southern cross wrote:
aglassdarkly wrote:
[
Replying to post 1 by Tired of the Nonsense]
Christians believe in the resurrection because we have faith, not because we have demonstrable evidence. Also because it holds our worldview together, explains our religious experiences, and makes sense of how we perceive the world. Oh yeah, and it makes sense.
If Jesus died and stayed dead, that means someone lied. Somehow that lie got spread around and some people believed it. How could that happen? Let's say the 11 apostles decided to make up the story. They go around telling everyone that Jesus rose from the grave... let's even say they stole the body so it would seem true. People are like "Oh yeah, he's alive? Where?" And Peter says "Well, he appeared to a bunch of people in the next town over, but he's not here anymore." And one guy says "Oh yeah? I'm going to go visit a friend there tomorrow, I'll ask about it because I'd like to know if it's true." No one can find anyone from the crowds that saw Jesus after the resurrection. No one can find anyone who saw Jesus ascend into heaven. No one can find any verification for the stuff the 11 apostles are saying. Everyone knows they're lying because their story is easily falsifiable.
But that's not what happened. So why did so many people believe the story?
We can even stipulate that the story was really clever and they paid a bunch of "witnesses" to give false testimony and somehow a bunch of people were gullible enough to believe the story. But why would the 11 apostles give up their lives for a lie, get tortured for a lie... without ever admitting that they made it up? And why would Paul join them?
It only makes sense if they genuinely believed.
If you believe the resurrection was made up, you have to explain human behavior during the 1st and 2nd centuries after his death.
All very neat, except, the story didn't exist until 50yrs after it's alleged occurrence.
Galatians was written sometime between 46 and 55 AD, depending on which theory we accept. From the first verse Paul writes about Jesus rising from the dead. Earlier dating is more commonly accepted, but even if we accept the latest date for the writing of Galatians it would mean that we have a record of Jesus resurrection which was written a little more than 20 years after the event.
Paul writes in a way which suggests that his readers are already familiar with the resurrection of Jesus, and that he and others had preached to them in the past about this resurrection. This means the story was well established before the writing of Galatians.
It is generally accepted the Paul began his first missionary journey, preaching about the resurrection of Jesus, sometime between 41 AD and 44 AD. This means that, at latest, within 12 years of the alleged event people were proclaiming that Jesus rose from the dead.
Any way we cut it that is a lot less than 50 years.
Concerning the general question it is impossible to establish any historical event by logic, reason, or critical thinking. We can examine the evidence, which is the approach that aglassdarkly takes. However, the fact that logic, reason, and critical thinking on their own cannot lead us to any historical event neither improves nor harms the likelihood of an event taking place.
In my experience, this issue comes down to what assumptions the individual begins with.
Those who begin with the belief that there is a God capable of acting in a miraculous manner and that Jesus is Lord find the evidence in favor of Jesus resurrection compelling.
Those who begin with the belief that there is no God or that God is incapable of acting in a miraculous manner in this world insist that there is no compelling evidence and whatever evidence there is must be false or faked.
Understand that you might believe. Believe that you might understand. –Augustine of Hippo
