What would it take to prove that Jesus rose from the dead?

[McCulloch]

What would it take to prove that Jesus rose from the dead. giving that it happened way before cameras etc were invented?

P4JC

Good question P4JC.

[Pastor4Jesus]

It's well documented historically that the Romans used crucifixion as a means of executing non-Roman citizens during this period. Was Jesus crucified? Well it's not implausible and I for one am not arguing against it. It's when we come to the story of the resurrection however that we we have a serious plausibility problem. Clearly you don't agree. What would possibly make you reach the conclusion that the implausible is not only plausible, but in fact actually occurred?

Thanks for your comment and I will assume that you agree that the man Jesus existed and that you highly suspect that the deity of Jesus is a myth. That's understandable. I plan on using the writings of extra biblical sources with the mention that I feel the Gospels is reputable source of information. When we consider that we are trying to understand what happened thousands of years ago and was witnessed by a largely illiterate and poor audience, in an era where loving Jesus could get you killed , the only thing we could hope to have are the writings of historians such as Secular men such as Tacitus and of the apologists of the day such as Ignatius.

Thanks for your reply.

P4JC

[Pastor4Jesus]

What starts the implausibility of the entire crucifixion story is the account of the trial of Jesus. It is against Jewish law and custom and historical accounts. It is very polemic against the Jews, which is what you would expect from a community that is
insulted that they got kicked out of being able to worship in the same services for heresy

What do you mean Jewish law? The Romans are the ones that crucified Jesus under Roman law.

P4JC

[Pastor4Jesus]

In the area of proofs, I imagine that many men were crucified in the day...However, proving that one of them was a God and thereater arose from the dead is another matter all together...even more difficult in the area of proofs is the notion that Jesus' mom was a virgin and that no man, including her husband, had ever copulated with her at which time God himself impregnanted her ...that's impossible to swallow on hearsay dont you think?...come on now....

The Virgin birth is another subject, but yes its difficult to prove any miracle happened, even today! So the best we can hope for is that enough circumstantial evidence exists to convince any reasonable person that Jesus did indeed rise from the dead, visited his, visited hell then visited his buds only to fly the earth coop for the perfect realm of heaven. I hope to at least give enough evidence for the resurrection.


P4JC

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 69:

~ onward christian and non christian soldiers and we all are in a battle for souls whether we realize it or not.

Unsupported claim.

Other than James Brown, what evidence is there for "souls"?

So I will simply say that personally it satisfies me that the gospels agree with written history, and are not debunked in the historical extra biblical writings.

So you're satisfied. Why should we take your word for the resurrection of Jesus?

Ie when Taticus and others wrote about Jesus they were not debunked as liars etc by those that had a vested interest in doing those things.

Why should I accept your take on the writings?

...They described ‘his “hanging� (on a cross) on the eve of Passover, His identification along with the names of five of His disciples, certain healings in His name and scoffing at the “claim� that He was born of a virgin‘ in other words they were implying His birth was probably “illegitimate.�

Any of 'em mention seeing the resurrection?

Were these writings false?

You presented them, it's on you to show they're correct.

Now as we get answers and comments I may not answer all and will compile the negative responses to show how they do not represent truth but rather an concerted calculated effort to discredit historical events.

Of course. If someone merely challenges your claims you indicate you'll call them a liar and a member of some vast conspiracy.

I fear this "may not answer all" is a predictor that you'll ignore challenges.
------------------------------------------
From Post 70:

"With all due respect", that's a stupid, inflammatory statement.

I would counter that it may be a " stupid, inflammatory statement" only for those that lack the intellect to know the difference between sarcasm and someone being serious.

How do you know I wasn't offering sarcasm or not being serious?

Let's look at what got us here:

With all due respect, from my experience, most atheists would not believe that God was real even if he came down from heaven and took over the world.

Now, if that ain't stupid, it's ignorant. If it ain't inflammatory, it's flame bait.

Christians have a history of denigrating, even torturing and murdering those that disagree. I don't take such claims as yours here lightly.

You insult all those who make the best, most honest decision they can.

Back to Post 70:

Precise prophesies are not possible (if one wants to retain free will) by an all knowing GID (My term for God the Intelligent Designer).

LOL Your use of intelligent design to argue about why prophecies can't be verified is amusing.

Does the Bible name Russia specifically, or does it just mention some army from the north?

The bible has several books of prophesy. What I was speaking of was a pre- Armageddon strike against Israel by Russia and a middle eastern nation. In other words if Africa invaded Israel that would not be in the prophesy.

So you are saying it does mention Russia?

Why can't you answer the question?

You do know Africa is not a nation, right?

This is important because while we're all watching Russia, Lichtenstein could be ready to pounce!

"With all due respect", that's a stupid, inflammatory statement."

Of course it's stupid, and even inflammatory.

How is it any different than your declaring Russia and possibly Iran are gonna be the ones to pounce?

(edit for tags)

[Pastor4Jesus]

Ok we will start with the crucifixion as I said in regards Bible sources as valid evidence but we will examine some of the extra-biblical sources starting with this excerpt where the Roman governor of what is now northern Turkey wrote to Emperor Trajan regarding the Christians in his district:

Before we get into the extra biblical writings of Tacitus and other secular writers, there is something that most of us including Christians never consider. Such as; If the crucifixion and the resurrection of Jesus is not true, why early on is there no documentation refuting these events? Why did the agents against Christianity (nearly the entire literate population, and those with ‘police’ and ‘judicial’ power) make sure the body was not stolen from the grave?

Why didn’t the antagonists against Christians and its religion produce the body Jesus to prove the Christians were deceived? Why wasn’t anything at all written about the mental stability of those that claimed to see Jesus after his death? Why were there no documents by the opponents countering the details that are documented in scripture? Why pray tell is it a thousand years after the bible was written that the validity the events documented in the Bible is being questioned only today? If the disciples were If they were insane enough to die for a lie, there should be much documentation on how insane the disciples were after Jesus death. There certainly is plenty of gossip on other nuttiness and other dirty laundry of historical figures. Just a few questions to get warmed up.

P4JC

[Pastor4Jesus]

Unsupported claim.

Hmm’ Is it just me or does anyone else sense something….never mind. I am referring to souls in the religious context. However, there have been studies that indicate a mind brain duality may exist. Wilder Penfield esteemed father of modern neurosurgery recanted his disbelief of a sprit or soul and claimed that even a scientist (Walter Penfield ’the mystery of the mind’ pg 79) can believe in both (spirituality and science). Additionally no one knows how consciousness works which is a component and the standard definition of soul includes self awareness, without self awareness there is no soul.

So you're satisfied. Why should we take your word for the resurrection of Jesus?

I see above, I will use the gospels as one of many evidences of course. Evidence can be something as little as a piece of fiber or as great as a confession you know.

Why should I accept your take on the writings?

My take? First to have any discussion one must at least have some respect for the credibility of the other. If not why debate. When one must validate every word no matter how obvious its trueness is debate becomes impossible. You by your asinine attitude and attempts at slowing up debate harms everyone here. You are on the verge of me not being able to respond to you for those reasons. I am hoping that I do not have to ignore you.

Any of 'em mention seeing the resurrection?

Perhaps you should read the thread you are debating. Didn’t we agree to first prove the crucifixion? (hint hint ; yes)

You presented them, it's on you to show they're correct.

Correct they are correct without a doubt. Of course correct means different things. Anyway ~ The extra biblical writings by Tacitus etc are accepted and are recognized as valid in every case I am aware of, if you are claiming they aren’t so its your show that they aren’t. They are accepted by scholars and that’s enough for me.

Of course. If someone merely challenges your claims you indicate you'll call them a liar and a member of some vast conspiracy.
I fear this "may not answer all" is a predictor that you'll ignore challenges.

I answer most of those that ask questions, but you seem only capable of insults and other trollish remarks. If you ask a question that is free of insults I will answer in time. I think a moderator already commented on you critiquing my method of answering, so please unless you want more intervention keep it civil.

LOL Your use of intelligent design to argue about why prophecies can't be verified is amusing.

And effective that’s why you can’t defeat them. Again your remarks are verging (well they are already) on violating the spirit of this debate, and worse. Look at your responses, about 80% are not respectful nor are they on topic nor are they meant for anything but harm, it seems that your posting is simply an attempt to discredit everything I type with no regard to facts or real debate. You are only harming yourself and this the members of this forum by the derailing of the thread.

So you are saying it does mention Russia?

I am saying that Russia did not exist at the time and the book was written so that the people of the day could understand it. Additionally if God would of specifically said that the country was Russia he would have been changing our future because if the creator of the universe foretold specifics then we would have been forced to make those specifics come about. . Lastly I simply agree with the scholars that study this for a lifetime.

Why can't you answer the question? You do know Africa is not a nation, right?

Another bucket of tripe. I did answer the question you ignored it or insulted me about the specifics of prophesy. So try this; You do know that the word nation wasn’t invented until recently right? Did I call Africa a nation? Do you know that there are nations south of Israel? Again you fail to be able to understand simple terms and ideas. I am beginning to feel that productive debate with you is hopeless. From now any insulting or personal remarks embedded in a answer or question will not be addressed with further explanation.

P4JC

[Pastor4Jesus]

What would it take to prove that Jesus rose from the dead. giving that it happened way before cameras etc were invented?

P4JC

Good question P4JC.

Hmm...........

It can't be proven. I am a Christian. I do believe he rose from the dead. On the same token how do we know that George Washington was a real person. Have any of you seen him. How do we know that anyone before us existed. I have no proof Jesus existed. I also have no proof he did not.

God bless you. Well many things of science and most things of religion can't be 'proven'. Its mans guesses that sets the bar of proof where it is. Or what evidence constitutes. When it comes right down to us nothing that we feel is real is in fact is what it seems. This desk that my computer sits on seems solid but its not, its mostly empty space, our senses lie to us, but its a sweet lie, it enables us to navigate our bodies through this universe, and allows us to make sense of a near senseless counter-intuitive natural world.

God is real as anything else in this universe, it only takes the tools to be able to determine it as truth. Most nonbelievers do not have the tools to be able to believe anything except for what they can touch smell see or feel, sadly that is not sufficient to take the next emergent evolutionary step that our species is primed for. That is to shed the neo-positivist shackles that we have been burdened with for the last one hundred plus years and put on the angel like wings of metaphysics.

eh?

P4JC

[Pastor4Jesus]

Some extra biblical writings to establish the crucifixion occurred.

Cornelius Tacitus  - Annals XV.44

About the author: Born AD 52-54, a Roman historian, Governor of Asia in 112 A.D., son-in-law of Julius Agricola who was Governor of Britain A.D. 80-64.

Addressing the burning of Rome by Nero, he states the following:
"But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome.  Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities.  Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius; but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also." 
Ref 1/81

The method of execution by the court is crucifixion and its how the order read.

Lucian of Samosata - The Passing Peregrinus
About the author: A satirist of the second century.
Scornful of the Christians, he refers to Christ as:
"...the man who was crucified in Palestine and because he introduced this new cult into the world...Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they were all brothers one of another after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshipping that crucified sophist himself and living under his laws."
Ref 1/82

YES I KNOW OF THE SUSPISION OF Flavius Josephus - Antiquities xviii.33 (early second century) BUT HIS WRITINGS ARE USED IN TEACHING ABOUT ROMAN HISTORY ETC SO THEREFORE I HAVE INCLUDED HIM. ADDITIONALLY THERE IS A DISCLAIMER IN THE BODY OF THE CUT AND PASTE

About the author: Born A.D. 37, a Jewish historian, became a Pharisee at age 19; in A.D. 66 he was the commander of Jewish forces in Galilee.  After being captured, he was attached to the Roman headquarters.
The following version of Josephus' text is found in a manuscript composed by Bishop Apapius in the 10th century.  (The wording is hotly contested.) The manuscript has a section commencing with: "We have found in many books of the philosophers that they refer to the day of the crucifixion of Christ."  Then he gives a list and quotes portions of the ancient works, including the following:
"Now there was about time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure.  He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles.   He was the Christ, and condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him.   And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day."
Another version of this writing by Josephus can be found in an Arabic manuscript entitle "Kilab Al-Unwan Al-Mukallal Bi-Fadail Al-Hikma Al-Mutawwaj Bi-Anwa Al-Falsafa Al-Manduh Bi-Haqaq Al-Marifa" (approximately translated: Book of History Guided by All the Virtues of Wisdom. Crowned with Various Philosophies and Blessed by the Truth of Knowledge).  This version reads as follows:
b]"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good, and (he) was known to be virtuous.  And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples.[ Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders."
Ref 1/82[/b]

This is only three of many accounts of Jesus’s crucifixion. I am using these writings as the second item in my claim for the crucifixion (and later the resurrection). However there are other methods that I will use for evidences as these writings are discussed.

Yea two or three pages, that's enough writing for now eh?

P4JC

[McCulloch]

[...] Why did the agents against Christianity (nearly the entire literate population, and those with ‘police’ and ‘judicial’ power) make sure the body was not stolen from the grave?

Why didn’t the antagonists against Christians and its religion produce the body Jesus to prove the Christians were deceived?

What agents against Christianity? Other than the Christians own sources, there is no record of any action against Christianity in the first half of the first century. Until after the destruction of the Temple, Christianity was a mere blip not worthy of any notice.

However, there have been studies that indicate a mind brain duality may exist. Wilder Penfield esteemed father of modern neurosurgery recanted his disbelief of a sprit or soul and claimed that even a scientist (Walter Penfield ’the mystery of the mind’ pg 79) can believe in both (spirituality and science). Additionally no one knows how consciousness works which is a component and the standard definition of soul includes self awareness, without self awareness there is no soul.

Got anything more current? How is this any different from the usual creationist canard of "we don't understand it, therefore it must be God."?

God is real as anything else in this universe, it only takes the tools to be able to determine it as truth.

Really? Which tools are those? Nobody doubts the existence of water, yet good people cannot honestly say that they have confidence that God exists. Therefore, God cannot be said to be as real as water.

[Goat]

I may of too much liberty with the assumption that the atheist readership would even admit that the crucifixion happened! So maybe we should present evidence for that first?

You would be correct. Please proceed with the evidence that the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth by the Romans actually happened.

First we must agree that Jesus existed as a historical person. If we don’t agree with that we don’t have a debate for even the crucifixion of Jesus. So this is a conversation for those that agree that the historical Jesus existed. I would ask that everyone that responds indicate if they believe in an historical* Jesus. If the answer is 'no' I think someone should create another thread to debate if Jesus existed at all.

~ onward christian and non christian soldiers and we all are in a battle for souls whether we realize it or not.

I would argue that the gospels themselves are evidence for the crucifixion but debating the that topic (defending the Gospels) of this is beyond this threads intent and scope. So I will simply say that personally it satisfies me that the gospels agree with written history, and are not debunked in the historical extra biblical writings. Ie when Taticus and others wrote about Jesus they were not debunked as liars etc by those that had a vested interest in doing those things.

So lets visit some extra biblical sources as an addition to the Gospels. For example , the writings from Jewish Rabbis (circa A.D. 40-180) in the Talmud and other Jewish writings refer to Jesus Christ, i.e., They described ‘his “hanging� (on a cross) on the eve of Passover, His identification along with the names of five of His disciples, certain healings in His name and scoffing at the “claim� that He was born of a virgin‘ in other words they were implying His birth was probably “illegitimate.� Were these writings false? Now as we get answers and comments I may not answer all and will compile the negative responses to show how they do not represent truth but rather an concerted calculated effort to discredit historical events.

P4JC

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

uh.. error number 1 .. The Talmud that Christians claim to mention Jesus was started to be written down in the very late 2nd century to 6th century. That is plenty of time for stories and polemic word of mouth disruptions to come along,
and can not be used as a primary evidence that a Jesus actually existed. The Gospels were well in circulation, and the story is a reaction against the accusation of the illegalities of the trial of Jesus as described by the NT.
. 'Hanging' in Judiasm is not crucifixtion. It is displaying of a dead body after they were killed by a blow to the throat.

So, that solves that as using the Talmud as evidence.

Next?