Thank you for your comment about 5 year olds. Very scholarly of you.
There are at least 300 verses of Scripture that speak of the Resurrection of
Jesus.
If one takes a look at a minimal facts argument, he will find the following,
to be few:
· Many scholars as well as non-Christian sources at the time believe
that Jesus was crucified. No one survived that death.
· After Jesus death, his disciples had experiences they believed
were the appearances of the resurrected Jesus.
· Saul had an appearance he believed was the resurrected Jesus
· James was s skeptic until he met the resurrected Jesus
· The disciples despaired after the death of Jesus.
· There were many historical proclamations of the resurrection
· The resurrection was the central message of the early church and
remains the central message up until this day
· The disciples were so solid in believing it that they were all
willing to die untimely deaths for the sake of it
· 500 witness saw the resurrection of Jesus
Dan Boone
From: Roger Loran Bailey [mailto:rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx] ;
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2018 8:05 PM
To: Dan Boone; blind-democracy
Subject: Re: [blind-democracy] Re: Original Sin
When one examines the scriptures the same way one examines any other
historical document one uses some discernment to separate the credible from
the superstitious pronouncements of primitive uneducated people. For
example, the bible holds that during the time of Jesus the geographical area
in which he lived was under Roman occupation. That is backed up by a lot of
other historical documents and archaeological evidence. It is highly
credible and I am convinced that it is true. The bible also holds that Jesus
traveled around preaching. There is not much in the way of back up for that
contention, but it could have really happened. That makes it credible, not
as credible that the region was under Roman occupation, but credible. Then
the bible contends that Jesus physically came back to life after he died and
ascended to some place in the sky called heaven. That is a pretty outrageous
claim and something that incredible requires some really profound evidence.
There is no evidence. It is hard for me to believe that anyone over the age
of five can be so gullible as to actually believe such unsubstantiated
absurdities. Anyone who claims to have the least respect for objective
historical research should be embarrassed to admit to being so gullible as
to believe in things like that.
On 5/26/2018 8:30 PM, Dan Boone wrote:
I will not take the time here to discuss everything that has been proven by
countless others who have given their lives to study. Please allow me to say
that when one examines the scriptures the same as any other historical
�
�
�
From: Roger Loran Bailey [mailto:rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx] ;
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2018 6:53 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Dan Boone; 'Bob'; 'Scotty'; 'Scott';
'Sam'; 'Russell'; 'Rick Harmon'; 'Rev Mark'; 'Pia'; 'Peter the hater'; 'Paul
California'; 'Pastor Al'; 'Ohio 3'; 'Ohio 2'; 'Ohio'; 'North Carolinian';
'Natallie'; 'Nancy'; 'Mssionary work outreach'; 'Monica'; 'Missionary work
associate'; 'Miller, Clay'; 'Mike Johnson'; 'Matthew'; 'Kids Pastor';
kchurchlady@xxxxxxxxxxx; 'Kane'; 'Joe'; 'Jews'; 'Jessica'; 'Jenn Hanna';
'Jenifer'; 'Jason of Fruit Cove'; 'Jason Meyerson'; 'James F. Holwell';
'Jakob Jackson'; 'Heather of Minnesota'; 'Heather Kentucky'; 'Heather
Judson'; 'Hannah'; 'Erin Mehl'; 'Erin Conway'; 'Dr. Bill Coates'; 'Donald
Moore'; 'Deborah Kerwood'; 'David the Pastor'; 'David'; 'Church staff
member'; 'Charlie Isbell'; 'Chandler'; 'Carrey Cannon'; 'Cara'; 'Canadian';
'British Council'; 'Brian Hartgen'; 'Brett Mehl'; 'Brad'; 'American'; 'Allen
Dicey'; 'Alabama'; 'A. Fadden'
Subject: Re: [blind-democracy] Re: Original Sin
�
According to the scriptures? Okay, according to the Harry Potter books
wizards ride around on broomsticks. What does any of this have to do with it
being true?
�
On 5/26/2018 3:53 PM, Dan Boone wrote:
Bob,
�
You write much more eloquently than I do. However, Jesus used simple words
to communicate significant meanings, so will I. I have not read most of your
posts, but somehow thought I would interject some quick points concerning
this one:
�
1.) 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 has been historically proven to have been written
15-20 years after the resurrection. This has been confirmed by many notable
skeptics to be the oldest actual piece of New Testament scripture that has
been found. It was also an early Church Creed:
�
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ
died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he
was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he
appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more
than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still
living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to
all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one
abnormally born. NIV
�
We should stop and think about all of the ramifications that would have
happened if the above Scripture was not true considering the time it was
written and all of the people involved in the statement.
�
2.) Once a person realizes the perfection of a Holy God, and just how
significant that understanding is to the opportunity of eternal life, then
the same person will realize why sin had to be extinguished by the
propitiation of the One who was both Holy and capable of sinning (the
God-Man, Jesus)!!
�
Dan Boone
�
�
This message has been sent as a part of discussion between Church of the
Harvest of America, Inc., or one of its associated ministries and the
addressee whose name is specified above. Should you receive this message by
mistake, we would be most grateful if you informed us that the message has
been sent to you. In this case, we also ask that you delete this message
from your mailbox, and do not forward it or any part of it to anyone else.
Thank you for your cooperation and understanding.
�
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob [mailto:ebob824@xxxxxxxxx] ;
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2018 1:46 PM
To: Scotty; Scott; Sam; Russell; Rick Harmon; Rev Mark; Pia; Peter the
hater; Paul California; Pastor Al; Ohio 3; Ohio 2; Ohio; North Carolinian;
Natallie; Nancy; Mssionary work outreach; Monica; Missionary work associate;
Miller, Clay; Mike Johnson; Matthew; Kids Pastor; kchurchlady@xxxxxxxxxxx;
Kane; Joe; Jews; Jessica; Jenn Hanna; Jenifer; Jason of Fruit Cove; Jason
Meyerson; James F. Holwell; Jakob Jackson; Heather of Minnesota; Heather
Kentucky; Heather Judson; Hannah; Erin Mehl; Erin Conway; Dr. Bill Coates;
Donald Moore; Deborah Kerwood; David the Pastor; David; Dan Boone; Church
staff member; Charlie Isbell; Chandler; Carrey Cannon; Cara; Canadian;
British Council; Brian Hartgen; Brett Mehl; Brad;
blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; American; Allen Dicey; Alabama; A. Fadden
Subject: Original Sin
�
��� Dear all, peace be with you. Today, we inshAllah are going to
critically
readdress the concept of Redemption and Original Sin in Christianity.
Original Sin is basically the backbone, it is the bedrock on which the
doctrines of Redemption and Crucifixion are based. Original sin is the
doctrine that Adam and Eve had offended the divine presence. It is a sin
said to be inherited by all descendants of Adam and Eve as They sinfully ate
from the forbidden tree. That led them to be taken out of� Eden and
thence,
had earned their descendance eternal damnation. As Christian Apologists say,
someone had to pay the bill of this mass blasphemy and thus, God sent his
only begotten son to sacrifice himself for the sake of humanity. Whilst this
concept is� apparently�� consistent and chronological,� it is not
accepted
as it fallaciously seams to be. To this distorted concept, there are
theological and juristic objections. Theologically, this concept is refuted
with the repudiation of condescending the divine to the temporal pursuance.
Those who insist to disgraciously desecrate the divine by falsely
proclaiming that he had to die on the cross for their sins, or that he had
to send his merely begotten son to die for� mass resentment, they
desecrate
the divine Omnipotence with imperfection. It essentially depends on whether
you belong to those who consider Jesus as God without internal distinctions,
a Unitarian, or you�re an adherent of Trinitarianism. No one is absolutely
sure of who died� on the Cross or, if there was even a Crucifixion in the
first place. The Christian Epiphany� is reprobated with the Transcendent
Omnipotence of Allah glory be to Him to either atone or penalise without any
discretion. Juristically, this concept is morally inadequate, for what it
incorrectly consents of sanctioning the innocent for the sake of the guilty.
On a judicial� level, justice is conducted with decisive evidence and
incisiveness.� Christian Ministers constantly emphasise on the emotional
aspect of their Redemption chronicle, without paying much attention whether
it matches up to the principles of divine justice. I don�t care how
affectionate the story might sound to be. What matters to me is, how just
this concept is? I want Christian missionary activists to ask a competent
jurist of their domestic residence, is it licitly excusable for you to
punish the innocent on behalf of the guilty who justly deserves retribution?
The conversation is temporarily suspended at this point. The problem lies
over beyond a particular tree that has erroneously been eaten. It worsens
when a particular race is intrinsically� depicted as cr�me de la cr�me
for
just its texture or complexion. This is what they modernly define as racism.
The United States ranks as the topping racist nation worldwide. Its racial
history is filled with disparity and ethnic secernment. It bases its
purportedly patriotic sentiment on often racial inequality and topical
divergence. That is what we should rather call, Original Sin. Racial acts
are enormously minacious to social stability and coexistence. There shall
not be any tolerance of exerting discriminative practices, either on gender,
ethnic, social or religious basis. That is our everlasting combat as humans,
resembling the unity, peace and safety of our precious species. Islam
doesn't bear our initial parents accountable for Original Sin. It rather
recognises Lucifer to be the first sinner. His trespassing act has involved
committing pride. Consequently, he has been expelled, depressed and
anathemised. As Muslims, we have a totally different concept of� Original
Sin. I wrote about the subject because I believe it is of worth noting.
Thank you for reading, Bob Evans
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
�
