When did Jesus actually die?

[PoloPrincess]

Can someone point me in the right direction?
We know that Jesus was crucified on Good Friday and he rose from the dead on Easter Sunday.
Then what happened? When and how did he finally die?

Patriarchy, do you mean John Remsberg who said "Jesus of Nazareth, the Jesus of humanity, the pathetic story of whose humble life and tragic death has awakened the sympathies of millions, is a possible character and may have existed? He doesn't deny the existence of Jesus as a historic character?

To be the true Christ though he was always born to die - that was the Jewish prophecy surely? By dying he was fulfilling the prophecy. That's my understanding.

I mean the Old Testament prophecy of true Messiah.

Dione

Yes that Remsburg.

He doesn't deny the existence of Jesus as a historic character

I do.

He used the argument from silence list to show that Jesus could not have been a miraculous figure. I agree with him.

I made my point earlier why I conflate the divinity of Jesus with his existence when debating Christians. Cough, cough sorry I forgot, your not a christian.

"is a possible character and may have existed"

Hardly a ringing endorsement...

So you're not here to debate anything Patriarchy, just to try your to weaken the position of Christians using this forum. Or as I quoted earlier: coming into a predominantly female website to try to prove more women wrong. It's a hobby I suppose.

Dione

Considering you seem to be poring over every post I write to try and catch me out, you don't seem to have understood much of what I've said.

If someone states they are a Christian, it's a specific belief position, part of that belief is the divinity of Jesus.

If I debate a Christian on the existence of Jesus then I conflate his divinity and his existence deliberately because their position on those issues is weak as a result of their beliefs.

Not sure what your issue with that is?

I'm not poring, I'm reading your posts as you requested upthread. Like this one,
Can you point me in the direction of some non religious 'Biblical Scholars'?

Yes I can Patriarchy, John Remsberg is an atheist historian who believes that a historic Jesus did exist. I think 53rd provided you with the names of some others upthread.

Oh, and this one:
*It's always a good idea to check the references... before you use it to support your case.

They might not be as 'supportive' as you think.*

If I debate a Christian on the existence of Jesus then I conflate his divinity and his existence deliberately because their position on those issues is weak as a result of their beliefs.

that’s cool. I debate the more traditional way, where both sides agree on what the motion at hand is. But you do you, man, you do you.

Hey Dione, I see you’re still being accused of covert Christianity. Didn’t know we had secret undercover agents these days

Dione

I mean, I can do this all over again if you want?

Do you want me to copy and paste my earlier explanations of the difference between a historian or theologian that studies the Bible, and someone who's go-to description of themself is as a biblical scholar?

I didn't really think it needed explaining the first time as the obvious choice of language points you in the direction of their bias but it seemed that some people were being deliberately obtuse. Obviously your not doing that now, are you?

Or are you happy to just re-read those posts and then rejoin our discussion?
It has moved on somewhat in the last few pages since that issue was put to bed.

53rd

Everybody else on this thread seems to have agreed that the motion being discussed currently is 'was Jesus a real person'

Except you.

His divinity or otherwise is directly relevant to his existence, as it significantly impacts the likelihood or otherwise of certain types of evidence for him being forthcoming or not.

Considering you seem to be poring over every post I write to try and catch me out, you don't seem to have understood much of what I've said.

Isn’t the point of a discussion forum to read posts and respond to them. I’ve never considered that anyone responding to my posts was pouring over them

His divinity or otherwise is directly relevant to his existence

don’t tell me, dude, tell Dawkins. I’d do it myself but my priest says I can’t get within 50ft of atheists or I’ll catch it

53rd

It's good to see you supporting Dione again, especially as you dropped her like a bad habit a few pages ago.

Uh-oh 53rd. It looks like your posts are being pored over.

“Dropped her like a bad habit”, wtaf.

Beginning to suspect you’re the undercover Christian agent here, Patriarchy, here to do a weird hypeexaggerated version of Pointlessly Aggressive Internet Atheist Man to make the atheists look bad. C’mon, own up, you can tell me...

Hyena

53rd

Dawkins et al concede the point because it's irrelevant to the wider question of god's existence. They are right, it is.

However you may have noticed that I'm argumentative, particularly when I'm right so I won't let you off the hook as easily as he lets John Lennox off the hook in that debate where he makes the concession.

If you watch the whole thing, I think he let Lennox have that one because he was so eager to get onto some of the other absolutely garbage arguments that Lennox usually produces.

Like I said earlier in the thread, watching Lennox act as an apologist is like playing a game of theological whack a mole.

If he is the 'heavyweight' Christian apologist, then your religion really is doomed.

If he is the 'heavyweight' Christian apologist, then your religion really is doomed.

oh noes.

However you may have noticed that I'm argumentative, particularly when I'm right

Never stop posting Patriarchy

I utterly disagree with you but your posts do make me grin. Ive never read posts of anyone quite so sure of their own intellectual superiority before.

Hyena

On the contrary, it's nothing to do with intellectualism.

The truth is the easiest case to make.

Honestly. Your posts are hilarious. Albeit unintentionally but honestly, hilarious.

Such overwhelming smugness in that last one. Please, do continue to impress us with your brain power solving debates that have spanned thousands of years.

I'm pleased to have entertained you. Stick around for more if you like. 😁

What are your thoughts on the existence or divinity of Jesus?

53rd I'm afraid I'm no undercover agent. I post on Christian threads, woo threads and Muslim threads. Patriarchy was probably lying by ommission when he didn't mention them when discussing my posting habits here. I don't think he was lying by ommission when he failed to disclose being a Christian in the past. I can see how that can happen.

However you may have noticed that I'm argumentative...

It has been noticed Patriarchy a poster on a different thread summed it up nicely. I think i quoted her upthread.

...particularly when I'm right.
You may truly believe that you are right, but experts in the field, including biblical scholars and actual historians* disagree.

www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/14/what-is-the-historical-evidence-that-jesus-christ-lived-and-died