Are there any evidence that Jesus rose from the dead?

[otseng]

One of the key beliefs of Christianity that sets it apart from all other religions is that Jesus rose from the dead. No other religious founder has risen from the dead.

The Bible is clear that Jesus rose from the dead. But, are there any other evidence that Jesus was resurrected from the dead?

[otseng]

I'll start considering the "classic" arguments for the resurrection of Jesus.

One is that nobody has ever claimed to have found the body of Jesus. Especially not even during the first century. This would've been the easiest way to discredit early Christianity. Simply exhume the body and that would've been the end of it.

Suppose though that the disciples stole the body and disposed of it so that nobody could ever find it. Why would they all be willing to die for the cause if they knew that they simply hid the body?

[Abs like J']

From Otseng @ Mar 15, 2004 8:36 am:

Those are interesting points of discrepencies that you brought up surrounding the events that happened with Mary, Salome, Simon Peter, Joanna, angels, etc. But, the main point of this thread is the evidence of Jesus' resurrection.

Perhaps start another thread on those discrepencies? (As you can tell, I like having topics that try to stay within one subject matter)

The discrepencies are directly related to your question for debate in this thread: "are there any evidence that Jesus rose from the dead?"

The Gospel accounts are the primary source of the resurrection story are they not? I brought them and their internal differences up not to openly discuss random discrepencies within the Bible but to show that they present unreliable testimony of such an event as the death and resurrection of a man by the name of Jesus.

Regarding your "classic" argument for the resurrection of Jesus, we would first have to assume such a person lived, died and was buried as presented in the Bible (something I strongly doubt). Beyond that, assuming the Gospel accounts are somewhat true in their presentation of events, the "classic" argument is still left with the possibility that persons other than the disciples disposed of the body without their knowledge.

[Corvus]

How is the shroud that Jesus was wrapped in compelling evidence he rose from the dead? It seems to be compelling evidence he existed and died.

By the way the image got on the cloth. I'm not exactly sure what happened when he was resurrected, but he must've emitted some sort of energy to have created the image. I'll explain this more in the other topic.

Until we discover how the image got on the cloth, it's not evidence of any kind. The only true evidence is that we have a cloth with the image of a bearded man on it.

[otseng]

Their different accounts of the matter immediately call into question their truthfulness for me...

On any witness stand when there are several witnesses, they will each give their own perspective on what happened. Each will have their own interpretation of events. So, each will have differing accounts. The role of the jury is to piece together the accounts to try to get an accurate picture of what happened. It is expected that accounts will be different. Actually, when accounts given by different witnesses are completely identical, then the testimonies are suspect of collusion. Just like if four people in a classroom writes a report on a topic that is completely the same, then they are suspected of collusion or plagerism. So, if all four gospel writers wrote identical things, then their testimonies would suspect.

Each gospel account comes from a different angle and emphasizes different things.

Matthew account (Chap 28 )

1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:
4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.
5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.
8 And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.

Mark account (Chap 16)

1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?
4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.
5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.
6 And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.
7 But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.
8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.

Luke account (Chap 24)

1 Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.
2 And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.
3 And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.
4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:
5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?
6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,
7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.
8 And they remembered his words,
9 And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest.

John account (Chap 20)

1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.
3 Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre.
4 So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre.
5 And he stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in.
6 Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie,
7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.
8 Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed.
9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.
10 Then the disciples went away again unto their own home.
11 But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre,
12 And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.
13 And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.
14 And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.
15 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.
16 Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.
17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.
18 Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.

As to when the stone was rolled away, it was before the women came to the tomb. Matthew mentions that the guards saw the angel move the stone and was afraid to death and they fled during this time. Mark, Luke, and John mention that the stone was rolled away when the women came.

As for the number of women who approached the tomb, it was a minimum of three: Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome. Matthew mentions two Marys. Mark mentions all three. Luke doesn't mention them by name, but refers to the plural. John refers to Mary Magdalene. In both Matthew and John, they refer to less than 3, however, it doesn't discount that more could've been there. None of them says, "only Mary and Mary was there" or "only Mary was there".

As for when they arrived at the tomb, it was around sunrise. Matthews says "it began to dawn". Mark and Luke - "very early in the morning". John - "when it was yet dark". So, it was the time when it was dark to just when the sun was rising, which could be a very brief period of time.

As to the number of angels at the tomb, it depends on the time. In Matthew it mentions one angel moved the stone and sat on it. But this was before the women came to the tomb. When the women came, they saw two angels. Matthew and Mark mentions one angel. Luke mentions two. And John doesn't mention it. Matthew and Mark doesn't say that there was "only" one angel, so it doesn't preclude two.

[Abs like J']

From Otseng:

On any witness stand when there are several witnesses, they will each give their own perspective on what happened. Each will have their own interpretation of events. So, each will have differing accounts... It is expected that accounts will be different. Actually, when accounts given by different witnesses are completely identical, then the testimonies are suspect of collusion. Just like if four people in a classroom writes a report on a topic that is completely the same, then they are suspected of collusion or plagerism.

Four people writing their own individual reports are expected to have different papers. They can be about the same subject and include identical facts without being considered plagerism. The problem arises for students when their papers match word for word or close enough.

Supposedly eye witnesses to the same event may have different perspectives, but the basic facts are expected to be the same. If the fact is that Mary Magdalene and another Mary went to the tomb (Matthew 28:1-10) there is no accounting for an alleged witness to claim that only one person (John 20:1-12) or three people (Mark 16:1-8)went to the tomb. These are key details to the alleged event, not simply whether they wore shoes or what color their hair was.

Likewise, three Gospels report that the angels/men are encountered immediately upon arrival at the tomb, whereas the remaining Gospel (John 20:1-12) reports that Mary Magdalene fled the scene only to encounter visitors to the tomb upon her return with Simon Peter and another disciple.

And while you might like to think that there were definitely a minimum of three attendees, there appears no reason to believe this leap to justify the discrepencies. We're to believe that John was concerned enough with detail to specifically reference Mary Magdalene, Simon Peter and another disciple, report that only Mary Magdalene arrived and fled and that the three of them returned... but that others were with Mary at first and he just skipped mentioning them?

There is no reason to assume that there were details left out or seen from a different perspective by each author to account for these blatant differences except to vainly try and justify a belief that they are all true despite being so clearly different.

Their failure to account for a cohesive picture of the "discovered resurrection" (amongst other things) calls their testimony into question. That's not even taking into consideration the estimated date of their respective compositions and the unknown authorship of each. We don't know who wrote the first Gospel accounts, what information they were or weren't privy to, or even what their intent was in writing a story about an alleged resurrection.

A jury was mentioned at the start of your last post, Otseng. Would you expect to be convicted of a crime on the basis of eye witness testimony in the form of written text with unknown authorship at times decades after your alleged crime and with conflicting key details?

[Quarkhead]

Even a casual reading of works like The Golden Bough, or the work of Joseph Campbell, reveal that resurrection myths are almost as ubiquitous as hero myths. The idea of dying and being born again was also very commonly used as part of the metaphorical rites of passage at the time of puberty, for many ancient peoples.

To me this doesn't detract from the power of the Jesus resurrection story - it cements it. It is a powerful story because it is a primal representation of transition and growth. Trying to insist that this story is historical fact actually takes away a lot of its power. To "die" and be "born again" into a new covenant is excellent theology. But to view that as a metaphorical shadow of a historical event somehow takes away from the root of its power - that such a revolutionary transcendence is an innate desire, or represents some basic part of what it means to be human

[otseng]

If the fact is that Mary Magdalene and another Mary went to the tomb (Matthew 28:1-10) there is no accounting for an alleged witness to claim that only one person (John 20:1-12) or three people (Mark 16:1-8)went to the tomb.

Mary was the only one at the tomb after the disciples saw the tomb and left. Prior to the disciples coming, it doesn't mention that Mary went to the tomb alone.

Likewise, three Gospels report that the angels/men are encountered immediately upon arrival at the tomb, whereas the remaining Gospel (John 20:1-12) reports that Mary Magdalene fled the scene only to encounter visitors to the tomb upon her return with Simon Peter and another disciple.

I see no discrepencies here.

And while you might like to think that there were definitely a minimum of three attendees, there appears no reason to believe this leap to justify the discrepencies. We're to believe that John was concerned enough with detail to specifically reference Mary Magdalene, Simon Peter and another disciple, report that only Mary Magdalene arrived and fled and that the three of them returned... but that others were with Mary at first and he just skipped mentioning them?

The whole first half of John 20 focuses on Mary. It is also the only book that goes into what happens at the tomb after the disciples left, in which Jesus appears to Mary. So the perspective of this passage is focusing on Mary's encounter with Jesus. Also it only devotes one verse to mentioning first visiting the tomb, so a lot of details were left out of what happened prior to the disciples coming.

A jury was mentioned at the start of your last post, Otseng. Would you expect to be convicted of a crime on the basis of eye witness testimony in the form of written text with unknown authorship at times decades after your alleged crime and with conflicting key details?

You'll have to prove your allegation of unknown authorship to convince the jury.

As to conflicting key details, I have made the rebuttals to them.

[Abs like J']

Markan Authorship
Evidence of Markan Priority
Authorship of Matthew and Luke

The above links concern themselves with the details of each Gospel in refuting their alleged authorship by the names attributed to them. Religioustolerance.org suggests that it is the more liberal scholars who accept now that authorship of the Gospels is unknown. It also explains why only four Gospels, out of the many in circulation, found their way into our present day bible:

St. Irenaeus explained: "There are four principle winds, four pillars that hold up the sky, and four corners of the universe; therefore, it is only right that there be four gospels."

Of course, the easiest way to diagnose the problem of authorship is to realize that they never seemed to have names attributed them until the second century. Dozens of Gospels were floating around in use by different churches, and while referenced prior to their given names, were done so anonymously.

There is nothing to show that the authors of the Gospels are who have been attributed with the writings and plenty reason to question the position taken by the early church.

From Otseng:

As to conflicting key details, I have made the rebuttals to them...

Abs like J' wrote:

If the fact is that Mary Magdalene and another Mary went to the tomb (Matthew 28:1-10) there is no accounting for an alleged witness to claim that only one person (John 20:1-12) or three people (Mark 16:1-8)went to the tomb.

Mary was the only one at the tomb after the disciples saw the tomb and left. Prior to the disciples coming, it doesn't mention that Mary went to the tomb alone.

According to John 20:1-12, which you copied and pasted earlier:

1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.
3 Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre.
4 So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre.

Rather than being the only person "after the disciples saw the tomb and left" it appears John is pretty clear in stating she is the first person to the tomb (alone), and is only the remaining person upon her flight and return with Simon Peter and another disciple. She is clearly shown as the first and only person arriving at the tomb in contrast to the two, three or more depicted in other Gospel accounts.

The discrepencies you failed to see in the account of John 20:1-12 versus the other Gospels is that in addition to Mary Magdalene being the only person described visiting the tomb in the morning, she flees the scene to return later and encounter angels/men whereas the other Gospels indicate the angels/men are encountered on but a single trip.

[canadianhorsefan]

Jesus (pbuh) was never killed. So, he never rose from the dead. He wasn't killed, he was saved by Allah. I'm sorry if I'm going crazy, I've just got debate-fever, and since I'm the only one online, I'm going nuts.

canadianhorsefan

[otseng]

Jesus (pbuh) was never killed. So, he never rose from the dead. He wasn't killed, he was saved by Allah.

What is your supporting evidence for such a claim?

Also, as a side question, why do you postfix Jesus with (pbuh)?