Mr. Ratzinger: "Resurrection of Christ is historical tr

[ShadowRider77]

Mr. Joseph Ratzinger, also known as Benedict XVI, said that the resurrection of Jesus is fact.

Here is a link in Italian (Sorry I didn't find anything in English about it. I looked on NYT and CNN websites, but couldn't find anything on it. Apparently, they ignored this. Praise to them if it is so.)

http://www.corriere.it/ultima_ora/agrne ... 0DFFBDE9E}

[I tried dressing the link, but didn't appear to work...].


and here is my translation, as literal as I could:

"'Nobody can deny such an historical and fundamental truth for christian church like the resurrection'. The pope said it in his first post-Easter general audience beefore 30.000 believers. 'The resurrection of Christ is widely documented - Benedict XVI added - even if today, like in the past, there are some who in different ways puts it in doubt or even denies it'. The pontifex also said: 'If in the Church faith in resurrections goes missing, everyhing stops, everything crumbles. Instead, adherence of heart and mind to Christ resurrected changes life and enlightens existence of persons and people. If Christ is not resurrected, said the apostle Paul - the Pope commented - then our predication is vain and our faith is also vain. But Christ is resurrected.'"

Also here the full papal speech, in Italian again, as reported by the official vatican newspaper (I couldn't muster the strength to translate that whale yet, but if anyone is interested just ask and I'll do it as soon as I'll be able...):

Avvenire.it

[Here it worked. Weird... ]


Now, the above appears to me as wrong on so many levels, I don't even know how to begin. Resurrection an historical truth?! A fact? Sorry, but didn't you tell me that the key was faith? If the resurrection of your prophet is fact, then faith is no more required, am I wrong? Then why you keep blabbering about the "mistery of faith"?

Also, I like the circular logic. "If Jesus is not resurrected, then we are all telling and living a mass of lies. But Jesus is resurrected, because the book we wrote ourselves says so!". I half-expected him to add a "so take it!" at the end...

The resurrection cannot be denied? Wanna bet it? "Jesus did not resurrect!". Here, I won...

I don't think it is needed to even begin about the 'historical accounts' to which the church refers to. Self-referencial tales, written by members of Jesus' fan club generations after his alleged death and resurrection, and heavily manipulated in following centuries...

The sad thing, at least for me, is that this was one of the first news in yesterday's newscasts in Italy, and is front-page on the sites of the main newspapers today. Bah...I'll be better start looking for ways to get out of here...

[ShadowRider77]

Hm, threat title too long. Sorry, I didn't notice it on the preview. Last word was "Truth", of course...

[Oskuro]

First he says that Hell does exist (contradicting Jhon Paul II who said it didn't), then, they make up new deadly sins, like being extremely rich, or tampering with the human genome... Now this.

It wouldn't surprise me if good old Darth Benedictvs spouts Young-Earth Creationist drivel next.

[Superman]

He's correct about it being a historical fact. That's why all of the Romans, Jews, and others in the region who witnessed all of the miraculous events recorded them in their own historical accounts... Oh wait a minute, other than the first four books of the New Testament, we don't have any historical corroboration... Pfff, what was I thinking...

Consider these events:

(Mat 27:45) Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.
(Mat 27:51) And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
(Mat 27:52 NRSV) The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised.
(Mat 27:53 NRSV) After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many. ("Braaaaains....")
(Luk 23:45) And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.

I think it's safe to say that the Romans, or the Jews, or whoever, would have recorded some of these things as well. That's some heavy shit.

[Darth Yoshi]

Don't you understand, Supes? It's all part of the Evil Roman-Jewish-Egyptian-Homosexual Conspiracy™ to suppress the Word of God! The very fact that there is no evidence is itself proof of the conspiracy! It's a good thing the Pope is such a sharp man.

[wautd]

Not much of a sacrifice if he did resurrect if you ask me

[Rye]

That's pretty fucking hilarious as it's clear from the Gospel of Mark that the resurrection stuff was added later and not a part of the original flow of the text. What a complete fraud. I have to laugh when those stupid catholic priests argue with Dawkins and claim that Ratpope is the "thinking man's pope".

[Superman]

Don't you understand, Supes? It's all part of the Evil Roman-Jewish-Egyptian-Homosexual Conspiracy™ to suppress the Word of God! The very fact that there is no evidence is itself proof of the conspiracy! It's a good thing the Pope is such a sharp man.

The one I always hear is that the Gentiles in the area wouldn't have recorded those miraculous events... because it would be the same as admitting Christianity is true. You know, because all other religions of every other society have to compete against the other religions just like the Christians.

Biblical literalists are so fucking stupid... it's like they don't even listen to what they say.

[Zixinus]

They're getting desperate.

[Darth Wong]

This is nothing new. Pope John Paul II watched Mel Gibson's film The Passion and declared that "it is as it was". In other words, JP2 declared that The Passion was historical fact. How is that different from RatPope's latest bullshit?

[General Trelane (Retired)]

This is core Christian doctrine, and all who disagree (such as Unitarians) are automatically declared to be non-Christian, blasphemers, and heretics.

[FSTargetDrone]

Not much of a sacrifice if he did resurrect if you ask me

As with many things, Twain has said it well:

Jesus died to save men -- a small thing for an immortal to do, & didn't save many, anyway; but if he had been damned for the race that would have been act of a size proper to a god, & would have saved the whole race. However, why should anybody want to save the human race, or damn it either? Does God want its society? Does Satan?

[UCBooties]

I'm not sure why it is surprising that the leader of the largest sect of organized Christianity in the world would declare that the fundamental basis for Christianity is fact. That's kind of like having a head-line that reads "Cat lover announces 'Cats are Awesome.'" It'd be much more news-worthy if the Pope or another leader of an equally influential sect came out and said Jesus wasn't literally resurrected.

As for the Homo/Romo/Jew conspiracy about keeping things hushed up to keep a lid on the Christians, why wouldn’t people of other faiths in the region have recorded such unusual events and argued that they were manifestations of their own gods?

[Kitsune]

Isn't believing in Christ as a historic fact a part of being a Christian in the first place........

[Vendetta]

Well yeah. Pope believes in christianity, in other shocking news water is wet.

[Metatwaddle]

Isn't believing in Christ as a historic fact a part of being a Christian in the first place........

Not if you ask this guy.

[The Vortex Empire]

Whats that, Benny? Nobody can deny Jesus resurrection as fact. Well that's odd, I don't think it ever happened. Widely documented? No, it's only found in the Bible, which is an ancient fantasy.

[Zixinus]

How about evidence of OTHER prophets from the time, like Christ's rival. I don't know his name, but he was pretty popular for a long time.

Then again there was a shitload of those guys back then.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

This is NOT worthy of a thread. It's like creating a thread for "Used car dealer says his cars are a quality product!"

No shit?

The POPE said the Resurrection is fact!? NO FUCKING WAY!

Jesus, you're a dumb fuck trying to get some atheist creds by posting this. The fucking Pope of the fucking Catholic Church believes that the Resurrection is an historical fact? I mean, seriously, WHERE IS THE NEWS HERE? WHAT is there to discuss?

That would be nothing, nothing, and nothing.

You might as well have added that the sky is blue and oxidized blood is red.

[Surlethe]

This is core Christian doctrine, and all who disagree (such as Unitarians) are automatically declared to be non-Christian, blasphemers, and heretics.

Not just declared to be -- they are not Christian, by definition. The reasonable definition of a Christian is a person who accepts as true the propositions laid out Nicene Creed (save, perhaps, the filioque, which I understand the Catholic Church is quietly conceding).

[ShadowRider77]

This is NOT worthy of a thread. It's like creating a thread for "Used car dealer says his cars are a quality product!"

No shit?

The POPE said the Resurrection is fact!? NO FUCKING WAY!

Jesus, you're a dumb fuck trying to get some atheist creds by posting this. The fucking Pope of the fucking Catholic Church believes that the Resurrection is an historical fact? I mean, seriously, WHERE IS THE NEWS HERE? WHAT is there to discuss?

That would be nothing, nothing, and nothing.

You might as well have added that the sky is blue and oxidized blood is red.

I'm sorry that you see it that way. I thought it could be an interesting starting point for a discussion on how catholic church is steadily radicalizing its positions and getting more and more fundamentalist, possibly due to its rapid loss of influence in countries that were once its 'property'. I also found interesting the idea that, according to the chief of catholicism, their religion should not be anymore based on 'faith', but rather on 'fact'. Apparently I was wrong. Feel free to delete or lock this thread, as you see fit.

'get atheist creds'? Mah, you are free to believe so, but it is not one of my priorities. I have better things to do than trying to become 'popular' on a internet forum. I have asked membership because appeared to me that there was a good incidence of interesting discussions, and I thought I could give my contribution. That is all.

As for me being a "dumb fuck", well, let's say that opinions vary... anyway, I have added your vote to the pool...

[wjs7744]

As has been pointed out already, this isn't really a suprise. What does surprise me on the other hand is that this apparently was considered headline news in Italy. Guess it must have been a slow week or something.

And ShadowRider? I think you messed up here. Claiming that Jesus really happened is hardly fundamentalist stuff.

[ray245]

Hmm come to think of it, does Jesus as a PERSON exist at all?

[Darth Servo]

As has been pointed out already, this isn't really a suprise. What does surprise me on the other hand is that this apparently was considered headline news in Italy. Guess it must have been a slow week or something.

If the Pope gets up later than usual, its headline news in Italy.

[Macross]

Hmm come to think of it, does Jesus as a PERSON exist at all?

Their usually is some truth behind a myth. Probably in the same vein as King Arthur, their is no one single person behind the myth, but rather several individuals who's separate stories were intermixed, combined and over embellished into a single narrative.

You have to remember that these are stories that had been passed down in oral tradition for decades before they were even written down. And even after they were written down, the stories continued to change as each bible had to be copied by hand, and the monks who copied these bibles took "creative liberties" while transcribing the text. They would expand of some stories, remove other stories, rewrite whole portions of text. Thats why we have many different versions of the bible today.

Many of the "facts" in the bible were actually decided by committee when the church decided to reconcile the different versions of the texts. So the bible, through its own history, proves that it is not a reliable historical document, let alone the word of God.

I guess you could even say the bible "evolved" into what it is today.