Hello Sup Forums, BRo here. Last night...

Hello Sup Forums, BRo here. Last night, in my hermeneutics lecture we were discussing the contributions of theological schools of interpretaion to hermeneutics. Someone started questioning the historical validity of the apostle's books about the resurrection of christ and the gospels and such. One argument that struck my mind was the following: "The apostles were persecuted for spreading the word of christ, they didn't do it for fame, money or personal gains. They were either mad or the resurrection is a true story that needed to be announced to the world". How would you argue agaisnt such claim?

Fuck off, monkey.

As a Christian I've always found this to be a weak argument. Christ was a convincing person, so it's easy to see how others would follow him to their death. Lots of people die for their religion, but only one can be correct.

Good insight, thanks bro.

The Jew Jesus never existed.

>unironically following/worshipping a Jew because of scare tactics... In 2017.

>le monkeyfighting_simpsons.jpg

That's a dumb argument. So any time someone does something against popular opinion without any financial gain we should believe them?
The real argument is, even if the gospels are not true, even if jesus never existed, it's still excellent literature and contains powerful moral insights and a cultural foundation for Europe.
Maybe if immigrants read the bible and understood it they wouldn't have so much trouble assimilating.

I wouldn't and it's sorta straying from hermeneutics too. The bible seems to only makes sense if it means exactly what it says to mean.

Jesus rose up against the Jews and tossed the bankers out of the temple, leading the Jews to plot against him.
Clearly you're not taking notes.

The argument is that the apostles couldnt have stolen his body and fabricated the whole thing (as the jews said)

It argues a single point, not the whole thing

Agreed. I think that argument goes outside the text a little bit. That doesn't make it wrong, it just isn't really hermeneutics.

Hello JIDF

I see. In this context it makes more sense. I think then it's much more effective. But I don't think it's a knockout. The apostles were persecuted, but I can see someone making the argument that they enjoyed the status that comes having followers since before most of them were nobodies. Regardless this context makes the argument better for sure.

Are you kidding me? There's dozens of interpretations, and christianity was so powerful that the elites were forced to co-opt it rather than fight against it.
Read the book of john and tell me there's only one interpretation
>Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

Only if their theories are directly opposed. For example, Christianity and Confucianism have a lot in common philosophically even though the beliefs aren't very similar

They did so in the name of the resurrection and everything that Christ claimed himself to be. Consider Peter, who denied he knew Jesus three times before the crucifixion and yet died for Him in Rome when executed by Nero. He literally did not benefit from preaching the doctrine in a worldly sense, so this complete 180 flip demonstrates, at least to me, that Jesus was who he claimed he was and that His miracles, including the resurrection, happened.

I guess that's true. I should have said people have died for ideologically opposed religions so death does not imply truth.

And the people who blow themselves up for non Christian religion? They don't benefit either. But they believe they will. Belief does not imply truth though. I think, as mentioned above, this argument makes sense to combat the idea that the apostles stole Jesus' body.

*[[2Pe 1:20]] KJV* Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

*[[Act 20:27]] KJV* For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God.

The bible is its own interpreter.

...

Is this reasoning useful for verifying the truth of Gilgamesh, as well? What about Scientology?

You make some good points, however, uour comparison is flawed for a few reasons.

The major reason is that these people didn't know Jesus personally like Peter did. Remember that Peter DENIED Christ three times, then years later after Christ is gone, he dies in the belief of the resurrection and Christ. Something he was clearly unprepared to do beforehand, what was the difference between the first time and the second time? Also, remember that Paul was present when Jesus showed himself after his death and resurrection whereas the ideologues and other martyrs are inspired by the promises of their ideology or traditions of their religion, long before defined on top of their life circumstances which have convinced them to follow their path. Martyrdom isn't something that every believer will do, it takes an extra special kind of person for such a thing, wether it be for man, God or ideology

To me, this suggests more than belief was involved with the death of the apostles. they witnessed the Glory themselves and giving their lives for something that they would've known to be false, as they travelled and learned with Jesus, would be incredibly stupid as they would know first-hand if it was or not.

What you describe is an aspect of human nature, it doesn't disprove anything except that people will die for what they believe in, regardless or not if it's actually Truth.

The differences between Peter and your standard zealot or ideologue is numerous.

Gilgamesh is a Nephilim reflection of the story of Noah from the pantheistic religions of Mesopotamia, it is fundamentally different from the biblical flood story with the exception of the details of the flood narrative.

Do you think the fact that we can see that Peter clearly regrets his decision before the resurrection takes away from your argument? You're certainly putting forward a strong argument, so I'm curious on your thoughts there.

I understand they all were martyred except John. The counter argument however is, would you rather live your life long as a middle class fisherman with no hopes of anything more, or take a chance on dying while having the adventure of a lifetime?

No

>im bored, gonna get stoned to death in some shithole
I dont understand how all of them would reach the same conclusion

I'd rather be a fisherman and spend my lunch money on prostitutes

Good story about St. Peter. I've heard t before. It's extra-Biblical so not true necessarily, but it's cool to think it's true.

I am a Christian, and I believe that the apostles were martyred, but I just don't find this particular argument very compelling.

They became famous too. Hundreds waited on the words of Paul and Peter.

Yes, the Resurrection was very convincing!

>apostle's books
What books? There is not a single book written about Jesus before Paul's letters. Gospel authors weren't apostles nor did they claimed to be.

I agree the resurrection was convincing. However Christ was convincing before the resurrection as well! The apostles left their families and lives behind to follow Jesus around. The question we have to ask is it we have definite proof that the resurrection was the only thing that would have been enough to convince the apostles to give up their lives.

Well, if you believe the bible narrative then yes, definitely everything needed to happen just as bible tells us. There isn't that much wiggle room.
If you don't then the real fun starts.

we should believe that they really believe it

I totally agree! Everything needed to happen the way it did. The problem is, this argument is used to try to convince non-Christians that the resurrection happened because there's no way the apostles would've died otherwise. However, non-Christians, I believe, could see that the apostles dropped their lives already, so why wouldn't they do it again?

>0+2017
>Still believing in jewish religion

Pretty sure the resurrection was a way to pass on the teaching/tradition (found in many of the Mystery religions, of which early Christianity was one) of the death/rebirth of the adept. A modern example of this can be found with Skull & Bones at Yale.