James 's Martyrdom As A Verifiable Origin For Information

Some scholars argue that evidence of Jesus of Nazareth 's existence can only be found within the writings of the New Testament. They believe that the New Testament is a biased and unreliable source for the existence of Jesus. They therefore claim that Jesus did not exist. The historical existence of Jesus is necessary to demonstrate the truth of Christianity. While Christian scholars do not discount the reliability of the New Testament as a historical document, they are also able to point to other historical documents and consider non-Christian writings which support the existence of Jesus. In this paper I will argue that Jesus the Nazarene was an actual, historical person and that this can be demonstrated through extra-Biblical resources.

The most rebutted aspect of the work done by the scholars was their idiosyncrasy to equate “unverifiable” with “unauthentic.” Most scholars who study the elements attribute to the life of Jesus stand on common ground when it comes to the realization that many of the sayings and deeds associated to Jesus in the Gospels lack sufficient evidence to establish authenticity. However, to many scholars insufficient evidence means an element cannot be verified, and therefore should not be deemed as historical. In contrast, the Jesus Seminar went beyond this scope and maintained that Jesus did not say or did not do things that cannot be authenticated by evidence. For example, it is widely accepted that there is very little evidence to support whether or not Jesus was born from his virgin mother, Mary. As a result, this element of his life has just been something that one would believe on the foundation of religious faith rather than historical science. However, the Jesus Seminar applied a post-Enlightenment historical scientific view to this element in order to determine authenticity. Under this assessment, they determined not only what is confirmable but what also is scientifically possible. Therefore, the scholars deemed the virgin birth as non-historical, concluding that Jesus had been conceived through normal sexual intercourse between a male and female because it fit the paradigm known today. This stance held by the Jesus Seminar “turn[s] a corner in the traditional understanding of the relationship that faith and philosophy bear to science and history” (Powell, 115). For this reason, I reject the integrity of their work. I believe faith and philosophy should be kept separate of science and history, unless the two aim to support one another. Rescinding concepts of faith simply because they do fall within current scientific boundaries is illegitimate. The major flaw of the Jesus Seminar is their

Although, Professor Albright’s most noteworthy work was working with the Dead Sea Scrolls, it was his innovative work in the field of biblical archaeology that had the biggest impact. Professor Albright, “More than any other scholar Albright’s astounding corpus of books, articles, and public lectures defined a new relationship between archaeology and biblical studies.”

This New York Times article by Adam Higginbotham revolves around the well-known skeptic, James Randi, who previously held a million-dollar reward for those who could successfully prove existence of the paranormal. Higginbotham explores the life of Randi and the origins of the prize, including brief accounts of contenders for the million dollars. Throughout his life, Randi has worked to ensure that paranormal belief is not a product of misinformation and as such, he considers himself to be a scientific investigator rather than a debunker. This presents the argument that he hopes that the contenders for his prize will provide genuine evidence, but this is combated by the fact that everyone who has applied for it has failed the test. This could

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is one of the most debated issues throughout history. Christians place their trust in a resurrected Christ for salvation and a promise of eternal life. If the resurrection never happened, Christianity is a lie and people have been mislead for generations. On the other hand if the resurrection is true, Christianity is true also. This issue is of extreme importance because one’s soul is at stake. If all the claims that Christians make for the resurrection are true, the evidence for these claims must be examined. Equally important, are the claims against the resurrection; they too need to be looked at with careful consideration. Because so much is at stake, the question must be answered: Is the

There is far reaching agreement among researchers today over a wide religious spectrum that the resurrection of Jesus is the focal point of Christianity, asserted by conventional believers in light of New Testament passages like 1 Corinthians 15:12-20. However, it is also declared by secular analytical intellectuals also. One of the major confrontational arguments facing Christian theology or apologetics is the resurrection of Jesus being a significant part; therefore, if the

The four “facts” and subsequent points listed in this article, are the most convincing argument for Christ’s resurrection

This Book review is to complete an assignment for Biblical Worldview. Dinner with Skeptics is an account of a conversation Jeff Vines had with a group of skeptics. A missionary for many years, Vines is currently Senior Pastor at Christ’s Church of the Valley in San Dimas, California.

One will no longer draw a pseudo-life from the drives and urgencies of the world, but directly again from the living voice of the divine author of life. And this will be a resurrection: the true self appearing anew, intimately filled and brimming with the spirit or desire of the author. Theology does not simply think about these things, it has to think by means of them: with a theological mind that has died and is now alive in Christ, drawing its mode of reflection from Christ.

Christianity has long faced attacks on the historical authenticity of Jesus, His claims, works and resurrection. This skepticism took a new turn when the Jesus Seminar took it upon themselves to study the authenticity of the Gospels and the historical accuracy of their contents. The article in Time magazine, Gospel Truth? by David Van Biema explores the arguments of the Seminar and the counter-arguments brought forth by Christians who defend the historical authenticity of the Gospels. My reading of the arguments put forward by the Seminar, have not found their conclusions consistent with the evidence found in the Bible, historical records or personal experience.

I feel that the conversion of Saul of Tarsus provides great evidence to the authenticity of Jesus’ claim to be the Messiah. That such a persecutor of the church could be led to confess his target was right all along is strong proof that Jesus was indeed the Son of God. As Saul of Tarsus was bitterly opposed to the spread of the gospel, so Paul of Jesus was just as intense in teaching the lost and glorifying

One of my favorite quotes is what I also happened to name this paper. The quote comes from a song (Thnks fr th Mmrs by Fall Out Boy, the full quote being “Say a prayer, but let the good times roll in case God doesn 't show”) and while it is often used in a sardonic manner, there is a lot of truth in it. Coming from a household where one side has to be in the front row every Sunday and the other believes that everything intimate is between you and God alone, I often ponder the idea of a higher power and what life after death entails if there even is one. In today’s modern age, everything seems to have a need to be disproved by scientists and skeptics alike yet modern developments

The book of James is not very tidy when it comes to fitting into any of the other genres of literature. Some consider it to more of a circular rather than an epistle and it is quite possible that both Paul and Peter had read the Epistle of James, at least there are several coincidences between them.7 Because it was written to such a broad audience and because it contains many references to the Old Testament, James hardly fits into any category very neatly. Therefore, it may be best to see James as a literary circular since it does not address any particular needs at a given moment. James was apparently teaching the victims of the Diaspora.

The book of James has created disputations amongst its readers for years. Like almost all of the New Testament writings, contemporary readers have questions about it origin, composition, and content. Also like most New Testament writings, there are multiple hypotheses that have been presented to answer each of these enquiries. For example, many scholars have suggested that it is the least Christian amongst all of the New Testament writings due to the fact that it only references the name of Jesus twice. This a particular point that I feel needs to be addressed when trying to understand James, and it is a point I will answer further while also trying to present information regarding other possible questions an individual may have while reading

The word "gospel" is a translation of the Greek word "euangelion" which means "good news. The first three books in the New Testament (Mark, Matthew, and Luke) are often referred to as the Synoptic Gospels (from Greek synoptikos, "seen together") They bear greater similarity to each other than any of the other gospels in the New Testament. Along with these similarities come some differences among the gospels, suggesting that each gospel was written for a specific audience and for a specific purpose. This paper will examine the resurrection of Jesus, while identifying the significant differences between Mark, Matthew and Luke. This paper will also analyze the differences to suggest the prominent theological perspective each gospel author