Rowan, as I posted in a previous article by ‘Sells’,

“The resurrection, as described in the bible, relates to numerous earlier writings and oral traditions, which number in their hundreds if you wish to do a little research.

More importantly, the resurrection is an allegory, specifically relating to specific terrestrial and cosmic observations.

The act in question relates directly to the Solstice. Here is a pertinent snippet re the solstice from Wikipedia for the uninitiated, “The word solstice is derived from the Latin sol ("sun") and sistere ("to stand still"), because at the solstices, the Sun's declination appears to "stand still"; that is, the seasonal movement of the Sun's daily path (as seen from Earth) stops at a northern or southern limit before reversing direction”.

The reappearance of the skyward march occurs on the third day, i.e. the resurrection of the sun’s journey in reverse again.

I firmly believe this.

Additionally, I believe any reference to ‘God’ or ‘Gods’ relates to either the sun, planets and other cosmic bodies. I believe the bible is a mythical book, but with many facts written in which if interpreted properly show how ancient peoples, of various origins, interpreted the world in which they lived in.

Perhaps, maybe, the contents of this site will bring some much needed Light to this topic. http://www.beezone.com/esoteric_christianity.htm

Keeping in mind the fact that the modern West does not have a living Esoteric Spiritual Tradition. Such has of course always been the case with the Protestant tradition, which is the "religion" of the spirit-killing left-brained word, the situation of which is described here:
http://www.adidam.org/teaching/gnosticon/universal-scientism

If you read the usual christian blather re the nature of what we are as human beings and of the World-Process altogether you will never ever get any sense that all of this is an open ended psycho-physical
Process.

Thanks Rowan. Peter Sellicks just repeats past heresies somehow thinking his denial of the resurrection will win friends among what Trump calls the swamp. Indeed the whole of the old and new testament points to the death, burial and resurrection. Just like the Jewish leaders of the day rejected what Christ said about Himself so does Peter. I suspect the many current day and past martyr's of the faith must treat the teachings of denialist with disdain. There is One Man who will judge us all and He certainly ain't dead. Hopefully many will humble themselves and receive mercy before that day.

Rowan,

Thank you for this magnificent expose of Peter Sellick's postmodern interpretation of Jesus' resurrection.

You have directed us to the glaring holes in his argument such as, "This does not mean they are untrue and hence the stuff of fairy tales. Rather, they are essential stories that outline the character of God."

You have shown how Sellick's fictitious stories of the burial and resurrection face a Titanic iceberg theologically when compared with the biblical documents.

<<Yet Mr.Sellick insists "we must rid ourselves of the notion that truth only resides in fact". So where else does truth reside, apart from fact? In fable? In fairytale? In fabrication? In fraudulent falsehood? Furthermore, he says we must also rid ourselves of "the pernicious conclusion that unless the resurrection can be taken as an historical event of the flesh, then the Church must fall.">>

You have nailed it and I appreciate your careful eye on the consequences of Sellick's beliefs.

<<if Mr.Sellick is right, the supposedly infallible Word of God, the Bible, is riddled with fabrications, falsehoods, and figments of some lively imaginations. It is full of descriptions of "events" that never historically happened. It is full of fictitious fairy tales>>

I commend your splendid uncovering of the fictitious hoaxes promoted by Mr Sellick.

Galen,

<<More importantly, the resurrection is an allegory, specifically relating to specific terrestrial and cosmic observations.>>

Your post was riddled with your beliefs and suppositions and not with the facts of truth. I read your statements:

+ <<The resurrection, as described in the bible, relates to....>>

+ <<the resurrection is....>>

+ <<the resurrection is....>>

+ <<I firmly believe this.>>

+ <<Additionally, I believe....>>

These come out of your opinions, based on your presuppositions.

It's time for you to check out the objective historical facts in the Bible, relating to the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

OzPen, it’s time you fact checked your beliefs in JC more than me.

My opinion stacks up more than yours as mine is based on hundreds of sources and observations from history including Egypt, Babylon and other ancient civilisations and their written histories.

Your belief is based on nothing but faith, hardly evidence of anything.

Nice try, try again.

Galen,

<<Your belief is based on nothing but faith, hardly evidence of anything.>>

That's a straw man. You promote falsehood about my Christianity.

No matter how much I provide you with historical, verifiable evidence for Jesus and his resurrection, you continue to dump your presuppositions on me.

Bye, bye!

OzSpen, running away is cowardly.

The bible is nothing but a miss-mash of earlier historical works. It has no truth other than the reality it was written long after the alleged events and contains evidence of multiple sources of information demonstrating the birth of our solar system and other misrepresented scientific facts. The bible is in part based on allegorical facts relating to solar and cosmic observations, Christianity has just overlaid their mythological story and piggybacked it within the texts.

Your faith is yours, you are just so closed minded you can’t see the wood for the trees.

Here is another one for you OzSpen. The bible alleges ‘in the beginning god created the heavens and the earth’. This is just an allegory for the, as we now know it, Big Bang. The god bit is just a creation, made up by people who, like us wondered about the age old question of where we come from but did not know how to explain it scientifically.

Simple evidence your blind faith refuses to acknowledge. Back to those weird 6000 year old dinosaur bones eh!

the big bang 'scientific'. You don't have a single clue Galen.

runner,

From what Rowan wrote about the Resurrection of Jesus and whether it is history, legend, or something else, what is your understanding of the historical basis for Jesus' rising from the dead.

Since nobody witnessed the actual rising but we have documented post-resurrection appearances by Jesus in reliable NT documents, what's your view on whether this is all a legend or an allegory or whatever?

Runner you are nothing but rude, ignorant and quite obviously very poorly educated judging by your silly and bigoted posts on OLO. I hope you don’t have offspring, they would be brainwashed and as ill informed as you I would imagine.
Silly little man.

OzSpen

Personally I have no doubt Jesus Christ rose from the dead. Having seen the way the media report today I have little faith in many historians. Some are even denying the holocaust.

The resurrection of Jesus in bodily form occurred as far as I am concerned because I believe the Scriptures. Jesus foretold many times that He was going away for a short time and then returning. The cowardly disciples who deserted Him when He was being taken away to be crucified became different men after seeing the resurrected Christ. They were filled with the Holy Spirit and boldness and were willing to be martyed, beaten and ridiculed for their faith.

There is tons of evidence of biblical events and locations. Every word Jesus spoke was truth and if He wasn't the resurrected Son of God He would be a liar. Obviously you and I believe otherwise and that He was Truth personified.

The bible to me a very reliable source of history. Alternative theories to Creation, design, moral law etc are non scientific and ridiculous. The number of frauds, lies and rewrites of evolution is only matched by our current day gw fraudsters. The science is not settled and supports the bible far more than these wild fantasies created by consensus pseudo science.

The depravity of man is very clear for all to see. I include myself in this. Thanks for reminding me Galen. Christ was the Only Sinless Man who was never corrupted. His deniers are happy to slaughter unborn babies, promote sexual perversion and virtue signal their own moral virtues through hashtags. Yep things are just as Christ said they would be. He is everyone's Judge or Saviour. His Resurrection proved that He was who the prophets said He was, who He said He was and who His mockers said He wasn't. Nothing surer that He is coming back again.

Ok Runner lets get serious:

“The resurrection of Jesus in bodily form occurred as far as I am concerned because I believe the Scriptures.”

Well that’s clearly not evidence of anything- Fail

“Jesus foretold many times that He was going away for a short time and then returning. The cowardly disciples who deserted Him when He was being taken away to be crucified became different men after seeing the resurrected Christ. They were filled with the Holy Spirit and boldness and were willing to be martyed, beaten and ridiculed for their faith.”

Again no clear evidence - Fail

“There is tons of evidence of biblical events and locations. Every word Jesus spoke was truth and if He wasn't the resurrected Son of God He would be a liar.”

Again no evidence - Fail

“The bible to me a very reliable source of history.”

Another Fail

“Alternative theories to Creation, design, moral law etc are non scientific and ridiculous.”

Says who, another Fail

“The science is not settled and supports the bible far more than these wild fantasies created by consensus pseudo science.”

You just get more ridiculous the more you state, another Fail.

If you are going to make claims to justify your argument, back it up with facts and references not your ‘beliefs’ and assumptions.

Pathetic

Galen to receive a pass mark from you would be a total fail. Glad to be pathetic in your sight. You have absolutely no answers.

Runner, that was a strong and well argued response.

You have confirmed to all your ineptitude and incompetence. Not one shred of evidence to back up your ridiculous claims. If you can’t substantiate your claims with evidence then you have no right in making them in the first place.

Faith is not evidence, you will unfortunately not grasp this, even when you die and fail to arrive in that other ridiculous Christian faith belief, eternal life in heaven, much is the shame. What a wasted life.

To Galen.

Just a heads up, but none of your responses have any evidance in them either. From accusations towards OzSpen and Runner, to your statement on the Big Bang, there has been no evidance given to support your own words. Worse most of your replies have been accusational with no support. I give you this criticism because your failing grade to Runner could just as easily be applied to yourself. Keep that in mind so that you aren't swallowed up in hypocritical thinking.

Moving on to your original response, because I assume this holds your strongest points that you can support and are not about anyone else.

You say that the resurrection relates to earlier writings and oral traditions. Even to say that there are hundreds of them. Do you have any examples, because that's quite the claim. I have heard similar claims about Jesus being a myth made up from other myths, but when asked for examples or details, they all fall short and either have none, or the examples don't compare to Jesus, or the examples aren't real but are misconceptions and lies about previous myths made to fit the gospel narrative almost. When looking up those examples it shows that they were not like Jesus at all. So with this in mind do you have any examples of Myths that relate to the resurrection. (The March of the sun and the solstice don't fit the narrative of the resurrection at all).

(Continued)

(Continued)

Your next point assumes resurrection is an allegory for the movement of the sun and the solstice. That the three days is about the sun standing still before moving the opposite direction. There's nothing in the bible nor in Christian tradition to support this view. Instead Jesus explained the number of days as a sign for Israel. To be just like Jonah in the belly of a great fish for three days, so also will Jesus be in the belly of the earth for three days. It was nothing to do with religions that follow and worship the sun, but was meant as a testament for the Israeli people so that they knew Jesus's words were true.

I can back these up with the bible verses if you want.

Regarding your last points. You believe that any reference to God or gods is a reference to the sun, planets, or stars. Consider this. Both modern day and recorded in the bible God answered the prayers of the people. But neither modern day nor the Jewish culture believe that the sun, the planets or the stars answered their prayers.

You also say that you believe the bible is mythical with some facts in it. That might be the most interesting point because not long ago, no one who disbelieved in Jesus thought that the bible held any facts in it. That you or anyone else will say otherwise is interesting because it shows the support dug up in archeological discoveries to support the bible. That a nonbeliever in the bible will say there are facts in it, I'll call that progress. Look deeper into that and away rewriting the bible to be about the sun. The bible is more reliable then you give it credit. Talk to OzSpen about this. It is an area that he has researched and can point you in a direction to research on your own to confirm or deny the reliability of the bible. There are other books I've been told are good for that research like the book "Cold-Case Christianity" by J. Warner Wallace.

runner,

<<The resurrection of Jesus in bodily form occurred as far as I am concerned because I believe the Scriptures. Jesus foretold many times that He was going away for a short time and then returning.>>

I agree, but OLO is a non-Christian forum where antagonists want 'evidence'. I invite you to think outside of the box. How do we as Christians conclude in support of the bodily resurrection? From this reliable NT, what arguments would you provide to demonstrate that Jesus actually rose from the dead - was resuscitated.

<<There is (sic) tons of evidence of biblical events and locations.>>

In your post you provided no examples of these events and locations. Do you rely on archaeological evidence or from other historical sources?

<<The depravity of man is very clear for all to see. I include myself in this. Thanks for reminding me Galen.>>

I agree, but again you needed to supply examples to demonstrate your point. I hope by 'man' you meant mankind = men and women. Would you call the looting of property in the Townsville floods to be an example of the sinful depravity of human beings? How about the terrorists and their bombing around the world? What about the cheats at the Banking Royal Commission? Does it apply to the lies told by just about anyone, including adulterers who lie, deceive and con spouses?

Galen,

One of the rules of On Line Opinion is:

"Do not flame."

"Failure to abide by these rules may result in post deletion and/or account suspension. When a post is deleted a note explaining its deletion will be left in its place by the moderator. If you are suspended a note will also generally be left.

We normally delete the totality of any comment that breaches any of these rules. When only part of a post infringes the rules you may repost the parts that don’t infringe". See: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/rules.asp

So, what did you write to runner?

<<You have confirmed to all your ineptitude and incompetence>>

You have flamed him! When will you quit flaming him, me and others on OLO?

OzSpen, who is this ‘we’ you speak of?

As to flaming someone, well occasionally people deserve it.

Not-now-soon, the evidence of the mythical resurrection occurs twice a year, you can witness itself yourself if you wish, this is the hidden message in the bible, a book full of similar observations, taken from hundreds of prior ancient documents, try reading the Epic of Gilgamesh as an example. If you look at old Roman texts, Sumerian, Assyrian and other works which tell the same stories as those stolen and written into the bible. It’s a pity the best bible writers did not understand the works they were plagiarising.

Galen,

<<As to flaming someone, well occasionally people deserve it.>>

Not on this forum where flaming is banned. Why won't you obey the rules to be able to continue posting?

Galen,

<<OzSpen, who is this ‘we’ you speak of?>>

The 'we' is from the OLO rules. I presume it refers to the editor, moderators and/or owner of OLO. It would do you good to read the rules for engagement on this forum: See: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/rules.asp

<<As to flaming someone, well occasionally people deserve it.>>

On this forum, nobody deserves flaming posts against them. The rules say so!

Ozspen

'I agree, but OLO is a non-Christian forum where antagonists want 'evidence'.'

Few do want evidence Ozspen. You have supplied tons. Creation screams at every god denier everytime they open their eyes. Any honest scientist knows the big bang is at best fantasy based on pseudo science. Every person has faith. My faith is in our Creator. The atheist faith is based on totally unprovable pseudo science. If they can't see the obvious no amount of research will convince a seared conscience and perverse heart.

'I agree, but again you needed to supply examples to demonstrate your point.'

come on Ozspen. You must be kidding.

runner,

This is what you wrote: <<<The depravity of man is very clear for all to see. I include myself in this. Thanks for reminding me Galen.>>

My response was: <<I agree, but again you needed to supply examples to demonstrate your point.>>

Now you state: <<come on Ozspen. You must be kidding.>>

I am dead set serious! There are people I know who do lots of good deeds for others and appear to be 'good' people and would never see themselves as being depraved. Neither would they give that label to Mother Teresa of Calcutta, Corrie ten Boom of Haarlem, the Netherlands; those who volunteer for charitable organisations, everyday people who cause no harm to others and follow the rules at work, etc.

We can see depraved actions in those who murder and commit crime and violence, but human depravity needs examples for the everyday folks to know that depraved/evil thoughts that break God's laws are just as depraved as evil actions of the terrorists on 11 Sept 2001 at the twin towers.

Jeremiah 17:9-10 nails it for people like you and me but we need to explain it to all:

“The human heart is the most deceitful of all things,
and desperately wicked.
Who really knows how bad it is?
But I, the Lord, search all hearts
and examine secret motives.
I give all people their due rewards,
according to what their actions deserve.”

That judgment by God applies to all people, including Mother Teresa, Corrie ten Boom and those who volunteer wherever.

However, that's not how ordinary Aussies see it and it is my view we need to show them with examples.

If you don't believe me, take a read of this: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/queensland/nathan-wiseman-couldn-t-see-the-bad-in-anyone-and-it-cost-him-his-life-20190208-p50wn8.html

Ozspen

We are on the same page however the sins of omission and commission are numerous. Every person including mother Theresa have broken the 10 commandments. Ordinary aussies as you put it condone the ripping apart of the unborn, fornication, homosexuality, lying, stealing and the list goes on. All are miles from righteousness without Christ. The greatest sin is the rejection of the Merciful Saviour who died a horrible death so all could be forgiven. John 3:18-19 makes it clear that men reject Christ because they love darkness rather than light not for some made up historical denial. The problem is not intellectual, it is a love of darkness.

runner,

<<Every person including mother Theresa have broken the 10 commandments>>

Are you saying they (including mother Theresa) have broken all of the 10 commandments, including you and me?

There's a theory that mankind deep down is good. That we are born good but later learn the things that make us what we are now. The theory goes on the lines that racism and sexism are learned behaviors, not something children are born with.

However for an example of deprivity of mankind is that in our early years, while we are still innocent, we have to be taught to be good and to not hit, to share toys instead of grabbing and taking away from younger siblings, and to respect others and not talk back.

These are at our most innocent years and yet we still need to be taught to be good. Those that aren't run wild with parents who don't say no to their kids, and either spoil them or just don't punish them if they do something wrong.

This is the heart of human deprivity, and it can get better or it can get worse depending on how we are raised and taught. At our roots we we have to be taught to be good, because we don't know the difference between good or bad.

Hope that helps for an example, . :)

'Are you saying they (including mother Theresa) have broken all of the 10 commandments, including you and me?'

Ozspen

break one you have broken the lot. Sure you know that. And of course that includes you and me.

Not so Soon

well written

runner,

<<break one you have broken the lot. Sure you know that. And of course that includes you and me.>>

James 2:10 (ESV) states: 'For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it'.

Please do the exegesis of the grammar of this text and share what it means.

'James 2:10 (ESV) states: 'For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it'.

Please do the exegesis of the grammar of this text and share what it means.'
I will leave that to you Ozspen. Your grammar is much better than mine.

runner,

You stated: <<break one [of God's commandments] you have broken the lot. Sure you know that. And of course that includes you and me.>>

How is it possible to break one of God's commandments and that means breaking them all. Doesn't that sound like strange logic?

I asked you to do the exegesis of the grammar of James 2:10 and tell us what it means.

Now you pass the buck: <<I will leave that to you Ozspen. Your grammar is much better than mine.>>

I urge you not to promote a view that you are not prepared to defend.

Ozspen

'For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.' MKJV

now you go and do he exegesis of the grammar or at least reveal the little game you are trying to play

To Galen.

The your interpation that the reserection is a myth, is not evidance that it is a myth. Nor is the sun moving throughout the seasons and then changing direction is not evidence of anything either.

As for Galgamash, I've found a copy of the tale online and am in the process of reading it, however so far it does not resemble anything like Jesus. Do you want to make your point more clear and say how they are simular or why you think the reserection is plagiarizing from this story? (Or if you want to point to another story, can you include why you think the bible and the life of Jesus are plagiarized off of those stories.

I agree with Peter Sellick that truth need not correspond with the facts of the material world, for truth could only be unchanging and everlasting while this material world is fleeting!

How did this misconception as if truth must correspond with facts, come about?

My hypotheses: when people who have complete faith in the material world, state things that are not factually/historically so, this has to be a dishonest, selfish manipulation for some gain. The need to serve their small-self/ego indicates that they consider themselves small and needy, separate from the totality of God - and that is a falsehood in denial of the truth of their eternal divine nature.

Nevertheless, getting back to the article, what has the finding (later to be found a hoax) of the bones of Jesus' body in a cave to do with his resurrection? Surely if Jesus came back from the dead, then he could obtain a body from anywhere he liked, including even from sunlight or thin space - why would his new body necessarily contain every calcium atom from the old bones he once had?