Silvanus, it's your own words that led me to believe that you have "preconceived notions." The dismissive/loaded language you use (referring to "contradictory gospels" and "morality stories," and now your unwillingness to accept any of the writings that were eventually bound into the one book, the Bible, as historical evidence, certainly gives the strong impression that you are not willing to accept as true anything that contradicts what you already believe. In other words-- in spite of your assertions of the time you claim to have spent researching this topic (which I have no proof of but do not challenge), in spite of your having heard the Bible stories as a child from Catholic and Lutheran parents, and in spite of your avowed willingness to be guided by the evidence, I stand by my statement.

Today's Bible reading is John Chapter 20
http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=20&v=1&t=NLT
in which Jesus' disciples find that the tomb is empty and Jesus appears first to Mary (not his mother--another Mary) and then miraculously to his disciples on various occasions.

I think the last seven verses are very appropriate to post in this forum:
24 One of the twelve disciples, Thomas (nicknamed the Twin), [fn3] was not with the others when Jesus came. 25 They told him, “We have seen the Lord!”
But he replied, “I won’t believe it unless I see the nail wounds in his hands, put my fingers into them, and place my hand into the wound in his side.”
26 Eight days later the disciples were together again, and this time Thomas was with them. The doors were locked; but suddenly, as before, Jesus was standing among them. “Peace be with you,” he said. 27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here, and look at my hands. Put your hand into the wound in my side. Don’t be faithless any longer. Believe!”
28 “My Lord and my God!” Thomas exclaimed.
29 Then Jesus told him, “You believe because you have seen me. Blessed are those who believe without seeing me.”
30 The disciples saw Jesus do many other miraculous signs in addition to the ones recorded in this book. 31 But these are written so that you may continue to believe [fn4] that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in him you will have life by the power of his name.

Ok, but that was what the disciples said. There were no other witnesses. How do we know they speak the truth?

We don't without corroborating evidence (which isn't likely to be viewed as such unless it is not Biblically-based, to be honest).

Hi Mario, I'm not sure who your "we" refers to, but I think you have put your finger on one of the problems--That since the Bible talks about supernatural events and characters, like God/angels/the devil and such, it is automatically discounted as evidence. But if you judge it in a legal-historical sense, there are a huge number of copies of the gospels, and fragments of the gospels, that were copied in the first 100 years after the events in the gospels. That doesn't prove the truth of those documents, but it is strong objective evidence of the fact that we do in fact have the originals. In fact there are many secular sources that are accepted as truth with just a few copies available that were written within 100 years of the event, such as Caesar crossing the Rubicon, but the secular community accepts those documents because they don't talk about religious topics. That's my take on it anyway.

Please excused my mangled sentence structure/train of thought. It's the week before finals. ;-)

Mujus, the "we" is collective (based on that used in Gobbledygook's post). I think the major problem with the Bible and similar texts is that supernatural/otherworldly phenomena are described alongside comparatively mundane phenomena. You're right that because of that, these texts tend to be discounted as evidence, but I think part of the reason for that is because it's difficult to determine what they are, if accepted as such, evidence for, whether that's the existence of a given deity or a collection of deities or whether that's the occurrence of a natural disaster or other event (such as a global flood), or if one is supposed to be evidence of the other, or vice-versa. I always find it interesting how some people tend to think that an original document is automatically more accurate than later versions based on its original status, when the possibility exists that the originals are the most flawed versions of a given document, and that later versions come into existence in order to rectify those flaws. Of course, in some cases, such as in Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf, for lack of a more contemporary example (and the fact that the validity of religious texts is subject to a greater degree of debate in comparison, but I digress), later versions can add to those flaws and thereby damage the work's reputation in a fashion that would not otherwise occur. Please excuse my mangled train of thought, though it could just be me rambling, as I tend to do on occasion, for the same reasons.

Hi Mujus,
Thanks for the quote about Thomas. I like that as a reminder that it does really come down to faith on a daily basis. The faith that there is a plan and a place for each person isn't particularly a bad thing wherever it may come from. There are probably going to be any number of people to ridicule us or disagree with us and that's fine. It's actually a good thing even if it isn't always pleasant.
It seems so far in our discussion we've had some really good quotes that have the general theme of remembering that the world will not accept us because we're standing at odds with it to some extent. There have also been a lot of us over the years with various degrees of understanding, agreement, and commitment to what the central messages of Christianity are.
For me the central message is "love one another as I have loved you" & "Love thy neighbor as thyself". Now admittedly, you and I can think of about 2.1 billion people that don't do that exactly right and you can put me at the top of that list. It's important because it makes us face our humanity and realize that everyone else is as human as we are. Then it tells us to do that stupid thing, "love our enemies", now we even have to love and look out for those people who are out to get us. It's a lifestyle that, upon examining, I find challenging to put into practice. That's spiritual growth to me. Can I take an ideal and put it to work in my life? On those times that I manage it, it seems to work well. Most of the time, it’s God working through me despite my best efforts to prevent him from doing so.

lol, no worries about "stream of conciousness" writing Mario. :-)

Are you people still bangin' on about God and Jesus; do you have any positive uplifting stories happening in the real world to inspire us?

This makes me think of a colleague. She’s a great teacher and she and I could not be more different in our approach to teaching, nor more alike in our commitment to kids. That alone would make conflict inevitable. The past year we've been in a situation in which we've been increasingly encouraged to "be on the same page" though which amped up the tension quite a bit. Everything I suggest blows up in her face in the classroom and everything she suggests does the same in mine. We've had heated disagreements that amounted to a resistence to losing our individuality as teachers, but it's interspersed with "Hey, some of the best things I do in class I learned form you" or a joking critique of each other’s teaching styles "I'd never do that it's boring". In the disagreements which can be difficult there is a basic understanding that the other person is struggling as much as I am. She mentioned a few times in meetings "Hey, yeah we disagree but we're still smiling". It's the part of Christianity that resonates with me. The call to love others as myself, Could I do it without Christ? I don't know. I either am already or I don't have to, so there seems little reason to change.

I've heard that when God returns to create the kingdom of heaven and kill everyone else only 200,000 people will make the cut. After the sponsors and senior execs have their tickets you loyal devotees will be screwed just like the rest of us, I guess at the time that will be pretty hard to take but we'll be there for you to pick you up when you're down, then you will finally understand who your true friends are.

You didn't like my uplifting story? :-( Posted at your request.

Crazy
As long as she's not religious it's OK, can you reassure me she's not :-)

Why would it matter? Shouldn't the religious be shown consideration as well as those who aren't, or has my behavior toward you convinced you that I'd treat you differently in any way?

Don't be Crazy and please answer the question, is she a God-botherer?

I'm not sure what a God-botherer is. Can you give me a definition?

I had a couple of questions there too. If you'd answer them I'd be obliged.

God-botherer definition - A person who persistently promotes religious beliefs to others, even when unwelcome

Hi Silvanus,

No, the hornet's nest was mine I'm pretty sure. Your post just seemed to be a response to it. No worries. I've heard the basic challenge before and quoted many of the same writings that you mentioned, in reponse to it.
I'm no historian as I'm reminded daily in my efforts to teach social studies, but I'll do my best to look into the idea. It was my understanding as well that there were a large range of theories about a historical Jesus Christ. Are you challenging the idea that he’s historically verifiable, or are you asserting that he’s mythical altogether?

She is definitely not a God-botherer then.

I like your uplifting story :-)

answered your question would you answer mine please? :-)

Thank you.

Crazy, your point (quoted below) is probably the clearest explanation of the Christian life that I've ever seen: "Now admittedly, you and I can think of about 2.1 billion people that don't do that exactly right and you can put me at the top of that list. It's important because it makes us face our humanity and realize that everyone else is as human as we are. Then it tells us to do that stupid thing, "love our enemies", now we even have to love and look out for those people who are out to get us. It's a lifestyle that, upon examining, I find challenging to put into practice. That's spiritual growth to me." Plus two for this post!

I find it so hard to resist winding people up who just take themselves way too seriously. Humility and self-deprecation and the ability to laugh at ourselves are beautiful things. Some people are so busy tried to pump out their message they stop listening, and once you stop listening you stop learning. Who wants to engage in conversation with a person if you don't think they are listening.....

Do you think I'm not listening? **admittedly probably won't be soon after this post, going to bed**

No Crazy, I think you're a good guy :-)

I agree on the laughing at yourself part. I once whacked myself so hard with a three-sectioned-staff during a martial arts practice session that my brother took me up to the emergency room. Filling out the paperwork had my brother and I laughing.

Question "What di you get hit with"
answer "a stick"
Question "who hit you"
answer "I did"

Question "You did what?"