.
He came back to life
A book was written about the execution of a preahcer a hundred years ago on trumped-up charges of crimes against the state. His body was put into a mausoleum. A few days later the mausoleum was opened and the body was gone. Some of his parishioners said they saw him a few times then he was gone for good and hasn’t been seen since. The book describes the event.
Before one accepts the story as true, perhaps it would be wise to ask a few questions.
1. Are there records that the person lived at the time in question?
Yes, there are church records.
2. Are there any non-church records (civil records, historical accounts, impartial witness accounts)?
No answer
3. Are there records of the execution?
Yes, there are church records
4. Are there any non-church records?
No answer
5.Did anyone examine the body to insure that death had occurred?
Someone probably did
6. Who did and what were their qualifications to determine the presence or absence of life?
No answer
7. Into which mausoleum was the body placed?
No answer
8. Who witnessed the body being placed in the mausoleum?
There were witnesses
9. Who?
No answer
10. How does one know that the body was not removed?
There was a large stone over the door and there was a guard
11. Was the stone ever moved by humans?
Yes, but . . . . . . .
12. If it was moved once by humans is it possible that it was moved again by humans?
Yes, but . . . . . it was moved by an angel
13. How do we know that?
It is written in the book
14. Is there other evidence?
No answer
15. Other than the stone, is there any reason to believe the body was not removed?
There were guards
16. Who were the guards?
They were soldiers
17. Can you identify them, their unit or their commander?
No answer
18. Are guards completely reliable?
Yes
19. Can you say that no guard has allowed something in his care to be taken, stolen or moved?
No answer
20. How do we know that the body was gone?
There were eyewitnesses
21. Who were they?
I don’t know but some people said that they knew the people and wrote about it in letters.
22. Can you identify the witnesses?
No answer
23. Can you identify the people who wrote for the book?
I can give you their first names
24. Can you provide credible identification of the writers?
No answer
25. Did the witnesses leave any written record of what they saw?
No answer
26. What evidence is there that the preacher came back to life?
He appeared to some members of his congregation
27. Did people other than members of his congregation see him alive and make a record of their account?
No answer
28. Where is he now?
He went to heaven
29. How do we know that?
It is written in the book.
30. Is there any other evidence?
Lots of people believe it
31. Does wide acceptance guarantee truth?
It should count for something
Now. Would you believe the above account on the basis of the information provided?
He came back to life
Moderator: Moderators
-
Zzyzx
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 25089
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
- Location: Bible Belt USA
- Has thanked: 40 times
- Been thanked: 73 times
He came back to life
Post #1.
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
-
TRANSPONDER
- Savant
- Posts: 8414
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
- Has thanked: 977 times
- Been thanked: 3632 times
Re: He came back to life
Post #31It's a bit depressing but par for the course I suppose that all the old, stock, apologetics claims are trotted out.
Just for instance extra -Biblical evidence for Jesus. I saw this claim trotted out back when I first got into the debate, and we still see it repeated today There was only ever two that even merited consideration: Tacitus and Josephus, and possibly a third, Suetonius. The others just refer to Christians or their claims, but provide no shred of decent evidence for Jesus (even though I do thing he was a real person). Suetonius might be referring to Jesus when he talks of 'Chreshtus stirring up trouble in Rome, but equally likely it is not Jesus at all. Josephus' Flavian Testament is for sure partly forged by a Christian and there is evidence that it is all a forged interpolation between two 'misfortunes' relating to Pilate which the forger inserted (I also read that there is no mention of this thing before the 3rd c, which would be surprising if it was in Josephus from the start). There is also the reference to James the brother of Jesus (known as Christ), which I originally found convincing, but now I think related to Jesus and James, sons of Damnaeus and 'known as Christ) is a Christian gloss, added later.
Tacitus I was also convinced by but it was discussions intended to validate it as reliable Roman record that rather undermined it. The Pilate stone (which for sure validated Pilate at least) shows he was a prefect, not a procurator. They are functions of a Roman governor but prefect is a military position and procurator a fiscal one - tax collecting rather than military action, though in fact all Roman governors did both. But the point is that Tacitus calls Pilate Procurator, which is wrong. So that shows that he was not referring to Roman records, but to Christian hearsay, assuming the governor in Jesus' time was procurator as in Tacitus' day. So Tacitus is merely commenting (unsympathetically) on Christian claims and, while it is slight exra -Biblical validation for Jesus even being crucified (as I think he was) ity is no validation at all for the Christian beliefs about him. In fact a better case can be made for Jesus as merely yet another failed messiah.
Just for instance extra -Biblical evidence for Jesus. I saw this claim trotted out back when I first got into the debate, and we still see it repeated today There was only ever two that even merited consideration: Tacitus and Josephus, and possibly a third, Suetonius. The others just refer to Christians or their claims, but provide no shred of decent evidence for Jesus (even though I do thing he was a real person). Suetonius might be referring to Jesus when he talks of 'Chreshtus stirring up trouble in Rome, but equally likely it is not Jesus at all. Josephus' Flavian Testament is for sure partly forged by a Christian and there is evidence that it is all a forged interpolation between two 'misfortunes' relating to Pilate which the forger inserted (I also read that there is no mention of this thing before the 3rd c, which would be surprising if it was in Josephus from the start). There is also the reference to James the brother of Jesus (known as Christ), which I originally found convincing, but now I think related to Jesus and James, sons of Damnaeus and 'known as Christ) is a Christian gloss, added later.
Tacitus I was also convinced by but it was discussions intended to validate it as reliable Roman record that rather undermined it. The Pilate stone (which for sure validated Pilate at least) shows he was a prefect, not a procurator. They are functions of a Roman governor but prefect is a military position and procurator a fiscal one - tax collecting rather than military action, though in fact all Roman governors did both. But the point is that Tacitus calls Pilate Procurator, which is wrong. So that shows that he was not referring to Roman records, but to Christian hearsay, assuming the governor in Jesus' time was procurator as in Tacitus' day. So Tacitus is merely commenting (unsympathetically) on Christian claims and, while it is slight exra -Biblical validation for Jesus even being crucified (as I think he was) ity is no validation at all for the Christian beliefs about him. In fact a better case can be made for Jesus as merely yet another failed messiah.
