Atheism Vs Christianity

Proof of Christhttp://carm.org... In additon to the crucifixion, there are numerous reasons to believe that the tomb was indeed empty on that Easter morning. This evidence can be summarized by the acronym JET: J - Jerusalem Factor, E - Enemy Testimony, and T - Testimony of Women. First, the disciples preached the gospel in Jerusalem in the midst of opposition. It would have been virtually impossible for Christianity to survive and expand in Jerusalem if the body of Jesus was still in the tomb. All the opponents of Jesus would have had to do was produce the body of Jesus and squelch this Christian movement. Second, early enemies of Christianity never disputed that the tomb was empty. Instead, they argued that the disciples stole the body (Matt. 28:12-13; Justin Martyr, Trypho 108; Tertullian, De Spectaculis 30). Third, and perhaps the strongest evidence, the first witnesses to the empty tomb were women. Sadly, the testimony of women was not regarded highly in antiquity. The Jewish Talmud states, "“Any evidence which a woman [gives] is not valid (to offer), also they are not valid to offer. This is equivalent to saying that one who is Rabbinically accounted a robber is qualified to give the same evidence as a woman” (Talmud, Rosh Hashannah 1.8)." Furthermore, “Sooner let the words of the Law be burnt than delivered to women” (Talmud, Sotah 19a). However, in the Gospels, the apostles are the ones who are cowardly hiding from the Jews and the women bring them news of the empty tomb! If Christians were going to invent the empty tomb story, they most certainly would not have used women as the primary witnesses. jESUS’ BIRTHLuke uses when writing about Quirinius' governorship over Syria. In stating that Quirinius controlled the Syrian area, Luke doesn't use the official political title of "Governor" ("legatus"), but the broader term "hegemon" which is a ruling officer or procurator. This means that Quirinius may not have been the official governor of Judea, but he was in charge of the census because he was a more capable and trusted servant of Rome than the more inept Saturninus.CHRONOLOGYA lot of these contradictions are because of a misunderstanding of the intent of the writers. People are familiar with the notion that Matthew wrote to a Jewish audience, while Luke wrote to a gentile audience. Few people, however, take time to outline the Gospels themselves, but rather try to read them side-to-side and point out acontradicon. If they did, they would find out that Matthew wrote thematically and not chronologically, and Luke and Mark wrote far more chronologically than did Matthew. This is not some isolated fact. Rather, when looking at the problem of the healing of the centurion's slave Shaffer writes, "Every commentator consulted agreed that Matthew has not presented these stories in a strictly chronological order. Again, a look at any harmony will reveal this.By simply taking any class on literature, you learn that writers carefully plan out what their message is and how they want to deliver their message. It is apparent that Matthew's approach to the book was to alternate Christ's discourses with pertinent narrative. Now it is easy to see why Matthew sometimes places events in Jesus' life out of chronological order.TyreThe hole contradiction is based on the word "they" The "they" in v. 12 refers back the "nations" in v. 3-5, and were represented by Alexander the Great, who did the things described in v. 12, thus fulfilling the prophecy. Skeptics, however, say that the they in v. 12 refers to the elements of Nebuchadnezzar's forces in verses 7 and 11. Nebuchadnezzar never did the things ascribed to "they," in verse 12 - he failed to take Tyre at all - so the prophecy, it is said, was not fulfilled. A key here is that the "they" in v. 12 can only refer to the "nations" in v. 3. Let's see how this is so. 3 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Tyrus, and will cause many nations to come up against thee, as the sea causeth his waves to come up. Note to begin with this verse -- the being who is in charge here, who "will" do things, is the Lord God, Adonai YHWH. YHWH is at the head of the efforts, and it is He who will "cause many nations" to come up. The use of Adonai (which means sovereign or controller) places YHWH at the head of the nations. 4 And they shall destroy the walls of Tyrus, and break down her towers: I will also scrape her dust from her, and make her like the top of a rock. We see again the same pairing: they and I. The nations will scrape Tyre off, and destroy the walls, and break down the towers. ANY nations are eligible for this action. 5 It shall be a place for the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD: and it shall become a spoil to the nations. Once again, the I/nations pairing is made. 6 And her daughters which are in the field shall be slain by the sword; and they shall know that I am the LORD. 7 For thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will bring upon Tyrus Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the north, with horses, and with chariots, and with horsemen, and companies, and much people. Adonai YHWH now is said to bring on a specific attacker -- Nebuchadnezzar. In our view, this brings on the first of the nations against Tyre. Nebuchadnezzar comes WITH all these things. And now note how the pairing changes: 8 He shall slay with the sword thy daughters in the field: and he shall make a fort against thee, and cast a mount against thee, and lift up the buckler against thee. Note that now the pairing I/they is not used, but it is now he -- Nebuchadnezzar, as all would agree -- who is "in charge" of the scene. And of course "he" personifies his own army here, and those things with him (horses, etc) -- obviously Nebuchadnezzar did not do all of these things himself. 9 And he shall set engines of war against thy walls, and with his axes he shall break down thy towers. The "he" continues, and the subsuming "his" (with reference to the axes). 10 By reason of the abundance of his horses their dust shall cover thee: thy walls shall shake at the noise of the horsemen, and of the wheels, and of the chariots, when he shall enter into thy gates, as men enter into a city wherein is made a breach. In one more case Nebuchadnezzar's forces are personified under himself; the horses are "his" and the horsemen, wheels and chariots are sumbsumed under the heading of when "he" enters. 11 With the hoofs of his horses shall he tread down all thy streets: he shall slay thy people by the sword, and thy strong garrisons shall go down to the ground. And yet again: HIS horses, HE shall slay. But now note the change in the next verses: 12 And they shall make a spoil of thy riches, and make a prey of thy merchandise: and they shall break down thy walls, and destroy thy pleasant houses: and they shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the midst of the water. We return to "they" for the first time since v. 4. And: 13 And I will cause the noise of thy songs to cease; and the sound of thy harps shall be no more heard. We return also to "I": Adonai YHWH. And it continues: 14 And I will make thee like the top of a rock: thou shalt be a place to spread nets upon; thou shalt be built no more: for I the LORD have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD. This oracle clearly offers two pairings: the I/they of Adonai YHWH the sovereign, leading the nations; the he/personified-possession army of Nebuchadnezzar, who though still under Adonai YHWH's sovereign control, is given credit for being able to "will" do things on his own, with his army under him and subsumed under his identity. The oracle therefore indicates that Nebuchadnezzar will do specific actions, and that "nations" will perform certain actions. Nebuchadnezzar brings one of those nations, but the language tells us that the actions of 3-5 and 12-14 may be performed by any nations God brings against Tyre and need not be actions of Nebuchadnezzar.