The Dialog

What questions would you pose?  How would you respond differently?  Use the comments.

P.S. In the last panel when Jesus said the “right kind of person” he was refering to the kind of person that repents and accepts Jesus as their personal savior and doesn’t need any actual evidence that the whole story is true before they believe it.


The Dialog — 10 Comments

  1. Even the claims of miracles are things that people only think to be true because they are written about in the Bible. It’s like when people cite “the evidence of the empty tomb” as proof. Where did we get that evidence from? The very place we’re looking for evidence to verify to begin with.

  2. Referencing the tomb, there are other texts (non-religious texts even) that reference the missing tomb. Based on the non religious texts that I personally have read, the empty tomb seems to be pretty well accepted historically speaking. One huge thing that I like to look at is this. Right around the time that the Bible says Jesus was killed, something ENORMOUS happened in Jewish culture. Their Sabbath day was moved one day over in the week. The Sabbath now fell on the day before the Sabbath or the day of preparation. The crucifiction of just another religious cook would never cause the Holy day of a church to change. The person crucified HAD to have been different then just the next religious person. I see this as proof that many of the people who lived in this time period did believe that Jesus was the Son of God, and this can give a lot of support to the writings about Him. I know it’s not absolute, but then again, the Bible does have more historical support than any other text that is as old as it, and even texts younger than it. More historical proof than Shakespeare, more historical proof than Aristotle, Plato, the list can go on. The problem here is that I’ve read up on this from established historians that have proven what I have said to be so. There is a possibility that you have read up on this from established historians that have proven things in your favor. So nobody is “wrong” to cite their readings, it just comes down to I’ve read what certain people have had to say, and you have read what other people have had to say.

  3. In response to Jesus’ last quote from the comic, my personal belief and the way that I interpret the doctrine would not quite agree with what Jesus said. In my belief, not a single person is good enough to earn God’s favor. Rather, God’s favor is given as a gift to those that understand that they are born sinners and cannot change that on their own. Once you have sinned once, you are disqualified from entering heaven. God’s provision for the world, is then in Jesus Christ His only Son. Many people (even many Christians) will say that they understand the main idea of Christianity is “Jesus died for me and you”. While this is true, most will not be able to correctly tell you what this means. The doctrine says it is seen as this. Jesus is part of the trinity and is therefore God. God is perfect, so Jesus is perfect. Jesus lived a perfect life, earning his way in to heaven. But what happened to him at the end of his life? He was killed. Jesus did not deserve death, rather he died in our place. God is a just God so grace cannot be given to us unless the payment for our sins is satisfied. This payment is satisfied in Jesus’ death on the cross. So when Jesus died on that cross, he was seen by God as having our sin (so he was killed) and since our sin was killed with Jesus on the cross, we can now be seen by God as perfect and Holy (Jesus seen as us, us seen as Jesus). Many refer to this as the great exchange. The reason I say this all is simply because Jesus died for any kind of person that says, “I know that I’m born a broken person just like the rest of the world is. I am no better nor am I no worse than any person living in the world. But none of us can make it to heaven without you. None of us can serve you the way you want us to without your help.”

  4. Bill, concerning your 12:05 PM comment, certainly if a large number of people believe something (like the empty tomb) then others outside that faith-group will eventually notice that a group of people believe certain things and start to write that certain people believe these things. This doesn’t then add evidence that the initial claim is true. Just that the belief has gained some traction within society.

    Your comments on the movement of the Sabbath are not necessarily causal. At best, you identified a correlation between the movement of the Sabbath and the approximate time of the crucifixion. It is more likely that Jewish society was going through an instability at that period in history and was ripe for both a change in some of its ceremonial practices as well as a competing religious tradition (what becomes Christianity) being established. The instability in Jewish culture could have causes in all sorts of places other than some kind of singularity at the time of the crucifixion. For example, the Roman occupation and the influence of Greek culture and ideas…

    Concerning your 12:16 PM comment, personally I find it difficult to accept that an all powerful, benevolent Deity would ever create such a world where “Once you have sinned once, you are disqualified from entering heaven”. For me that pretty much ends the discussion on the way Christians say that God gets around this awful initial policy. I don’t tell my own kids that they can’t enter my house if they ever make a mistake unless they drop down and admit their failures, plead forgiveness, and mutter on about some sacrifice I supposedly previously made to “make up” for their mistake. I simply accept my kids as human beings who do sometimes make mistakes and let them in the house anyway. If they do something bad, they will get a proportional punishment. Certainly if I am big hearted enough to let my kids in my own house, then an omnipotent, benevolent supreme being could also let people who have committed at least one sinful act into His house and not require some ridiculous pledge of allegiance.

    And the “right kind of person” referenced in my last panel was meant to be the kind of person that repents and accepts Jesus as their personal savior and doesn’t need any actual evidence that the whole story is true before they believe it.

    P.S. I do like the Christian notions of being humble and questioning human power, but I think these ideas are only applicable (or useful) in the here and now. I see no evidence of these ideas having any application in getting into some kind of afterlife.

  5. Do you hear voices like the bible claims you are as proof and verification its written john 10 and i quote jesus sais his sheep hears his voice if anyone else tries to preach to them they will flee. or tried the moving the mountain on the faith the size of a mustard seed or any of the other claims that have a test yet never seem to happen.

  6. john 14 states you would be taught by the holy ghost and mathew 10 when taken to court you should hear a voice telling you how to defend yourself.

  7. I see a lot of interesting content on your website.
    You have to spend a lot of time writing, i know how to save
    you a lot of time, there is a tool that creates unique, google friendly articles in couple of seconds, just search in google – k2 unlimited content

  8. Here is a clue to the kind of people Jesus will surround himself with:

    “Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you. For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did.”

    “Tax collectors” means bad, low-life criminals. “Prostitutes” means hookers or whores. That’s who Jesus is looking for, not self-righteous people. Of course, this story might have been fabricated too.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>