Jesus isnt even close to being the first martyr
but your inclusion of "sin" which is a unique concept in early religions limits your idea of martyr greatly
Jesus was the first perfectly sinless individual to die or be martyred for ALL the sins of the world.
"sin" has been a concept of mans since the beginning of the human condition.
The story of Jesus is a compilation of other stories in mythology of gods and deities invented from observing the world and applying power structures to outcomes!
The term "concept" is traced back to 1554–60
How could it be then that since the beginning of the human condition, "sin" was a concept?
Sin is what it is, whether you believe it or not. Gods laws are His laws and the breaking of those laws is sin. But then again, breaking of any moral/ethical law is sin as well.
And I hate to be the one to break this to you, but Jesus is not a "mythical" being. He did exist. He walked this earth. And just as it is documented about people before him were born so to was it documented of his birth and of his crucifiction and even too of his resurection as there was no body ever found, the huge, massive stone rolled away, without the Roman soldiers being aware of it and so on.
That Jesus was crucified at all is a well-attested event of Roman history. Not to mention the countless other documented cases of Him on earth.
In repsect to the resurection though:
which by the way, when you think about it, do you not think, that in those times, The Romans would have done everything in their power to insure that Jesus' body would not be stolen?
I mean, he did tell of his resurection prior to being executed. So by that token, would it not have made sense then for the Romans to make certain nobody could "fake" the resurection and steal the body? I think they would have, if they could have. because surely they did not want for this prophesy to come true or take place or atleast to have millions and millions if not billions of people the world over to believe it did. But thats just my opinion
How then do you reconcile all the contradictory information about this supposed "historical" figure? He's described as looking many different ways, from height to hair color. He's even said to be bald. When exactly was he born? Again, many dates abound... Where was he born? Bethlehem or Nazareth? Archeologists have discovered there was no Nazareth in the first century. No secular record of the man even survives. Now, doncha think for such an important historical figure we'd know just a tad more about him?
Yeah from the historical account of Matthew we see that the chief priests and the Pharisees had guards put in front of Jesus' tomb because they knew he had foretold of His resurrection after three days.
Matthew 27:62-66 "And the next day, which followed the day of preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees came together to Pilate, Saying: Sir, we have remembered, that that seducer said, while he was yet alive: After three days I will rise again. Command therefore the sepulchre to be guarded until the third day: lest perhaps his disciples come and steal him away, and say to the people: He is risen from the dead; and the last error shall be worse than the first. Pilate saith to them: You have a guard; go, guard it as you know. And they departing, made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting guards."
Then when Jesus resurrected the guards became as dead men.
Matthew 28:1-6 "And in the end of the sabbath, when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalen and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre. And behold there was a great earthquake. For an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and coming, rolled back the stone, and sat upon it. And his countenance was as lightning, and his raiment as snow. And for fear of him, the guards were struck with terror, and became as dead men. And the angel answering, said to the women: Fear not you; for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here, for he is risen, as he said. Come, and see the place where the Lord was laid."
Sock puppet that is the weakest "scripture" trap I have ever seen on a religious thread, and I have seen some wild ones! . You are hilarious!!!
Yes even a modicum of proof would be better than nothing!
Ah Mohit my friend, we agree again! That is at least a few times, and that is pretty good
Again not a sign of proof, just more from the book already! We, at least most of us know it cover to cover fer cryin out loud!!!
by pennyofheaven5 years ago
Here's Wikipedia's version......A sin (also called peccancy) is an act that violates a known moral rule. The term sin may also refer to the state of having committed such a violation. Commonly, the moral code of conduct...
by Debra Allen6 weeks ago
The Bible says that all one has to do is ask for forgiveness. Now being that, do you think that Satan might have already asked God for forgiveness? Now before you rattle off scripture.....I don't...
by mohitmisra8 years ago
Jesus- Forgive them as they know not what they do" Doesnt work.The cosmos takes things into its own hands and even Jesus saying forgive them does not work.The cosmos does not tollerate and insult to the saints who...
by haj33964 years ago
No!!!!!!! a baby is born in a world of sin and as they Grow the are shaped in obedience are disobedience. But, when they are born they are sin free. Therefore if a baby die as a baby they are saved. a sinner is one who...
by Moxyl6 years ago
Is there anything wrong with the belief that Buddha, Allah and Jesus are friends?I went to non-religious schools when I was young and from there I learned stories about different religions. Somehow I connected the...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.