The book was written after. The question is historical events and figures. St. Paul, for example, is a notable historical figure and author. He at first prosecuted early Christians, then converted to Christianity himself, and he was in an intense direct contact with the first disciples of Jesus and other people who firsthand saw Him resurrected.
So, some dead dude knew a guy that pinky swore that he totally saw Jesus rise from the dead?
You have to understand why that's not at all convincing. You'd think that such an omnipotent being that puts so much bearing on how you live your life would - you know - continue talking to us. Why doesn't he just pop into the sky and tell us to follow the Bible lol?
I'm sorry, but it would be illogical for me to believe in a deity and alter my life all because of one book and nothing else. It lacks any actual evidence and goes against basic logic. I still don't know and won't pretend to know what is out there. If I had to choose, I'd lean more towards there is some form of a god than believing that nothingness created the whole universe.
We probably will never know during our lifetime.
Edit: I had to respond to this comment because I get a "thread can't go that deep" message when I try to reply to your latest comment. Anyway, I'm 100% certain that we are going to disagree on all of this. But thank you for taking the time to talk to me.
"I had to respond to this comment because I get a "thread can't go that deep" message when I try to reply to your latest comment." - Yeah, it's a weird constraint.
More generally, it was a general knowledge that the body of Jesus disappeared, and the disciples were fighting off accusations that they stole it, there is surviving polemic on the question. However, only they knew that they didn't, and only they saw resurrected Jesus, because... anybody who saw resurrected Jesus, which did include some random people (including in crowds), became one of them.
You're mentioning other religions. Well, the only other two major open-membership proselytizing religions are Islam and Buddhism, and they are both based on personal revelations to Muhammad and Buddha, correspondingly, you just have to trust that what "came to them" is true, they are not rooted in any concrete historical "Q.E.D. by God".
(I hope you don't mind us continuing to talk? It's up to you of course)
So, the book vouches for itself by claiming people totally witnessed it all, and some died?
Even if people died for it, that doesn't prove that it's true. It's circular reasoning.
The book was written after. The question is historical events and figures. St. Paul, for example, is a notable historical figure and author. He at first prosecuted early Christians, then converted to Christianity himself, and he was in an intense direct contact with the first disciples of Jesus and other people who firsthand saw Him resurrected.
So, some dead dude knew a guy that pinky swore that he totally saw Jesus rise from the dead?
You have to understand why that's not at all convincing. You'd think that such an omnipotent being that puts so much bearing on how you live your life would - you know - continue talking to us. Why doesn't he just pop into the sky and tell us to follow the Bible lol?
I'm sorry, but it would be illogical for me to believe in a deity and alter my life all because of one book and nothing else. It lacks any actual evidence and goes against basic logic. I still don't know and won't pretend to know what is out there. If I had to choose, I'd lean more towards there is some form of a god than believing that nothingness created the whole universe.
We probably will never know during our lifetime.
Edit: I had to respond to this comment because I get a "thread can't go that deep" message when I try to reply to your latest comment. Anyway, I'm 100% certain that we are going to disagree on all of this. But thank you for taking the time to talk to me.
"I had to respond to this comment because I get a "thread can't go that deep" message when I try to reply to your latest comment." - Yeah, it's a weird constraint.
It's not about pinky swore (and not one guy), it's literally what and why they were doing what they were doing, sine non qua. This was jotted down quite honestly and explicitly: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2015:12-19&version=NIV
More generally, it was a general knowledge that the body of Jesus disappeared, and the disciples were fighting off accusations that they stole it, there is surviving polemic on the question. However, only they knew that they didn't, and only they saw resurrected Jesus, because... anybody who saw resurrected Jesus, which did include some random people (including in crowds), became one of them.
Here are some more details, for example (I hope this doesn't count as outsourcing of thinking, but details) - https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/jesus-of-nazareth/the-resurrection-of-jesus/
You're mentioning other religions. Well, the only other two major open-membership proselytizing religions are Islam and Buddhism, and they are both based on personal revelations to Muhammad and Buddha, correspondingly, you just have to trust that what "came to them" is true, they are not rooted in any concrete historical "Q.E.D. by God".
(I hope you don't mind us continuing to talk? It's up to you of course)