Who Hates Academic Freedom?

[6days]

How do YOU deal with the fact that Jesus dies on the Day of Preparation in the Gospel of John and he dies on Passover according to Mark, Luke and Matthew?

What do you say about the friends of the paralytic who dug through the dirt and branches of the roof in Mark, and then "removed the tiles" according to Luke?

What do you do about "Blessed are the poor" in Mark and the "Blessed are the poor in spirit" in Matthew?


How do you regard your own pastor and church when you also read Jesus' admonition to not pray in public?

How do you see our capitalist system when it comes up against Jesus' advice that humans "cannot love both God and mammon"?

The Gospel of John has Jesus saying he is divine--over and over and over again. Yet in Mark, Luke and Matthew he scoldingly says he should never be seen as God. Oh my--what to do!

What to do?
We can either look for contradictions in God's Word (Atheist web sites have long lists) ... Or we can can understand the marvelous harmony of 40+ authors being divinely inspired by God over the course of 1500 years to bring us His inerrant Word.

 

[6days]

A Jesus who never claimed divinity for himself and said his message was to the House of Israel has become an idol worshiped by Gentiles. To me, that is idolatry.

Throughout scripture we see the divinity of Christ, including His own words.

Jesus called Almighty God and Everlasting Father in OTIsaiah 9:6 For a child is born to us, a son is given to us. The government will rest on his shoulders. And he will be called: Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Jesus is the Creator
John 1:1-3In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
God created everything through him, and nothing was created except through him.
He existed in the beginning with God.

Jesus claimed pre-existence.
John8:58 Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I Am!"

Also... you may know another instance or two in the OT of Jehovah calling Himself "I Am".

Jesus is called God in the NT
Hebrews 1:8 But to the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. You rule with a scepter of justice.

Jesus is Lord
Matthew 22:45 Since David called the Messiah 'my Lord,' how can the Messiah be his son?"
(Read earlier verses for context )

Jesus is Lord of Lords
Rev. 19:16 On his robe at his thigh was written this title: King of all kings and Lord of all lords.

Jesus forgave sin
Luke7:48

Jesus claimed omnipotence
Matt.28:18 Jesus came and told his disciples, "I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth.

Jesus was omniscient
John 1:48 Nathanael said to him, From where know you me? Jesus answered and said to him, Before that Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.

Jesus is omnipresent
Matt.18:20 For where two or three gather together as my followers, I am there among them.

Jesus is worshipped
By angels. Heb.1:6
By people. Matt.14:33

Jesus claimed equality with The Father
John 10:30 The Father and I are one

 

[exminister]

You obviously do not know your history. At one point in time, Biblical lineages were cutting edge science. That was when Bishop Ussher published his chronology. That was the model many scientists looked at as a foundation. Because they did not know any better, and Ussher had produced the most comprehensive research available at the time. A few decades later however, they had compiled enough evidence to falsify the historical possibility of that model.

Nowadays you still see people trying to bring in "supernatural miracles" when discussing their YEC model. You see that especially with the flood story. Since that is part of the model added by Ellen G White, when the geological evidence had been compiled that falsified the historical possibility of the YEC model.

PS kdall, 6days ignores my posts, because "he can't handle the truth". So you might want to alert the poor fellow.

Please expand on what you see as E G White's original contribution?
Is it something about the flood or 6 day creation or both? She added the "supernatural" part? Wasn't that always there? I hadn't looked at the SDA as contributing really anything original they just took bits and pieces of existing concepts, rearranging the puzzle giving a different picture if you will?

 

[aikido7]

What to do?
We can either look for contradictions in God's Word (Atheist web sites have long lists) ... Or we can can understand the marvelous harmony of 40+ authors being divinely inspired by God over the course of 1500 years to bring us His inerrant Word.

No argument there.

 

[aikido7]

Throughout scripture we see the divinity of Christ, including His own words.

Jesus called Almighty God and Everlasting Father in OTIsaiah 9:6 For a child is born to us, a son is given to us. The government will rest on his shoulders. And he will be called: Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Jesus is the Creator
John 1:1-3In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
God created everything through him, and nothing was created except through him.
He existed in the beginning with God.

Jesus claimed pre-existence.
John8:58 Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I Am!"

Also... you may know another instance or two in the OT of Jehovah calling Himself "I Am".

Jesus is called God in the NT
Hebrews 1:8 But to the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. You rule with a scepter of justice.

Jesus is Lord
Matthew 22:45 Since David called the Messiah 'my Lord,' how can the Messiah be his son?"
(Read earlier verses for context )

Jesus is Lord of Lords
Rev. 19:16 On his robe at his thigh was written this title: King of all kings and Lord of all lords.

Jesus forgave sin
Luke7:48

Jesus claimed omnipotence
Matt.28:18 Jesus came and told his disciples, "I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth.

Jesus was omniscient
John 1:48 Nathanael said to him, From where know you me? Jesus answered and said to him, Before that Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.

Jesus is omnipresent
Matt.18:20 For where two or three gather together as my followers, I am there among them.

Jesus is worshipped
By angels. Heb.1:6
By people. Matt.14:33

Jesus claimed equality with The Father
John 10:30 The Father and I are one

What to do?
We can either look for theology, apologetics and faith statements (Believer's web sites have long lists) ...

Or we can can understand the marvelous harmony of 40+ authors being divinely inspired by God over the course of 1500 years to bring us His inerrant Word by using thousands and thousands of translations of hundreds and hundreds of copies of still other copies.

And if you cannot believe in a copy, 6days, you might not have anything left to believe in.

 

[6days]

What to do?
We can either look for theology, apologetics and faith statements (Believer's web sites have long lists) ...

Or we can can understand the marvelous harmony of 40+ authors being divinely inspired by God over the course of 1500 years to bring us His inerrant Word by using thousands and thousands of translations of hundreds and hundreds of copies of still other copies.

And if you cannot believe in a copy, 6days, you might not have anything left to believe in.

Yes.... we have good reason to trust the copies. There are multiple methods of determining reliability of the ancient manuscripts. One simple reason is that Christ trusted copies of scripture, quoting and reading from them as the ultimate source of truth.

 

[Puppet]

They will not present the many absurdities that are implied by their model of origins, and yet they have the audacity to claim they want equal treatment. If you do bring them up however, they can always say "It was a miracle". That is why they try to dress it up as "sciency" sounding words like "intelligent design" and leave out the idea that it really means "supernaturally intelligent design". They are certainly a bunch of snake oils salesmen, who lack the intestinal fortitude to be honest with themselves.

6days is clueless about reality, by the way. Any reasonable person can see that his elevator does not go to the top floor.

How can I believe in “intelligent design” when I meet so many idiots?

 

[noguru]

Please expand on what you see as E G White's original contribution?
Is it something about the flood or 6 day creation or both?

There are a variety of nuances that White added to or accentuated in the YEC movement around her through publicizing her visions. These factors are still echoed by "fundamentalists" to this day. I will not get into the veracity of her claims, and not all have been adopted by first day sabbatarians. But what is important was the zeal that she attacked things she believed had "crept into" the "mainstream" churches. Her ideas on the corruption of "true religion" are based on her visions. Her social criticisms also extended to where science had been encroaching on claims made previously from theology. Her visions of the flood can certainly be seen as a tool for the revival of what was perceived as "traditional" by some.

You should also take into consideration the chronology of events.

In February 1845, White experienced her second vision in Exeter, Maine known as the "Bridegroom" vision. Together with the third vision about the new earth, the visions "gave continued meaning to the October 1844 experience and supported the developing sanctuary rationale. Additionally they played an important role in countering the spiritualizing views of many fanatical Adventists by portraying the Father and Jesus as literal beings and heaven as a physical place.

At the beginning of the 19th century the science of geology was still in its infancy. By the end of the century it had not only matured but played a prominent part in the debate on the question of origins. A decisive turning point in this development was the publication of Charles Darwin’s book The Origin of Species in 1859,1 which put the theory of evolution on the front burner of the scientific establishment at that time. Within twenty years of the publication of this book, “nearly every naturalist of repute in North America had embraced some theory of organic evolution.”

The impact the book made on the Christian churches was soon apparent. While the majority of Bible-believing Christians continued to hold to special creation, many clergymen warmed to the idea of evolution. In 1860 Darwin’s theory of natural selection was discussed at the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science at Oxford. Bishop Samuel Wilberforce (1805–1873) intended to crush Thomas Huxley (1825–1895), who defended the new theory. The debate, however, was a complete victory for the Darwinians. “Wilberforce ridiculed Darwin’s theory and asked Huxley on which side of his family he claimed to be descended from an ape.” Whereupon Huxley, after demolishing the Bishop’s arguments, claimed “that he would rather be descended from an ape than from a man of high position who misused his talents
to attack a theory he did not understand.”

Thereafter, many theologians began to interpret the six days of creation as long periods of time. In 1880 the editor of the weekly Independent, which held the line against evolution for a long time, estimated that “perhaps half of the educated ministers in our leading Evangelical denominations” believe “that the story of the creation and fall of man, told in Genesis, is no more the record of actual occurrences than is the parable of the Prodigal Son.

The words “science” and “sciences” appear about 1850 times in the writings of Ellen White. Frequently she uses the word “science” in its root meaning of “knowledge,” from the Latin scientia. Thus she can speak of “the science of salvation”...

More on White.

She added the "supernatural" part?

No. The juxtaposition is between "spiritualizing" to which she is opposed and "supernaturalizing" which her ilk accepts, although both are equally as logically meaningless (to the point of being synonymous) in their proposed model of the world.

Wasn't that always there?

Yes, and people were beginning to see the inherent problems with that model of reality. So she used her visions as an attempt to add credibility to her desire to preserve the efforts at "supernaturalizing" scripture. The main factor in this is that the "physical sciences", which is inherently capable of analyzing only the natural world, had only recently uncovered the difference in a "natural" and "supernatural" model of origins.

At any rate, I have more confidence in Augustine's contributions to this area than I do in Ellen G. White or others of her illogical ilk.

I hadn't looked at the SDA as contributing really anything original they just took bits and pieces of existing concepts, rearranging the puzzle giving a different picture if you will?

They (the SDAs in general) and Ellen G White were part of the whole "revival" to what many people perceived as the "only traditional and true way" to view "theology", which is the predominant tool they use to interpret reality. Her visions revived the "faith" in "supernaturalizing" rather than the current direction, "spiritualizing", in which the church seemed to be heading. I stand by the claim that this distinction is meaningless and only serves as a self promoting platform to undermine parts of science that people with this stance want to reject without sound reason.

 

[noguru]

How can I believe in “intelligent design” when I meet so many idiots?

Sometimes people, in their attempts to appear clever, make themselves fools.

 

[exminister]

There are a variety of nuances that White added to or accentuated in the YEC movement around her through publicizing her visions. These factors are still echoed by "fundamentalists" to this day. I will not get into the veracity of her claims, and not all have been adopted by first day sabbatarians. But what is important was the zeal that she attacked things she believed had "crept into" the "mainstream" churches. Her ideas on the corruption of "true religion" are based on her visions. Her social criticisms also extended to where science had been encroaching on claims made previously from theology. Her visions of the flood can certainly be seen as a tool for the revival of what was perceived as "traditional" by some.

You should also take into consideration the chronology of events.









More on White.



No. The juxtaposition is between "spiritualizing" to which she is opposed and "supernaturalizing" which her ilk accepts, although both are equally as logically meaningless (to the point of being synonymous) in their proposed model of the world.



Yes, and people were beginning to see the inherent problems with that model of reality. So she used her visions as an attempt to add credibility to her desire to preserve the efforts at "supernaturalizing" scripture. The main factor in this is that the "physical sciences", which is inherently capable of analyzing only the natural world, had only recently uncovered the difference in a "natural" and "supernatural" model of origins.

At any rate, I have more confidence in Augustine's contributions to this area than I do in Ellen G. White or others of her illogical ilk.



They (the SDAs in general) and Ellen G White were part of the whole "revival" to what many people perceived as the "only traditional and true way" to view "theology", which is the predominant tool they use to interpret reality. Her visions revived the "faith" in "supernaturalizing" rather than the current direction, "spiritualizing", in which the church seemed to be heading. I stand by the claim that this distinction is meaningless and only serves as a self promoting platform to undermine parts of science that people with this stance want to reject without sound reason.

Thank you for your detailed response.

 

[6days]

How can I believe in “intelligent design” when I meet so many idiots?

Idiots... The Bibical word is 'a fool' auch as in Psalms. Also...
Romans1
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

 

[noguru]

Idiots... The Bibical word is 'a fool' auch as in Psalms. Also...
Romans1
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

Sometimes people, in their attempts to appear clever, make themselves fools.

If you truly believed that Biblical quote, why do you try to be more clever than God?

 

[aikido7]

Yes.... we have good reason to trust the copies. There are multiple methods of determining reliability of the ancient manuscripts. One simple reason is that Christ trusted copies of scripture, quoting and reading from them as the ultimate source of truth.

There is a difference.

Jesus characterized the entire source of the truth of scripture as "Love God as well as love yourself and your neighbor." Luke makes this very clear.

And the only time Jesus refers to the Ten Commandments is when he specifically mentions only those that any other of the world's faiths also hold paramount.

Jesus did not believe in a literalist, fundamentalist mindset. You can review what he told Nicodemus in John's gospel about the term "born again."

 

[aikido7]

Akido you can try to point out to 6days that the Gen 1 creation account is chronologically different than the Gen 2 account, but he'll just ignore you

And by doing so, he will have to ignore the writing in the Bible itself.

 

[6days]

Yes.... we have good reason to trust the copies. There are multiple methods of determining reliability of the ancient manuscripts. One simple reason is that Christ trusted copies of scripture, quoting and reading from them as the ultimate source of truth.

There is a difference.

It's the same.

I also trust scripture as the ultimate source of truth.

Jesus characterized the entire source of the truth of scripture as "Love God as well as love yourself and your neighbor." Luke makes this very clear.

Actually He characterized those couple *verses by saying "No other commandment is greater than these.”

And the only time Jesus refers to the Ten Commandments is when he specifically mentions only those that any other of the world's faiths also hold paramount.

Not sure how that is relevant but Jesus 'upped the anti' on the 10 Commandments by showing a relationship with God was not a matter of just obeying rules and trying get to be good. In Matthew 5, He used the 10 Commandments to show we are all guilty of sin. For ex. "21*“You have heard that our ancestors were told, ‘You must not murder. If you commit murder, you are subject to judgment.’ 22 But I say, if you are even angry with someone,*you are subject to judgment."

Jesus did not believe in a literalist, fundamentalist mindset. You can review what he told Nicodemus in John's gospel about the term "born again."

Jesus often *taught through parables if that is what you mean. But He also accepted scripture as His source of absolute truth and true History. *

 

[aikido7]

Throughout scripture we see the divinity of Christ, including His own words.

Jesus called Almighty God and Everlasting Father in OTIsaiah 9:6 For a child is born to us, a son is given to us. The government will rest on his shoulders. And he will be called: Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Jesus is the Creator
John 1:1-3In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
God created everything through him, and nothing was created except through him.
He existed in the beginning with God.

Jesus claimed pre-existence.
John8:58 Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I Am!"

Also... you may know another instance or two in the OT of Jehovah calling Himself "I Am".

Jesus is called God in the NT
Hebrews 1:8 But to the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. You rule with a scepter of justice.

Jesus is Lord
Matthew 22:45 Since David called the Messiah 'my Lord,' how can the Messiah be his son?"
(Read earlier verses for context )

Jesus is Lord of Lords
Rev. 19:16 On his robe at his thigh was written this title: King of all kings and Lord of all lords.

Jesus forgave sin
Luke7:48

Jesus claimed omnipotence
Matt.28:18 Jesus came and told his disciples, "I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth.

Jesus was omniscient
John 1:48 Nathanael said to him, From where know you me? Jesus answered and said to him, Before that Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.

Jesus is omnipresent
Matt.18:20 For where two or three gather together as my followers, I am there among them.

Jesus is worshipped
By angels. Heb.1:6
By people. Matt.14:33

Jesus claimed equality with The Father
John 10:30 The Father and I are one

You hold to the later tradition of a jealous God of justice who demands a blood sacrifice.
The older tradition is that of Jesus and John the Baptizer. Jesus never thought he was divine--if we bracket John's gospel as an expression of a much later Christian theology.

In contrast to the synoptics, Jesus speaks in long, dense theological monologues all about his mystical self and the importance of believing in him. Gone is the Galilean rabbi who never said he was divine whenever questioned by his followers.

Read the Lord's Prayer carefully. Jesus believes in a God of mercy who simply wants repentance and a contrite heart.

Being a normative kosher, Jew, he would have been disgusted to find out he was in favor of a blood sacrifice for sin.

Paul's authentic letters and the Gospel of John are the only parts of the New Testament that make this claim. In fact, John was so interested in this tradition that he even changed the day Jesus was put to death!

 

[meshak]

You hold to the later tradition of a jealous God of justice who demands a blood sacrifice.
The older tradition is that of Jesus and John the Baptizer. Jesus never thought he was divine--if we bracket John's gospel as an expression of a much later Christian theology.

In contrast to the synoptics, Jesus speaks in long, dense theological monologues all about his mystical self and the importance of believing in him. Gone is the Galilean rabbi who never said he was divine whenever questioned by his followers.

Read the Lord's Prayer carefully. Jesus believes in a God of mercy who simply wants repentance and a contrite heart.

Being a normative kosher, Jew, he would have been disgusted to find out he was in favor of a blood sacrifice for sin.

Paul's authentic letters and the Gospel of John are the only parts of the New Testament that make this claim. In fact, John was so interested in this tradition that he even changed the day Jesus was put to death!

Wasn't Luke Paul's follower?

 

[aikido7]

Wasn't Luke Paul's follower?

That has been the myth. The historical research I preference says it was not the case. There is nothing in Luke that points to his being a doctor. And the dating of Luke and Luke-Acts is at least a generation removed from the authentic letters of Paul.

Luke wrote for a more suburban audience, not the rural audience Mark wrote for. Mark has the friends of the paralytic digging through a peasant roof of dirt and branches. Luke tells the same story but updates it for his audience: the men removed tiles, a common feature of homes build in the more modern cities at the time.

 

[6days]

Throughout scripture we see the divinity of Christ, including His own words.

Jesus called Almighty God and Everlasting Father in OTIsaiah 9:6*For a child is born to us, a son is given to us. The government will rest on his shoulders. And he will be called: Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Jesus is the Creator
John 1:1-3In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
God created everything through him, and nothing was created except through him.
He existed in the beginning with God.

Jesus claimed pre-existence.
John8:58*Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I Am!"

Also... you may know another instance or two in the OT of Jehovah calling Himself "I Am".

Jesus is called God in the NT
Hebrews 1:8*But to the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. You rule with a scepter of justice.

Jesus is Lord
Matthew 22:45*Since David called the Messiah 'my Lord,' how can the Messiah be his son?"
(Read earlier verses for context )

Jesus is Lord of Lords
Rev. 19:16*On his robe at his thigh was written this title: King of all kings and Lord of all lords.

Jesus forgave sin
Luke7:48

Jesus claimed omnipotence
Matt.28:18*Jesus came and told his disciples, "I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth.

Jesus was omniscient
John 1:48*Nathanael said to him, From where know you me? Jesus answered and said to him, Before that Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.

Jesus is omnipresent
Matt.18:20*For where two or three gather together as my followers, I am there among them.

Jesus is worshipped
By angels.*Heb.1:6
By people.*Matt.14:33

Jesus claimed equality with The Father
John 10:30*The Father and I are one

You hold to the later tradition of a jealous God of justice who demands a blood sacrifice.

That might be an interesting topic....but has nothing to do with the post you replied to.*

Jesus never thought he was divine

Jesus knew He was divine and claimed it. See the post you replied to.*

--if we bracket John's gospel as an expression of a much later Christian theology.

You mean you want to discount The Gospel of John?*

I would say John's Gospel is God breathed inerrant scripture, in full harmony with all other God breathed scripture.

Read the Lord's Prayer carefully. Jesus believes in a God of mercy who simply wants repentance and a contrite heart.

Yes. .. but are you suggesting we ignore the teachings of Jesus about judgment and Hell?*

Being a normative kosher, Jew, he would have been disgusted to find out he was in favor of a blood sacrifice for sin.

Actually, Jesus knew His purpose was to be our blood sacrifice.*
Matthew 26:28*For this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

Other verses throughout scripture starting in Genesis tell us that death / shedding of blood is the penalty of sin. Without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin.

Paul's authentic letters and the Gospel of John are the only parts of the New Testament that make this claim. In fact, John was so interested in this tradition that he even changed the day Jesus was put to death

Paul's writings and the Gospel of John is *consistent with all other scripture, as is the day of the crucifixion.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=6&article=5059

 

[aikido7]

Jesus knew He was divine and claimed it. See the post you replied to.*

Matthew, Mark, and Luke, authors of the first three Gospels, believed that Jesus was not God (Mark 10:18 and Matthew 19:17). They DID see him as the Son of God. Many other righteous persons were declared Sons of God in the Hebrew Bible. He also blessed us all as the sons and daughters of God.

"Why do you call me good? Only God is good."
Mark 10:18

"The Father is greater than I."
John 14:28

"Who made me a judge?"
Luke 12:14

Paul, believed to be the author of some thirteen or fourteen letters in the Bible, also believed that Jesus is not God.

The only commonsense explanation is that the gospel preserves many different inspired traditions that sometimes contradict each other.

You mean you want to discount The Gospel of John?*

Not at all. You need to be honest and directly ask me like an adult instead of judging me before you know the facts.

I would say John's Gospel is God breathed inerrant scripture, in full harmony with all other God breathed scripture.

Just because there is a massive consensus among historians that the Fourth Gospel contains very little that is historical does not mean that it is not inspired scripture.

Yes. .. but are you suggesting we ignore the teachings of Jesus about judgment and Hell?*

Jesus preached the Kingdom of God on earth. He also said he definitively saw Satan "fall like lightning from Heaven" (Luke 10:18).

Heaven was in good shape and could take care of itself. It's here on earth where the problems all.

Personal salvation came about because his later followers became anxious because God did not return as Jesus had promised. It is our human fear of death, pure and simple.

Actually, Jesus knew His purpose was to be our blood sacrifice.*
Matthew 26:28*For this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

The Last Supper mythology is based on actually eating Jesus' body and drinking his blood. Any kosher Jew (this includes Jesus) would have been disgusted by such a thing.

Other verses throughout scripture starting in Genesis tell us that death / shedding of blood is the penalty of sin. Without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sin.

If you read the text carefully, there is also a tradition (much, much older than the priestly one) that held that God is a God of mercy that requires only repentance and forgiveness of others' sins.

The sacrificial spilling of blood on the altar to assuage sin began with the Aaronite priestly cult. Pay close attention to Aaron, Moses's brother. He is the one to focus on when studying the tradition of a bloody sacrifice.

When Jesus came upon the scene, he made it clear (in the Lord's Prayer and elsewhere) that only a contrite heart was needed to come before God. His attack on the Jerusalem Temple is attested to in all four gospels. Historians use this as proof the attack goes back to a real historical event in Jesus' life.

Paul's writings and the Gospel of John is *consistent with all other scripture, as is the day of the crucifixion.
http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=6&article=5059

Your source is apologetics, and apologetics is not history. It is theology asserted in the face of a perceived attack.

I am not attacking Christianity. I am merely stating that I see my God revealed in Jesus of Nazareth, not in the Roman or the American empire.

Paul says nothing about an empty tomb tradition and his theology affirms that Jesus' resurrection had nothing to do with his physical body. The actual proof of the resurrection (told only in Matthew and Luke) is so rife with discrepancies and contradictions that we must conclude there were just about as many resurrection myths among his early followers than just one.