Scientific Proof that Jesus is the Messiah

[TER]

You can witness the "resurrection" during every winter solstice. Just as the ancients did. They understood the realignment of the Sun to be evident that spring was near and that new life was near. Spring. Bada bing...

NC, the resurrection you are referring to is not the same as the bodily ressurection of Christ. While the winter solstice and the signs in the heavens may give us glimpses, our resurrection from death into life occurs through Christ who is the uncreated merged with the created. I am not sure why you remain so fixated on the mere symbols in the created world (as wonderful as they are) when these things pale into comparison to the mystery of God becoming man in order to save us.

 

[FSU63]

Still awaiting scientific proof.

 

[TER]

Sevin, the odds listed in the OP are scientifically deduced probabilities and the way they came up with the numbers are explained in the paper and have been deemed to be reliable by a committee of neutral scientists. Please refer to the paper in order to get a better idea of how these numbers were formulated.

To disbelieve Jesus is the prophecized Messiah (when the odds of the prophecized Messiah being someone else is incalculably small), we then have to believe there was a conspiracy of thousands of people who were willing to die to defend lies they knew were lies (while at the same time living lives of complete selflessness and hardship). The second option (which requires more faith then even the first option) still would be astronomically unlikely. People defend lies all the time for personal benefits. How many do you know who would defend a lie they know to be a lie when doing so would cause them no worldy gain but rather mockery, torture, hardship, alienation, and death? And we are not talking about one person, but thousands who were willing to testify that Jesus Christ was the Messiah prophecized by the prophets, performed amazing miracles, and rose from the dead.

Both ultimate choices require faith and both scenarios would be unique in the history of mankind. It is up to us to choose which option to believe.

 

[Natural Citizen]

NC, the resurrection you are referring to is not the same as the bodily ressurection of Christ. While the winter solstice and the signs in the heavens may give us glimpses, our resurrection from death into life occurs through Christ who is the uncreated merged with the created. I am not sure why you remain so fixated on the mere symbols in the created world (as wonderful as they are) when these things pale into comparison to the mystery of God becoming man in order to save us.

Heck, I don't know, TER. I'm probably a rebel or suntun.

You'd think I spent my entire adult life in an observatory and studying Cuneiform script, huh...

 

[TER]

Heck, I don't know, TER. I'm probably a rebel or suntun.

You'd think I spent my entire adult life in an observatory and studying Cuneiform script, huh...

No, I think you a very bright and good-hearted person who is looking for life's answers by gazing in the skies when all the while the answers are to be found in an opened heart.

 

[Natural Citizen]

No, I think you a very bright and good-hearted person who is looking for life's answers looking in the skies when all the while the answers are to be found in an opened heart.

Well, Thank You TER. I appreciate that. I do. I won't lie to you though. I think I've mentioned before that my problem isn't those who go looking for God but those who think they have already found it and that there are no more questions to be asked. Now, this isn't even really a pet peeve for regular everday Christian Joes. As I said previously in the thread, I can live with it. We're not too far off of the same page. It's the fact that, too often, we find that it's an ideal scenario for powerful people who assume that they have already found him and that by setting the world on fire and pillaging nations they are justifiably doing his will. You see? That's my gripe. I do find the area of transition in civilization to be fascinating study. But I don't want to get off topic.

But thanks, TER. I do appreciate that. I need to get off of here before you go thinking I'm a nice guy.

Also...the thing with my interest in the stars. We're all stardust, TER. And we're all connected because the universe is in us. Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded. It's amazing to consider.

 

[erowe1]

So how many firsthand accounts of the resurrection are there? I thought all we had were the four gospels which of course could have been written by anybody.

They couldn't have been written by anybody. But they're not all we have either. Here's 1 Corinthians 15:1-11:

Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. 6 After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. 7 After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. 8 Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.

9 For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all, yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 11 Therefore, whether it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

This was written while Jesus's own generation was still living. And the basic message it conveys, which Paul calls the Gospel, was at the very heart of Christianity from the very beginning. Without those apostles and eyewitnesses that Paul talks about, there could not have been any Christianity at all.

 

[TER]

We're all stardust, TER. And we're all connected because the universe is in us. Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded. It's amazing to consider.

Amazing indeed NC, but you are worth much more than star dust. And the origins of your atoms and the sum of all of them together are but a mere pittance compared to why you have been given life and what you have been called to be.

 

[ewizacft]

You can witness the "resurrection" during every winter solstice. Just as the ancients did. They understood the realignment of the Sun to be evident that spring was near and that new life was near. Spring. Bada bing...

As I was saying to TER, the Three Kings, as they were known by the ancients and even understood to be today are simply Orions Belt. It points to Sirius on December 24th of every year. On December 25 they align to point to the Sun rise. This is why these "Three Kings "follow" the star in the east in order to locate the sunrise. The birth of "the Son", as it is accepted in moder times. And, of course, we also discused the constellation virgo as well. Or "The Virgin Mary", as it is today.

so, anyhoo. From the summer solstice to the winter solcstice the days get shorter and the crops die. From the western hemisphere the sun appears to move south and very scarce. To the ancients, this symbolized death. The death of the Sun. Buy the 22nd or 23rd the Sun was gone because it made it to it's lowest point in the sky. But then it stops moving south for three days in the area of the southern cross or "crux" constellation.

After this time...on December 25th, the Sun moves 1 degree North forshadowing loger days, warmth and spring. New life.

So...the Sun died on the cross, was dead for three days, and resurrected...born again.

Now, to be fair, "Jesus" isn't the only "Sun" God through the ages to share the crucifiction, three day death and resurrection concept. Many civilizations through the ages have had some Jesus figure to symbolize the Suns movement back into the northern hemisphere and thus salvation.

Of course, they don't celebratate the resurrection until the spring equinox or "Easter" because this is when the Sun officially over powers the darkness. Or "evil" as it is said today.The days become longer and through spring new life emerges.

12 deciples? These are simply the 12 constellations of the Zodiac, who Jesus, being the Sun travels with, as observed by the ancients. 12 tribes of Israel, 12 Great Patriarchs, 12 Sons of Jacob and so forth and so forth....

Many churhes display the Pagan adaptation of the cross of the zodiac. It is not a symbol of christianity. At least not historically.

Sorry for mispellings and whatnot. If I don't hurry up on long posts, the site signs me out and I lose all that was typed.

The problem with this is that these are historical people that the Bible is talking about and not stars. A man name Jesus was dead and resurrected. There were three wise men(not three kings) that worshiped this man. The Son of God being the Sun of God(or Sun God) argument only works in English as it is a homonym, but it is not so in Greek. To believe what you posted is really being unfair to yourself.

 

[Natural Citizen]

The problem with this is that these are historical people that the Bible is talking about and not stars.

Historically, where would your time line begin?

What I typed regarding the ancients understanding of the astrological rotation that they observed and it's impact on their lives is indisputable.

Understand that I'm not challenging your beliefs or anyone else's here for that matter. People are free to believe as they wish. When we talk about historical people though we open up a can of worms because, as all should know and accept, history is often written and re-written to influence culture and other geo-political aspects of civilization. For many reasons. We see this happening even now and by our own hand to paint a much more comfortable picture for later generations of the fires we've set abroad. Similarly a feel good tweak of sorts.

I think we discussed Greek dialect in another thread some place a while back regarding the resurrection and similar cultural based mythology. I don't remember where though.

 

[erowe1]

Historically, where would your time line begin?

With the historical man, Jesus of Nazareth, lived a human life on this earth, was crucified under the Roman prefect, Pontius Pilate, died and was buried, and on the third day rose again from the dead, and then was seen, heard, and touched, alive by many eye witnesses.

Again, see 1 Corinthians 15:1-11

Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. 6 After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. 7 After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. 8 Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time.

9 For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all, yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 11 Therefore, whether it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

 

[erowe1]

What I typed regarding the ancients understanding of the astrological rotation that they observed and it's impact on their lives is indisputable.

You say "the ancients" as if you can just put all ancient people together in one boat.

Nothing you said has anything at all to do with the Christian belief in the resurrection of Jesus at any stage in the history of Christianity.

The Gospel of Jesus's death and resurrection had been the central message of Christianity for a long time before any Christians ever attached any Christian significance to that date. The reason for their commemoration of his resurrection in the spring was because they, from the very beginning, connected it to the time of the Jewish Passover, which was when the actual historical events of his death and resurrection, which his earliest disciples witnessed firsthand, happened.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Originally Posted by erowe1 You say "the ancients" as if you can just put all ancient people together in one boat.

Not exactly. I said that there has been a Jesus "figure" through the ages in basically every culture.

Nothing you said has anything at all to do with the Christian belief in the resurrection of Jesus at any stage in the history of Christianity.

That's because theology contradicts that which preceded them as these events were retranslated conformingly to cultural demand. I think that the Christian belief purposefully detatches itself from it's origin.

The reason for their commemoration of his resurrection in the spring was because they, from the very beginning, connected it to the time of the Jewish Passover, which was when the actual historical events of his death and resurrection, which his earliest disciples witnessed firsthand, happened.

Yep. Poor misguided people.

 

[Natural Citizen]

With the historical man, Jesus of Nazareth, lived a human life on this earth, was crucified under the Roman prefect, Pontius Pilate, died and was buried, and on the third day rose again from the dead, and then was seen, heard, and touched, alive by many eye witnesses.

Again, see 1 Corinthians 15:1-11

I just don't buy that though, e. I think it's a culturally useful Christian retranslation of astrological events witnessed and recorded by the ancients to influence morality...or socially accepted behavior. Astrological events that still happen till this day and are still the subject of a cultural charade. Perhaps a mechanism for social control on top of that.

Do you have sunrise service outside, e? We do. We watch the sun come up every Easter. I really only go for the pancakes but what they are doing, I don't think they fully understand the value in. I don't think they get the origin at all. But yet, they're right there celebrating the sun's rebirth while singing "He Lives" and attaching it to what I believe to be a cultural myth. It's really only the Sun's return to the northern hemisphere signifying that the days are getting longer and that spring is near and revitalizes the Earth. Every year, they do this at "Easter". The kids love it because they toss in the bunny with the candy and it warms them up for later in life when the parents have the strategically placed "burden" of saying, much like the Santa gag, "sorry, junior...there isn't really an Easter bunny...it's about this man who died and was resurrected for your sins so we have to prepare to learn to repent and practice morality for the rest of our lives so that we are socially and culturally leashed now".

But then once the kid gets in Church I've noticed that they're constantly hassled by these people because they tend to do things that kids to and that's considered disrespectful in the house of the Lord. They are expected to be complacent and repeat after the pastor or what is typed in Bold in the program. Sit there like a statue and say what you're told because...well...we are. Like some cult. It's a wreck, e. Annoys me greatly. And we wonder why the youth are running from the Church. What's worse, is when you ask them what the heck the sermon was about they don't have a clue. For the most part. I can't say everyone is like that but many whom I've asked just sit there and go through the motions. It's nuts.

 

[PierzStyx]

I think what you're referring to here is about having theories about an event that may have occurred. In fields like cosmology, astronomy, and geology, they do make observations of the presence of things and patterns to come up with theories, but a theory that an event may have occurred is not the same as proof that it did occur. The only thing that scientists can really prove are things like math and logic. Math and logic are not events, they're just the tools that scientists use, along with their observations of events, to try to repeat something or figure out when or how to expect something to happen. A scientist's job is in essence to explain what/when/where something might be found with a very high level of reliability.

Logic cannot be proven. It can only be argued based on certain assumptions. What you're assumptions are depends on what you find logical. Some assumptions are generally more believable than others, but even then what you find 'more believable" is based on your own inner mind.

Math is proven and is proven over and over again. Especially the higher maths. Math's application to science even more so. When scientific theories come into being entire mathematical constructs are invented to justify the construct. But when that scientific idea disappears/is disproven so to is the math construct that propped it up.

 

[erowe1]

I just don't buy that though, e. I think it's a culturally useful Christian retranslation of astrological events witnessed and recorded by the ancients to influence morality.

When do you think this Christian retranslation of astrological events happened? Before or after 1 Corinthians 15 was written?

And what historical evidence do you have?

 

[ewizacft]

Historically, where would your time line begin?

What I typed regarding the ancients understanding of the astrological rotation that they observed and it's impact on their lives is indisputable.

Understand that I'm not challenging your beliefs or anyone else's here for that matter. People are free to believe as they wish. When we talk about historical people though we open up a can of worms because, as all should know and accept, history is often written and re-written to influence culture and other geo-political aspects of civilization. For many reasons. We see this happening even now and by our own hand to paint a much more comfortable picture for later generations of the fires we've set abroad. Similarly a feel good tweak of sorts.

I think we discussed Greek dialect in another thread some place a while back regarding the resurrection and similar cultural based mythology. I don't remember where though.

The timeline for the new testament is the early first century. People lived at this time and at this place and did these things.

There is no doubt in my mind that other people worshiped the sun, moon, and stars, but these people of the new testament are not recreating that through myth.

It seems that you reject history as a form of knowledge. Do you believe history to be an acceptable form of knowledge? Were the manuscripts of the new testament rewritten? If you believe that were, what evidence do you have that they were rewritten? If they were rewritten; they sure left a ton uncomfortable things in there that could have been changed.

 

[erowe1]

Logic cannot be proven. It can only be argued based on certain assumptions. What you're assumptions are depends on what you find logical. Some assumptions are generally more believable than others, but even then what you find 'more believable" is based on your own inner mind.

Math is proven and is proven over and over again. Especially the higher maths. Math's application to science even more so. When scientific theories come into being entire mathematical constructs are invented to justify the construct. But when that scientific idea disappears/is disproven so to is the math construct that propped it up.

Math is as much based on assumptions as logic is. Mathematical and logical theorems are proven, based on those assumptions. But the assumptions themselves must be assumed without proof. Fortunately, the Creator gave us an innate sense of these mathematical and logical laws, just as he did with moral laws.

 

[Sanguine]

If you're going to take the number of prophecies the Bible said were fulfilled by Jesus to be true (and that they actually happened), you might as well say that Jesus is the Messiah because the Bible said so.

However, that's not scientific proof. It's like saying Harry Potter isn't a wizard because the Harry Potter books say so, but because of all the magic he performs.

 

[osan]

Proof that Jesus Christ is the Messiah...

from a web page by alphabyte, a previous senior op in this channel

What do you suppose the chances are that Jesus is NOT the Messiah? The following are some prophecies made about the coming Messiah in the Old Testament and fulfilled hundreds of years later by the life of Jesus Christ.

1. The Virgin Birth:
2. Jesus born in Bethlehem:
3. King Herod kills children in attempt to kill the Christ child:
4. John the Baptist's ministry:
5. Jesus enters Jerusalem on a donkey:
6. The Resurrection of Christ:
7. Jesus betrayed for 30 pieces of silver:
8. Jesus crucified on a cross:

This is not proof in the least. Why, you ask? Because it rests on a shaky-at-best presumption that the NT is not a fraudulent work in the sense that those who wrote it wanted JC to be the messiah and did not write what they wrote to satisfy the OT prophesies with the goal of lending absolute authority to their philosophy.

Let us take some stock of the situation as we know it - and even THIS could be wrong, but let us forget that for conversation's sake. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and so forth were all nice Jewish boys. As such, you can be certain they had all read Torah or were otherwise well familiar with the stories including the many prophesies tied to the coming of the Messiah. Now consider human nature - they WANTED to believe - a fair and innocent enough desire in any man. They write their various gospels and epistles and other accounts of the life of this Jesus fellow. Perhaps he lived, perhaps not - it is not that easy to know for certain.

Note that no evil conspiracy need be the root motivation for stretching the truth. All that is needed is an honest belief in something seen as good and right and the willingness to mold a story in order to give people, those who also WANT to believe, sufficient pretext for accepting the notions you have to offer. But without the credibility of an authoritative hand behind the system of thought and values, many people will regard it as arbitrary no matter how greatly it appeals to their senses. In fact, the better is seems, the more likely some people are to reject it for fear of snake oil.

But if you imbue it with that authority by crafting the story properly, perhaps such that it dovetails strongly of even perfectly with ancient prophesy, people are far more willing to accept it as true because they tend to be very lacking in critical thought where their comfort is concerned. If believing that JC was the messiah and that all sins are washed away for the asking and repentance are the things that bring comfort to your marrow, believe is exactly what you are going to do. It does not take much - just the least finger hold and people will grasp at it and never let go.

Believing something will come to pass if you believe it will is one of the oldest and most deeply seated of all human proclivities. "If I just ignore the pains in my gut there will be no cancer." People do this every day, all day long, and billions at a time. This as common as breath in living beings. It is one of the things we do when we cannot deal with something that in the back of our minds we suspect may be true. Both parents died of stomach cancer and now at 40 you also have pain in the stomach area. You simply cannot deal with the fright of even considering this a possiblity, to you make believe it's not there and in so doing convince yourself that everything will be OK. This is not evil. It is peope doing the best they know how with their terror of frightful prospects. Not evil, but not right and not true, either.

This is a very strongly possible and even probable reason for the authors to have played with the truth. There may well have been a Jesus and he may have had all manner of oddly and deeply appealing ideas about proper human relations. But if he just another guy walking the streets and preaching, why should anyone listen? It does not matter a whit how beautiful and attractive his words are because all manner of pretty fantasies may be contrived by clever men. That does not make any of them true. These fellows needed something more - a basis upon which the unwashed masses could hear the words, understand the ideas and say "Yes! This is authoritative and not only may I comport myself according to these dictates, I must." What better authority than that of God? Jesus was one with God and this is what he says. One could not get any better than that in those days and it worked like a charm and continues to this day. In fact, for most people the authority of God is the only authority to which they answer, and IMO this may be very rightly so. Given that, then the motive for fudging the truth becomes an order of magnitude more intense.

I am not saying that this is in fact what happened, but if one is going to consider the issue honestly and as a competent scientist, this possibility must be given its fair hearing and until it can be proven that this is not what occurred, the claims of proof fall to the floor, smartly dead.

One needs to take very great care when tossing around words like "proof", especially when addressing issues concerning absolute truth and the will of God.