Posted on 01/31/2006 9:37:58 AM PST by SirLinksalot
In any event, this is a pointless discussion: no minds will be changed. Other things needing doing...
It has already been pointed out to you that the gospels were written within a very short period of time. Again, it would be like trying to say that President Kennedy rose again from his grave. Too many eyewitnesses around. Secondly, the authors were eyewitnesses or used the eyewitnesses as their sources. Theirs was origional source, not written centuries later as is the case with J Caesar. Countering facts would not be forgotten since the eyewitnesses were still around. Now IF you have any documentation of this I'd be interested in seeing it.
No conflict if you do a little research.
Or if you don't want there to be.
Since you are not answering my response with a reasonably argued reply, only this little bite, makes one wonder who is researching and who isn't.
Bawaaahahhahahaha. Is this something you thought up or did you dig this up from somewhere else? They didn't hide away and brainwash people - and I am sure you have no credable documentation of that occuring. Oh and BTW, it came to the attention of the Romans in less than 1 generation, not 3. At least get some of your chronology correct.
So did some Christian offshoots, as memory serves (the Cathars? Don't recall off the top of my head). Also see: Mormons.
Where these people claiming to be eyewitnesses to the events? I don't think the Cathars were. AFA the Mormons are concerned, your earlier statements concerning contradictions of the written materials would be correct. However, this is not the case with the first Christian documents (gospels and epistles)
People will believe lots of stuff without any real evidence. They just need to be told something they want to believe, or be born
The eyewitnesses were just that - eyewitnesses, and their testamony was that of an eyewitness. Now you have the choice to either believe or not believe. The overlooked fact of the matter is that these events were experienced by in some cases thousands at one time. These all didn't immediately become Christians until after pentecost and many didn't - even though they were there too.
Notice the number of Johnny Jihads the west has produced. Converts from Christianity to not just Islam, but the nastier strains of Islam. Islam is also growing in the Hispanic community. And obviously it grew in the black community in the middle of the 20th century. And the fact is, this is not being done through brainwashing, but through evangelism.
You are clueless on this issue. First 'ol Johnny was not a christian to begin with but had a very strange religious mix of his parents (buddist and catholic? - combined into a New Age format) and later his father switched to a homosexual lifestyle. Second, it has been observed by others that because of his home life, he was looking for a strong father figure. He found that 'image' in islam and the muslims used that to their advantage (common in cult groups) and eventually he was in Afghanistan undergoing intensive islamic doctrinal and combat training (the most intensive brainwashing of all). You should really review some counter cult materials regarding the steps of brainwashing.
Second point is - just because you come from a sector that is 'religious' doesn't make you any more a Christian than sleeping in the garage makes you a Ferrari. Christians recognize free will - that to choose what to believe. Growing up in a Christian home doesn't necessarly guarentee the child will make a decision to become a Christian too.
NOW you tell us..
{^_^}
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.