tomb of jesus

darknes

Active Member
He didn't rise from the dead right away. First, he went to hell, and three days later he "rose" from the dead. When he rose, he was transfigured, and his apostles didn't recognize him until he showed them his wounds. I don't know how long he was on Earth, might have to look into that.
 

saltn00b

Active Member
another question, did he have to fight satan in an eteranal struggle of good and evil for him to release the souls, or he just came down with a key and satan said go ahead and take em ?
 

saltn00b

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darknes
When he rose, he was transfigured, and his apostles didn't recognize him until he showed them his wounds.
oh now come on that is just lame. no offense to anyone. but that is such a large gaping hole.....
 

johnny84

Member
We know from Jesus' statement to the thief that when one dies they enter the presence of God immediately. Luke 23:42 states, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise." This statement also tells us that Jesus went to His Father upon death.
Beyond this we know very little about where Jesus was for three days. One must be careful not to read too much detail into a parable or story. The issue in Jesus recounting the story of Jonah was to relate to His anticipated three days of being dead. Reading Jonah 2:2, some translations say "from the depth of Sheol", another translation says "from the depth of hell", still another says "from the grave." What is clear is that that Jonah assumed he was a dead man inside the fish as he prayed.
Later, in Jonah 2:6 we are told his "life was brought up from the pit." Some interpreters assume that this is a reference to hell. However, a very simple interpretation of the Bible takes this as a reference to death, the imagery is the grave. Sheol is not hell; to the Hebrew mind it is death; a place where the soul waits for resurrection and judgment. The context of Jonah 2:6 is "the earth with its bars was around me forever." He is using imagery to say he felt just the same as if his body was buried in the earth (grave) and he was locked there forever.
There are other passages that are used to suggest that Jesus went to hell during the three days His body was in the tomb. If one wants to believe that He went to hell, then the verses can suggest it. However, if the verses are simply taken one-by-one, they do not support that belief
 

johnny84

Member
Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus went to hell during the three days. Actually, very little is said about what went on. The normal assumption is that Jesus' fleshly body remained in the tomb, just as ours will remain in the grave. He went to the presence of the Father, and three days later the Spirit resurrected His body (in the same way that our bodies will be resurrected—the first-born from the dead in Col. 1:18). The difference is that God did not allow Jesus' body to decay
 

socal57che

Active Member
The only way to properly debate the Bible is to first read it for yourself, or at least have one close by for reference. I've read so many half-truths and fallacies about scripture in this single thread than I care to respond to.
If anybody here would like a copy of the Holy Bible (both old and new testaments) I will ship you a copy free of charge
. E-mail me at socal57chevy at yahoo.com
There is a searchable online bible available in many languages and versions (translations from Hebrew and Greek NOT different teachings) at http://www.biblegateway.com/
 

johnny84

Member

Originally Posted by socal57che
The only way to properly debate the Bible is to first read it for yourself, or at least have one close by for reference. I've read so many half-truths and fallacies about scripture in this single thread than I care to respond to.
If anybody here would like a copy of the Holy Bible (both old and new testaments) I will ship you a copy free of charge
. E-mail me at socal57chevy at yahoo.com
There is a searchable online bible available in many languages and versions (translations from Hebrew and Greek NOT different teachings) at http://www.biblegateway.com/

I for one would like to to hear what these "half truths" and fallacies are. If your gonna accuse people of stating non truths then please by all means correct us.
 

watson3

Active Member
Originally Posted by saltn00b
oh now come on that is just lame. no offense to anyone. but that is such a large gaping hole.....
Very uncalled for, I think we can all agree on that...
 

socal57che

Active Member
Originally Posted by renogaw
didnt you guys watch or read the davinci code? this is all explained there :p
I'm sure this wasn't meant seriously as my copy of the book clearly states on the copyright page "This book is a work of fiction. Names, Characters, businesses, organizations, places, events, and incidents either are the product of the author's imagination or are used fictitously. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, events, or locales is entirely coincidental".
Dan Brown knew his book was a load of crap.
 

johnny84

Member
Originally Posted by socal57che
I'm sure this wasn't meant seriously as my copy of the book clearly states on the copyright page "This book is a work of fiction. Names, Characters, businesses, organizations, places, events, and incidents either are the product of the author's imagination or are used fictitously. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, events, or locales is entirely coincidental".
Dan Brown knew his book was a load of crap.

So I take it you believe the Holy Grail is a cup ?
 

moneyman

Member
Originally Posted by socal57che
I'm sure this wasn't meant seriously as my copy of the book clearly states on the copyright page "This book is a work of fiction. Names, Characters, businesses, organizations, places, events, and incidents either are the product of the author's imagination or are used fictitously. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, events, or locales is entirely coincidental".
phewww... now imagine what happens if the publisher fail to put that tidbit in there ... Christians Gone Wild ;)
 

saltn00b

Active Member
Originally Posted by watson3
Very uncalled for, I think we can all agree on that...
what is uncalled for? i am not calling your religion lame, i am pointing out that is such an open gap for endless possibilities of what happened in that sentance alone. he was "transfigured" and they couldnt recognize him? i wonder why no one else has ever brought this up? just what does that mean , exactly, "Transfigured". basically, an imposter could have rolled through the mud, had a buddy drive nails through his wrists and ankles and voila, there you have "transifgured" jesus who must be jesus because he has his same wounds. he obviously didnt stick around long enough to be found out, so he the imposter hides his wounds, cleans him self up, and all of a sudden there is no body to be found, so he MUST have transcended.
 

socal57che

Active Member
Originally Posted by Johnny84
But so was the new testiment and actaully they were written hundreds of years after the death of Jesus
How about this one. False. Most of the New Testament was written within 150 Years of the death of Jesus including the synoptic gospels which date as early as AD 60 to 90. This is corroberated by mountains of manuscripts and papyrus. See The Canon of the New Testament by Bruce Metzgar, PH.D.
 

johnny84

Member
Originally Posted by socal57che
How about this one. False. Most of the New Testament was written within 150 Years of the death of Jesus including the synoptic gospels which date as early as AD 60 to 90. This is corroberated by mountains of manuscripts and papyrus. See The Canon of the New Testament by Bruce Metzgar, PH.D.
The writings in the new testament were in fact written 100's of years after jesus's death. This is fact. However you are correct in saying their are writtings that date much earlier but these writings are not in the new testament. My point was that the new testament is not telling the entire story about jesus, there is much more missing from it.
Mark is the earliest Gospel and that was written over 100 years after jesus's death. Matthew and Luke copied what Mark wrote. John is the latest and he didnt really copy what Mark and the others wrote, there is actually more condridictory information in John's writings then the others.
So actually socal57che your telling a half truth yourself.
 

saltn00b

Active Member
Originally Posted by socal57che
How about this one. False. Most of the New Testament was written within 150 Years of the death of Jesus including the synoptic gospels which date as early as AD 60 to 90. This is corroberated by mountains of manuscripts and papyrus. See The Canon of the New Testament by Bruce Metzgar, PH.D.
thats contrary to recent things i have also heard and read. these findings explained that the new testament was pieced together close to 300 years after Jesus' time. the stories being told by word of mouth, and translated up to 8 times before ever being written down.
have you ever played the game of 'telephone' as a kid?
 

socal57che

Active Member
Originally Posted by Johnny84
So I take it you believe the Holy Grail is a cup ?
Do I believe there was a cup used by Christ. Yes. Do I believe this cup has any special power? No. The Everlasting life given by drinking from the cup is explained by Jesus in Matt. 26:27. Faith in Him saves, not a cup. Many of the books left from the New Testament were not canonized because their authorship was way beyond the guidelines required to be construed as accurate. I obviously hit a nerve and I apologize for upsetting you.
 

moneyman

Member
Originally Posted by saltn00b
thats contrary to recent things i have also heard and read. these findings explained that the new testament was pieced together close to 300 years after Jesus' time. the stories being told by word of mouth, and translated up to 8 times before ever being written down.
have you ever played the game of 'telephone' as a kid?
Mr. Webster didn't invent the dictionary back then. The original writings was probably Greek. Then, translated into Hebrew. Then Old English. Then New English, Then American English. Then, after 2000 years of telephone conversations, anything can be anything - anyone can be anyone.
 

johnny84

Member
Originally Posted by socal57che
Do I believe there was a cup used by Christ. Yes. Do I believe this cup has any special power? No. The Everlasting life given by drinking from the cup is explained by Jesus in Matt. 26:27. Faith in Him saves, not a cup. Many of the books left from the New Testament were not canonized because their authorship was way beyond the guidelines required to be construed as accurate. I obviously hit a nerve and I apologize for upsetting you.
I am not upset at all. I like having this debate. You said "Many of the books left from the New Testament were not canonized because their authorship was way beyond the guidelines required to be construed as accurate."
These guidelines you talk about...they were decided on by a group of monks, they put these "books" in the new testament to serve "their" needs and "their" needs only. There is so much more that was written that they left out on purpose to support their version of Christianity. What do you mean that they were not canonized because of their authorship?
 

saltn00b

Active Member
the people of Jerusalem spoke aramaic and hebrew, as well as the other cultures of the time that were congregated there.
 
Top