Sabbath.

Each time, Mary Magdalene has to be told that Jesus is risen, much to her subsequent shock.

So what's up with that?

These are not four different set of events, but four different perspectives to verify authenticity.

That is your contention, yes. However, you have not answer my question: why where the events of the day split into four

Your answer can't be to everything it was dreamed. One good reason for this is that Paul said people he mentioned that agreed with him could have contested their agreement, but of course, none did. Nobody documented in the first or second century denied the existence of Jesus.

Nobody except Paul proclaimed it either.

Atheism denies the evidence for God and claims there is no uncreated Creator. But, atheists don't have anything to support something happens all by itself.

Yes, they do: quantum mechanics. You have told me that you have no education in physics, so how on Earth can you make such grandose statements about it? You know nothing about what you are talking, and instead rely on your a priori assumptions. You have given me no names, no evidence, no papers, no textbooks, no journals, no nothing. I have given you evidence, and you have dismissed it out of hand in favour of your religious beliefs. You have no proof, Churchwork. You have only your faith.

I have science on my side. I have the rigour of quantum mechanics and the unprecidented precision in the evidence that supports it.

Quantum physicists don't say something happens all by itself, but say it is so complicated, they don't know the causes of some things on a quantum level, which is reasonable, since it is quite complicated.

Who? Who said this? What specific scientist made this specific statement?

I heard there is are as many different theories in the quantum world as there are scientists who study it.

You heard wrong.

One thing you can't do is deny the historical Jesus based on lack of documentation, because nothing in antiquity is more well documented.

Yes, it is.

For example, Jesus is documented four times more within the first century and a half than the Emperor of Rome who died the same decade.

And Harry Potter is in more documentation than Her Majesty the Queen of England. Your point?

John wrote John. Paul wrote the epistles. Peter wrote Peter. James wrote James. Matthew wrote Matthew. Luke wrote Luke. Mark wrote Mark. Jude wrote Jude. Until shown otherwise, we should not claim otherwise two thousand years after the fact.

And who claims that James wrote James, etc? What evidence do you have to support this assertion? I stand by the null hypothesis. You stand by your cultural beliefs and a priori assumptions.

If Christ did not to return for a million years, the most cherished book in the history of mankind would still always be the Bible.

I rather like the Qu'ran. It's poetry is unsurpassed.

[Churchwork]

The point about documentation is that you can't say the historical Jesus is not documented enough.

Whether you like the poetry of the Koran or not, it is wrong, because it has nothing to support its claim over six centuries later that Jesus did not die on the cross. The Bible is about truth, whereas obviously the Koran is not.

Just to let you know, you are getting an infraction for repeating that something in quantum mechanics happens all by itself even though you have no evidence to support your assumption. Naming processes in now way proves they happen all by themselves.

The book of James starts off with, "This letter is from James..." It is in keep with the personality of James, so there is no reason to think it is not him. The burden of the proof remains on you. You can take your obstinate attitude to anything, but you lack proof.

Scholars have cited various plausible explanations for what you think is a discrepancy. Let me know when you have read them.