Is the Resurrurredction really a historical fact, or not?

[polonius]

In Paul’s oldest and first epistle, written in 51-52 AD, he states without qualification that:

“Indeed, we tell you this, on the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord,* will surely not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16For the Lord himself, with a word of command, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God, will come down from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first.g17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together* with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Thus we shall always be with the Lord.� 1 Thes 4:15-17

But it didn’t happen. Thus we must conclude that either Paul or the Lord were incorrect.

How much else of what Paul told us is also incorrect?

Recall, it was Paul who reported the Resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15 written about 53-57 AD.

Was his story historically correct (did it actually happen) or is it just a story that was used by and embellished by the writers of the New Testament?

Since the basis of Christian belief is the historical fact of the Resurrection, let’s examine the evidence and see if the Resurrection really happened or can an analysis of the story show that it is improbable if not impossible.

Opinions?

[JLB32168]

Also factual as demonstrated by the lack of written evidence. Unless you have proof otherwise.

You have not factually demonstrated that there was no written evidence prior to Paul’s writings (what you alleged is the first mention of the Resurrection.) Your “facts� are founded in an absence of evidence; therefore, your conclusion is illogical.

It is logical to conclude that you think the scene from Acts – where Paul allegedly had a vision of Christ speaking from a light – is a fabrication. You also say that he wrote that 500 had seen Christ. What was the source of Paul’s information about Christ if he didn’t get from Christ?

Despite such an amazing event, none (including Romans residing in Jerusalem) wrote anything about.

You don’t know that. All you know is that if anything was written it did not survive. Have you ever speculated on an original source that the author of Mark used – the alleged Q gospel? I hope you haven’t because it no longer survives. I know that others much more learned than either of us speculate that it existed but is now lost. The same skeptics have stated that Paul wrote other epistles that haven’t survived. Second Corinthians is alleged by them to actually be two letters that were pieced together from two previous letters – a 3rd Corinthians being one of the two.

[polonius]

Clair Evans wrote:

In regards to why some scriptures appear in some gospels, but not in others demands a lot on the audience. Matthew wrote about the fulfillment of OT prophecies. In the dead saints rising argument, I believe it could be a symbolic fulfillment of the resurrection of the dead.

QUESTION: How about a simple fiction to make believers and maintain control over them?

I believe is there was no resurrection, no believers could be made in the first place. Especially if one witnessed someone died and had to proof they rose from the dead. Would you be a believer?

RESPONSE: No proof has been provided that someone died and rose (or was raised from the dead - there's a major difference and the writers of the NT don't agree on this point).

I will not be a "believer" until such "proof" is provided. And I tend not to be very gullible!

[polonius]

Also factual as demonstrated by the lack of written evidence. Unless you have proof otherwise.

You have not factually demonstrated that there was no written evidence prior to Paul’s writings (what you alleged is the first mention of the Resurrection.) Your “facts� are founded in an absence of evidence; therefore, your conclusion is illogical.

RESPONSE: It is common sense that there is no valid proof for a non-event.

It is logical to conclude that you think the scene from Acts – where Paul allegedly had a vision of Christ speaking from a light – is a fabrication. You also say that he wrote that 500 had seen Christ. What was the source of Paul’s information about Christ if he didn’t get from Christ?

RESPONSE: Paul made up an event claiming it occurred 25 years previously and to which he wasn't a witness. No other writing, even the Gospels, claims that such an event happened.

Despite such an amazing event, none (including Romans residing in Jerusalem) wrote anything about.

You don’t know that. All you know is that if anything was written it did not survive.

RESPONSE: Ah yes. The old "proof didn't survive" argument. A more credible explanation is that there simply was no proof of a non-event to survive. So it doesn't exist..

Have you ever speculated on an original source that the author of Mark used – the alleged Q gospel? I hope you haven’t because it no longer survives. I know that others much more learned than either of us speculate that it existed but is now lost. The same skeptics have stated that Paul wrote other epistles that haven’t survived. Second Corinthians is alleged by them to actually be two letters that were pieced together from two previous letters – a 3rd Corinthians being one of the two.

RESPONSE: First, please begin with proof of your claim that a "Q" document existed and contained valid historical information, and Mark, evidently a Syrian, had assess to it and used it's contents. Also, if so, why did Mark ignore the other information found in Q and reported by Matthew's and Luke's later stories?

[polonius]

In summarizing non-Christian historical references to Jesus, lets begin with the Roman historian Tacitus.

"Nero fastened the guilt ... on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of ... Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome...."

See Tacitus, Annals 15.44, cited in Strobel, The Case for Christ, 82
No claim of any Christian belief in a Resurrection or Ascension by Tacitius.

Let's examine some others.

[JLB32168]

It is common sense that there is no valid proof for a non-event.

You have not proved that the even did not occur. You asserted it did not occur and since you asserted it you need to prove it. You can’t do that so your comment is irrelevant.

Paul made up an event claiming it occurred 25 years previously and to which he wasn't a witness.

You have asserted this several times. The only “proof� you’ve given is “It’s just silly to believe that a god would appear to someone in a light and say this stuff� or some variation of that.

Ah yes. The old "proof didn't survive" argument.

You cannot win a point and misrepresent the point and rebut your misrepresentation. Then you claim victory. What you think is credible is your affair. Your argument “Nothing was written until Paul wrote it twenty-five years later� is mere speculation. You don’t know that nothing was written until Paul wrote it. You’re just throwing out presupposed conclusions – one that is as debatable as the next one.

First, please begin with proof of your claim that a "Q" document existed and contained valid historical information . . .

I didn’t say it existed. I said that not a few people much more learned than you or I posit its existence. The Institute for Antiquity and Christianity in Claremont, CA, began the task of “reconstruction,� in 1989. According to the Institute (with Ingolf U. Dalferth w/four Ph.D.s; Cynthia Eller, the late PhD, University of Southern California, the late James M. Robinson, Arthur J. Letts Professor of Religion, Director of the Institute for Antiquity and Christianity and the head of the Gospel of Q project) posited that via a highly detailed literary analysis of Matthew, Luke, and Thomas that this Q Gospel existed at one time but was lost. You didn’t even address the point on how many skeptics believe that the Epistles of 2nd Corinthians is actually a combination of two letters, one of which is a lost 3 Corinthians.

Your throw the word “facts� around willy-nilly as though your speculations were delivered from Sinai.

[polonius]

It is common sense that there is no valid proof for a non-event.

You have not proved that the even did not occur. You asserted it did not occur and since you asserted it you need to prove it. You can’t do that so your comment is irrelevant.

RESPONSE: Let's see if this is a common sense approach to history.

Let me try a similar claim.

Joe Perfutnick lived in the first century and could flap his hands and fly.

There are no records of his doing so.

However, it might be claimed that there were records but these records were lost.

Therefore, I can't prove that such records existed.

Therefore, I have to accept that there may have been a man in the first century that could flap his arms and fly.

Is that really a credible argument that people should believe a first century flying man story?

Isn't this example a similar argument to the one you are attempting?

Do you think we should accept such an argument?

[polonius]

Letter from Suetonius to Pliny the Younger.

"They (Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food – but food of an ordinary and innocent kind."

[polonius]

Letter from Suetonius to Pliny the Younger.

"They (Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food – but food of an ordinary and innocent kind."

(Pliny, Letters,(Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1935), vol. II, p96,)

[polonius]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus

Titus Flavius Josephus (/dʒoʊˈsi�fəs/;[1] 37 – c. 100…was a first-century Romano-Jewish scholar, historian and hagiographer, who was born in Jerusalem—then part of Roman Judea—to a father of priestly descent and a mother who claimed royal ancestry….
He initially fought against the Romans during the First Jewish–Roman War as head of Jewish forces in Galilee, until surrendering in 67 CE to Roman forces led by Vespasian ...
The next work by Josephus is his twenty-one volume Antiquities of the Jews, completed during the last year of the reign of the Emperor Flavius Domitian …

There are two references to Jesus in the Antiquities of the Jews. One is Jesus’ death; the other is to the death of Jesus’ brother, James the Just.

The Arabic version seems to be the original but the Greek version (evidently added to by it’s Christian translator) is more popular with Christians.

http://jewishchristianlit.com/Topics/Je ... ephus.html

The Arab version.

"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 didnot abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to themafter his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders."


The Greek (Christian) version:

[/b]About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not cease. On the third day he appeared to them restored to life. For the prophets of God had prophesied these and myriads of other marvellous things about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still up to now, not disappeared.

In sum, the early non-Christian writings report Jesus' death BUT NOT ANY RESURRECTION. That was added to the story later.

[JLB32168]

Let's see if this is a common sense approach to history.

No – let’s consider the things you’ve said thus far, namely, nothing was written prior to Paul’s letters, which you don’t know. In fact, evidence was presented that not a few scholars more educated than you or me believe that not all ancient Christian writings have survived, such as Paul’s letters being incomplete, the Gospel of Q. Your argument is founded upon an absence of evidence – one that isn’t even that solid since most scholars do indeed believe that stuff existed and hasn’t survived. To compare that with some guys claim to fly is silly.