Thoughts and Prayers: The Religion Thread

I do. Why does my believing that "as fact" matter to you?

 

That Alma believes Jesus rose from the dead negates the question. It doesn't matter if it's "myth" or "fact" in order for Alma to believe it.

 

You believe that his physical body levitated up to a place called heaven? Or that his "soul" rose up to God?

 

Alma uses words like myth and fact. That's why I asked if he believes "Jesus rose" (if his physical body rose) as fact.

We're conditioned to think there's such a thing as the unseen human soul.

But does belief that Jesus rose 3 days later relate to his physical body, or that thing we call a soul?

 

I believe the tomb was empty because Jesus rose from the dead.

 

Amazing.

 

I'm not disputing your interest in the matter. I'm saying you're asking the wrong question.

Asking DQ or Alma what they believe leads you in a circle.

Rather, just ask the question:

Did a man named Jesus* die and rise from the dead?





*So amended, per the post below.

 

As for Noah, and his "factual" age, make a syllogism.


1) The bible says Noah, a human, was 600 years old at the time of the Flood.

B - The average human maximum life span observed over the last seven millenia is around seventy years.

III: Therefore it is unlikely that human Noah was 600 years old.

 

There was never (well, back then) a man named Jesus Christ. There was Jesus. He revealed himself (to many) to be THE Christ (aka the Anointed One aka the Messiah).

 

Good catch. So noted.

 

The first time that ever hit me was during a sermon when the priest chucklingly noted that "It's not like there was a Christ family living at the corner of Elm and Main."

 

I too believe in the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus. His story leads me to some different conclusions about life than Doc or Alma, but I have that in common with them.

So @Songbird or whoever else is welcome to gawk and laugh at me too. But for the purposes of this thread, it gets a bit tiresome to have the same people repeatedly crash the conversation to declare they don’t believe in this stuff and we’re all idiots for doing so. It’s a valid point of view, but it does not advance the conversation any. And we ought to be able to have a conversation without what amounts to a heckler’s veto.