Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
05-16-2011, 11:55 AM (This post was last modified: 05-16-2011 11:58 AM by Ahmadi.)
Post: #1
The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
Christian apologists try to use the label of 'facts,' to create credibility for the hearsay evidence that they present for resurrection. But, the facts of one apologist differ in some ways from the facts of another apologist and in this comparison we can see that all the evidence mounts to no more than hearsay.

The first apologist that I want to bring here as a witness is Michael Licona. He debated Prof. Bart Ehrman and was trying to prove the historic validity of resurrection, he had the first opening statement. He suggested three (so called) facts to make the sum total of his thesis:

1. Jesus' death by crucifixion.
2. Sighting of Jesus by the Apostles after Crucifixion.
3. Sighting by Paul.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyHA3K_6H0g

It turned out that the first fact was a red herring and had no relevance to the debate, as Ehrman simply mentioned that Jesus did not have to be crucified but could have been drowned or died of cholera and could have been raised from the dead. So the first fact goes away fairly quickly and the other two facts are in fact only one fact as these imply witnessing by certain people including Paul. So much for the three facts of Licona. We will return to his only remaing fact some other time but let us move to the facts of William Lane Craig and address one of his facts in this comment. He makes a big deal out of the so called fact of the empty tomb and its relevance to resurrection. His fact is easily negated by a little quote from the chief apologist, Pope Benedict XVI:

"Jesus traveled the path of death right to the bitter and seemingly hopeless end in the tomb. Jesus' tomb was evidently known. And here the question naturally arises: Did he remain in the tomb? Or was it empty after he had risen?

In modern theology this question has been extensively debated. Most commentators come to the conclusion that an empty tomb would not be enough to prove the Resur¬rection. If the tomb were indeed empty, there could be some other explanation for it. On this basis, the com-mentators conclude that the question of the empty tomb is immaterial and can therefore be ignored, which tends also to mean that it probably was not empty anyway, so at least a dispute with modern science over the possibility of bodily resurrection can be avoided. But at the basis of all this lies a distorted way of posing the question.

Naturally, the empty tomb as such does not prove the Resurrection. Mary Magdalene, in John's account, found it empty and assumed that someone must have taken Jesus' body away. The empty tomb is no proof of the Resurrec¬tion, that much is undeniable. Conversely, though, one might ask: Is the Resurrection compatible with the body remaining in the tomb? Can Jesus be risen if he is still lying in the tomb? What kind of resurrection would that be? Today, notions of resurrection have been developed for which the fate of the corpse is inconsequential. Yet the content of the Resurrection becomes so vague in the process that one must ask with what kind of reality we are dealing in this form of Christianity.

Be that as it may: Thomas Soding, Ulrich Wilckens, and others rightly point out that in Jerusalem at the time, the proclamation of the Resurrection would have been completely impossible if anyone had been able to point to a body lying in the tomb. To this extent, for the sake of posing the question correctly, we have to say that the empty tomb as such, while it cannot prove the Resur¬rection, is nevertheless a necessary condition for Resurrection faith, which was specifically concerned with the body and, consequently, with the whole of the person."

So, the punch line is that the empty tomb does not prove resurrection hypothesis but may be necessary for considering such a hypothesis.


Pope Benedict XVI. Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week: From the Entrance Into Jerusalem To The Resurrection. Ignatius Press, 2011. Pages 253-254.

For further details go to a Google knol titled: William Lane Craig makes false claims about swoon hypothesis!

http://knol.google.com/k/zia-shah/willia...mbuyp/332#

I am second coming of Thomas Paine. If you are a Christian, have you read Age of Reason?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-16-2011, 03:12 PM
Post: #2
RE: The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
At the time of the resurrection, there were multitudes of witnesses. People saw Jesus die. People saw him alive afterwards. However, all we have today is the written record in the Bible. It's simply been too long ago, and the Bible has been passed down through too many hands, over too many centuries, which allows the skeptic to doubt or disbelieve. I get that.

The belief in Jesus Christ, the truth of the Bible, and anything religious is a matter of choice. Acting on that belief is faith. And we are here to develop our faith. Physical evidence eliminates the need for faith, which negates our purpose here on earth. Those of us who live by faith, have learned w/in ourselves that it is indeed true. That it works. But we cannot prove it scientifically. That said, I understand how the lack of physical evidence supports a person's disbelief.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-16-2011, 03:23 PM
Post: #3
RE: The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
Really well explained, Brenda - even though I don't share your faith, I have a great deal of respect for it as you describe it. I also respect the desire for empirical evidence, but I sometimes think we can put a little too much weight on it. I've got a lot of time for someone who's find a way that works for them, can understand the reasons why others wouldn't choose it and can respect that, but sticks with it anyway.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-16-2011, 03:55 PM
Post: #4
RE: The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
Brenda, you would like to think that people saw him alive but what if he never died on the cross and was only resuscitated and seen with the same body with the scars. How would you explain soul returning to a body that has been decaying for 36 hours or three days in tropical weather after death? Another issue to think about is that if he was going to get a brand new body on resurrection, why did God keep the scars, the car dealers do better when they refurbish any old car.

The Bible has several interpolations.

One of the most dramatic facts highlighting human interpolation in the Bible is that the conclusion of the gospel of Mark, full 12 verses are a later addition. This vulnerability is broadly acknowledged now in the Christian circles; see the New International Version of the Bible as an example.

The stories have served the Christians well for 2000 years but in this information age they may be hard to sustain, try reading Bart Ehrman.

I am second coming of Thomas Paine. If you are a Christian, have you read Age of Reason?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-16-2011, 05:14 PM (This post was last modified: 05-16-2011 05:15 PM by brenda.)
Post: #5
RE: The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
(05-16-2011 03:55 PM)Ahmadi Wrote:  Brenda, you would like to think that people saw him alive but what if he never died on the cross and was only resuscitated and seen with the same body with the scars. How would you explain soul returning to a body that has been decaying for 36 hours or three days in tropical weather after death? Another issue to think about is that if he was going to get a brand new body on resurrection, why did God keep the scars, the car dealers do better when they refurbish any old car.

The Bible has several interpolations.

One of the most dramatic facts highlighting human interpolation in the Bible is that the conclusion of the gospel of Mark, full 12 verses are a later addition. This vulnerability is broadly acknowledged now in the Christian circles; see the New International Version of the Bible as an example.

The stories have served the Christians well for 2000 years but in this information age they may be hard to sustain, try reading Bart Ehrman.
Again, I can give you no physical proof that he even lived at all, much less died and lived again. I choose to believe it's true and that choice has served me well during my lifetime of over 50 years.

When Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, he purposely waited until the 4th day when decomposition was underway. He possibly wanted to impress upon the people that he was who he said he was and could do what he said he could do. This miracle happened in the presence of the Sanhedrin who felt threatened by his influence and popularity. It was a "type and a shadow" of his own death and resurrection.

The scars remain as a testimony of his death and resurrection. Otherwise all resurrected beings will be w/o blemish.

Yes, the stories have served Christians for 2000 years. And the doubt and apostasy that would permeate the land in the last days was foretold. We today, who think we are so enlightened by science and knowledge, were also seen and warned by the prophets of old. I wouldn't be so quick to discount their wisdom. Science has advanced greatly, but at the same time we tend to repeat the same foolish mistakes over and over throughout history.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-16-2011, 05:56 PM
Post: #6
RE: The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
(05-16-2011 03:12 PM)brenda Wrote:  ... all we have today is the written record in the Bible. It's simply been too long ago, and the Bible has been passed down through too many hands, over too many centuries, which allows the skeptic to doubt or disbelieve. I get that.

The belief in Jesus Christ, the truth of the Bible, and anything religious is a matter of choice. Acting on that belief is faith. ... Those of us who live by faith, ... cannot prove it scientifically. That said, I understand how the lack of physical evidence supports a person's disbelief.
I have edited out the bits with which I disagree but let that not detract from the fact I consider this the first, or best I have noticed, reasonable statement of faith by any of the theists here.

I have no objection to the holding of personal faith by anyone.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-16-2011, 09:33 PM (This post was last modified: 05-16-2011 09:34 PM by Ahmadi.)
Post: #7
RE: The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
(05-16-2011 05:14 PM)brenda Wrote:  Again, I can give you no physical proof that he even lived at all, much less died and lived again. I choose to believe it's true and that choice has served me well during my lifetime of over 50 years.

You are not supposed to give away your age so easily!

You write, "When Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, he purposely waited until the 4th day when decomposition was underway. He possibly wanted to impress upon the people that he was who he said he was and could do what he said he could do."

This is precisely the reason why science had such a long struggle with Christianity. An article titled, Allopathic Medicine's long struggle with the Bible, nicely covers it:

http://knol.google.com/k/zia-shah/allopa...mbuyp/233#

You can have whatever private belief you would want, you might as well believe in any cult and I have no problem with that. Having said that, however, to make sense out of centuries of prosetylizing by the Christian apologists, one has to assume that they would offer explanations that can be understood by non-Christians.

There is a famous quote by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan: 'You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.'

I will not force this judgment on you but on any Christian apologists!

I am second coming of Thomas Paine. If you are a Christian, have you read Age of Reason?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-16-2011, 09:47 PM (This post was last modified: 05-16-2011 09:53 PM by Shimei.)
Post: #8
RE: The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
(05-16-2011 09:33 PM)Ahmadi Wrote:  
(05-16-2011 05:14 PM)brenda Wrote:  Again, I can give you no physical proof that he even lived at all, much less died and lived again. I choose to believe it's true and that choice has served me well during my lifetime of over 50 years.

You are not supposed to give away your age so easily!

You write, "When Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, he purposely waited until the 4th day when decomposition was underway. He possibly wanted to impress upon the people that he was who he said he was and could do what he said he could do."

This is precisely the reason why science had such a long struggle with Christianity. An article titled, Allopathic Medicine's long struggle with the Bible:

http://knol.google.com/k/zia-shah/allopa...mbuyp/233#

You can have whatever private belief you would want, you might as well believe in any cult and I have no problem with that. Having said that, however, to make sense out of centuries of prosetylizing by the Christian apologists, one has to assume that they would offer explanations that can be understood by non-Christians.

There is a famous quote by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan: 'You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.'

I will not force this judgment on you but on any Christian apologists!

Hello Ahmadi,

Three days is how long it took for one to be certified dead. Lazarus and Jesus both were certifiably dead. The theory that Jesus had survived the crucifixion is an old theory called the swoon theory. He hardly would have converted the masses in a scourged state and turnt around skeptics such as James if being only three days from the scourging and crucifixion.

When Jesus bared the cross and hung from the tree, after He breathed out His last breath (no man took His life), He was pierced in the side by a spear. That spear pierced what is called the periculum, where once pierced released the fluid and blood that was written about.

Taking the Gospel records into consideration does not require one to have anymore reasonable doubt than one does when taking precedent of law or any other court record into account. Examining the Bible under the scrutiny of a Lawer has and will always take place, but the Bible has been protected and will be from the attacks during the millenniums and future millenniums for all scripture is God breathed.

And it's nice to meet you by the way,
Shimei
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-16-2011, 10:22 PM (This post was last modified: 05-17-2011 12:07 PM by brenda.)
Post: #9
RE: The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
(05-16-2011 09:33 PM)Ahmadi Wrote:  
(05-16-2011 05:14 PM)brenda Wrote:  Again, I can give you no physical proof that he even lived at all, much less died and lived again. I choose to believe it's true and that choice has served me well during my lifetime of over 50 years.

You are not supposed to give away your age so easily!

You write, "When Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, he purposely waited until the 4th day when decomposition was underway. He possibly wanted to impress upon the people that he was who he said he was and could do what he said he could do."

This is precisely the reason why science had such a long struggle with Christianity. An article titled, Allopathic Medicine's long struggle with the Bible, nicely covers it:

http://knol.google.com/k/zia-shah/allopa...mbuyp/233#

You can have whatever private belief you would want, you might as well believe in any cult and I have no problem with that. Having said that, however, to make sense out of centuries of prosetylizing by the Christian apologists, one has to assume that they would offer explanations that can be understood by non-Christians.

There is a famous quote by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan: 'You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.'

I will not force this judgment on you but on any Christian apologists!
I'm not ashamed of my age. I've learned a lot in those 50+ years.Smile

You probably never will be satisfied with explanations from Christians because you want tangible scientific evidence and they have none to give you. (Actually there is much logical evidence in my beliefs, but it never goes very far with non-LDS.) It's like trying to prove love. How can you prove love exists? How can you prove you love your spouse, if you are married? You can't. Yet love is very real.




(05-16-2011 03:23 PM)Painkiller Wrote:  Really well explained, Brenda - even though I don't share your faith, I have a great deal of respect for it as you describe it. I also respect the desire for empirical evidence, but I sometimes think we can put a little too much weight on it. I've got a lot of time for someone who's find a way that works for them, can understand the reasons why others wouldn't choose it and can respect that, but sticks with it anyway.


Quote:I have edited out the bits with which I disagree but let that not detract from the fact I consider this the first, or best I have noticed, reasonable statement of faith by any of the theists here.

I have no objection to the holding of personal faith by anyone.

Thank you Pacioli and Painkiller.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-17-2011, 01:08 AM
Post: #10
RE: The so called facts about resurrection are merely contradictory hearsay
Ahmadi's not an atheist by the way, Brenda.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Believing the Cross and Resurrection of Jesus Christ, - A Wise Choice Daily Light 41 4,998 04-10-2015 02:43 PM
Last Post: Herminator
  Resurrection Adam 23 2,188 04-09-2012 01:43 AM
Last Post: Azrael17
  Name a few facts about the bible god1 16 1,828 05-09-2010 08:53 AM
Last Post: prdamico



User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)