Seriously. Hang around a few more years, do enough miracles that NO ONE could doubt You, maybe even pop off that old crucifix, dancing in thin air, and really give them nasty Romans a start, and do a world tour (two weeks in the Far East, a month in Gaul, then zip back to China for a bit, then materialize in South America and give them proto-Aztecs a thrill, like that) and THEN if people persist in rejecting you, after all this impossible stuff is thoroughly documented, THEN you can commit suicide-by-centurion again, and die so our souls blablabla, but this way Paul has one HELL of a set of incontrovertible miracles to peddle.
Why would this be so hard? Jesus, we hardly knew ye.
Realistic answer : he was dead, non-existent or in hiding, and in any case could no more work a miracle than I could.
Religious answer ( at least one of them ) : He couldn’t prove himself, because if he did that would mean faith is not required. Faith is the only thing that matters, therefore he couldn’t hang around and do so much no one would matter.
According to Luke (Luke 24 and Acts 1): He hung around for 40 days, appearing hither and yon to those who believed in him. This gets very odd, because at the same time he’s being shown to be a perfectly normal human being, who eats meals with people, walks along the road with them, etc., and simultaneously he’s doing a classic deus ex machina sort of appearing through locked doors, popping in and out like the Star Trek transporter device is on the fritz again, etc. The Matthew appearance (ch 28) is confined to Easter Day; canonical Mark barely mentions post-Resurrection events; and John’s account is cut from the same cloth as Luke’s, but without the time frame.
Traditional theology says that the Ascension happened then so that he could go back to “the right hand of the Father” to rule in power and glory, and send the Holy Spirit (which descended on Pentecost, 10 days later).
Worth mentioning, I suppose, that the LDS believe that he showed up in America after the Resurrection appearances in the Bible. Not having a Book of Mormon handy, I can’t give the information on what he is supposed to have said and did at that point.
Information supplied for what use it may be to those curious about the question. I don’t know of anyone who directly addressed the question, although I’m sure there’s plenty of writing about it over the years.
Although I am among the first to question theology, I can’t help but feel this post is less intended as a Great Debate as it is a opportunity to ridicule the beliefs of many Christian posters on this board. I just seems more rude than productive.
It seems inappropriate for GD, IMO.
Sorry, the phrasing is flip, but it’s a serious question. I mean, God picks this one spot to send His Son down here to straighten us out, the Son performs miracles and talks some serious philosophy, but He does it for only a brief period in one very localized part of this huge globe, and then He’s gone. So his followers have a very tough time winning converts over (2000 years later, and they’re still at it) and people dismiss the miracles with “Vas you dere, Sharley?” and "Sez who?’ instead of “Well, it is documented in these 2400 books, on various continents” which would be at least a lot tougher to dismiss. I think if any self-respecting Lord of the Universe decided to show these fools a miracle-doing Son, He could have done a far more convincing performance than that.
Do you think that still would be adequate for proof, pseudo? There will always be disbelievers, no matter how convincing the evidence, in any sense, including but not limited to religion, laws of physics, etc.
Thanks for your reply. I seem to recall a scene in Jesus Christ: Superstar were Judas asks the same question. Why did you pick such a backward time and such a strange place. Don’t you know you could have waited and had mass media coverage and have spoken to the whole world? I paraphrase but that is the gist. Additionally, why appear to such a backward people, when there were many great minds in the ancient world in places like Egypt and Greece and the like, were methods of observation and documentation existed for centuries? Why hang with fishermen and the uneducated ranks of the population of this area?
I understand the question, I only thought some respect for or friends would be better. And so you have.
Sure, but I think He could have done a more convincing job simply by extending Jesus’ run, maybe taking the show to Rome at least, generated a little play among the Roman historians. Am I asking for so much here? I just don’t think God planned it out too well–that, or else he was kind of stingy with the miracles. “I’ll give them three in Judea, and a couple of lepers and risen corpses in Galilee, but that’s if it. If they’re not buyng after that, then let them go to Hell. And I mean that, see if I’m kidding.”
Not to take away from your point, and in addition to Der Trihs’ realistic answer, I just wanted to point out that that the philosophy Jesus was talking was nothing to write home about. Jesus was a few centuries post Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus and others, and yet not even in their league with regards to insights.
That is so true. No matter how many prayers go unanswered, Christians will always believe in the power thereof and disbelieve reality. No matter how much evil the world contains, Christians will always believe the world was created by an all powerful and all loving god, and disbelieve in the logical contradiction. There is no amount of proof that will persuade that faithful, regardless of how much faith is shown to be a sham and held in common with nearly all ridiculous beliefs. Even when miracles to against the laws of physics, Christians will still disbelieve in said laws. You are so right. Thank you for your insights.
Or UFOs. They don’t land in front of Carl Sagan or a news crew, they fly by/meet/abduct people who are already inclined to gullibility. Or like the “psychics” whose powers mysteriously vanish if James Randi is nearby.
I’m just going to ignore all the anti-Christian sentiment in this thread.
Here’s my take: Jesus had nothing left to do in this world. He had told His followers everything he had to tell them, and so He left this world. Performing more miracles in front of larger crowds would have been pointless. We must believe that Jesus is the Messiah simply because we feel in our hearts that it is true, not because we see an impressive magic trick. That is the nature of faith. Of course, this is the Gospel according to Mayo Speaks!, and I don’t claim to speak for other Christians.
I generally try to avoid arguments where I think I’ll look bad too.
If that’s the case, why did Jesus do miracles for anyone? Why did he specifically ask people to believe in him because of the works that he did? Why did he promise that miracles would continue after his death? Logic should be applied consistently, don’t you think?
Yes, to believe in things because you have been conditioned to do so, under the guise of what you “feel in your heart.” I still don’t see why that’s at all virtuous.
If Jesus hadn’t been around then, it’s not just a case of waiting 2000 years for mass media; that’s 2000 years without a Messiah. It’s possible without that moral influence the world could have gone to hell in a handbasket before any kind of wide-spreading media is invented.
(I’m an agnostic, but athiest when it comes to Christianity, so… take my thoughts for what they’re worth.)
Are you arguing Christianity has had a particularly rough time spreading?
What started as a minor religious sect in a backwater part of the Roman empire has become the largest religion in the world. The predominant religion of the most advanced, most powerful, and most wealthy parts of the world.
Obviously it can be argued when talking about the ~2 billion Christians that a ton of them are Christian in little more than name. If you ask them about their beliefs, they can’t tell you much, they may even tell you they couldn’t care less. But, I think the bible even shows that disinterested “believers” have always been a problem.
After two thousand years. And i’m afraid I fail to see what some of the nations it is predominate in being the more powerful has to do with anything; if anything, I would expect a religion to do better in such regions anyway.
JC spells it out in John 14-17- He had to leave so that His followers, empowered by God’s Spirit, go out to spread His message. Jesus ascended, the Holy Spirit endowed the Apostolic Church, the Apostles went through the Roman Empire &
beyond also doing miracles, healing, casting out demons/madness (whatever),
establishing churches, and so on so that the Christian presence throughout the Roman Empire was so well-established by the early fourth century that Constantine considered it best to recruit it to solidify his reign (which was, alas,
quite a mixed blessing for Christianity).
If He’d has stuck around, His buddies would be hard-pressed to get off their duffs to go anywhere. Heck, even after He ascended, He had to allow persecution to break out in Jerusalem to get them moving out of there.
I too, find Christ’s departure a bit of a puzzle. but he did tell his followers that his work was finished-“I am with you all days, untill the end of the world”. So clearly, his physical presence was no longer needed. As for why his return was so short-that is a mystery. I subscribe to the idea that the Almighty wants us to find our own paths, and that having an all-powerful being around would be counterproductive. I stark terms: what was provided was suficient. As for the pagan world, Paul took charge of bringing the gospel to it. Hi work seems to have been effective.