Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Aetixintro
Site Supporter
Posts: 918
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 3:18 am
Location: Metropolitan-Oslo, Norway, Europe
Has thanked: 431 times
Been thanked: 27 times
Contact:

Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Post #1

Post by Aetixintro »

Mattman wrote: Fri Apr 08, 2022 8:26 am I love discussing/debating arguments related to God's existence and Christianity, and I have a voice chat group I'm putting together to do that. Send me a PM if you're interested in participating or listening in.

Below is a brief summarized version of an argument. I'd love to hear your thoughts!
____
Resolved: The available evidence justifies our belief that Jesus rose from the dead.

I'll present three lines of evidence supporting this claim:

The NT documents were based on eyewitness testimony.
We have reliable copies of that testimony.
We can establish facts from that testimony that support the resurrection.

In support of the first point, that the NT documents were based on eyewitness testimony, I present the testimony of three extra-biblical authors who were contemporaries of the eyewitnesses and of the writing of the NT documents. These writers were Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement of Rome. These three men were well acquainted with the eyewitnesses (Ignatius and Polycarp were disciples of John, and Clement was appointed to his position in Rome by Peter). They all also endorsed the NT documents through their many citations, quoting from every NT book except for 2 John and Jude. Finally, these men gave their lives for their faith (which speaks to their sincerity). The significance of this testimony cannot be understated. Three different men, well acquainted with the eyewitnesses, endorsed the NT documents through their many citations and died for their faith. Their writings justify our belief that eyewitness testimony provided the basis for the original NT documents.

Second, we want to know that we have accurate copies of those original NT documents. The NT stands head and shoulders above every other ancient work in this respect with over 5300 early copies and fragments in existence today. The next runner-up (Homer's Iliad) has just 643 copies and fragments. The New Testament manuscripts are also close to the originals, with many copies and fragments from the first few hundred years after the sources. Compare that to the next runner-up (again the Iliad), whose manuscripts are 500 years after the originals. There is also something to be said for the wide distribution of the documents. They were spread out over three continents and translated into multiple languages (with the earliest Latin translation going back to the 200s). The wealth of documents and their nearness to the originals give us good reason to believe we have accurate transmissions of the original documents.

Finally, we want to know what facts we can establish from the testimony. There are four facts critical to our consideration of the resurrection that we can consider:

Jesus was buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea.
The tomb was empty on the third day.
People, individually and in groups, reported post-mortem appearances of Jesus.
The disciples came to believe that Jesus rose from the dead.

Multiple NT witnesses corroborate each fact. We can find individual support for these points as well. For example, Joseph of Arimathea was a member of the Sanhedrin (the same group that condemned Jesus) and is therefore unlikely to be an early Christian invention. James (Jesus' brother and one of the people reporting a post-mortem appearance) met Paul in Jerusalem before Paul reported James's claim to a post-mortem appearance, indicating that Paul’s report of James’s claim to an appearance is firsthand.

I've supported the claim that eyewitness testimony provides the basis for the original NT documents and that our copies are accurate. I identified four facts that we can establish from that testimony, and those facts support the conviction that Jesus rose from the dead. We are, therefore, justified based on that evidence in the belief that Jesus rose from the dead.

____
Sources:

Craig, William Lane. On Guard. David C Cook, 2010.

Holden, Joseph M. The Popular Handbook of Archeology and the Bible. Harvest House Publishers, 2013.

McDowell, Josh. The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict. 1999.
So, QFD: Does this argument above convince you that Jesus rose from the dead? Why? Why not?
I'm cool! :) - Stronger Religion every day! Also by "mathematical Religion", the eternal forms, God closing the door on corrupt humanity, possibly!

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Re: Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Post #121

Post by Goat »

We_Are_VENOM wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 3:11 am
Goat wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 12:15 am Why. lets' go through it again.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_in_Judaism

The concept of messianism originated in Judaism,[1][2] and in the Hebrew Bible a messiah is a king or High Priest traditionally anointed with holy anointing oil.
Um, no.

You were challenged to show proof that high priests were called a "christ", because that was your original (false) claim.

So since you failed do so, I will conclude that the claim was false and jot it down as yet another false piece of information that I had to set straight.

Second, sure, the messiah was to be a high priest and no one is disputing that...I even shared Hebrews 7 and 8 which attest to the fact that Jesus is the High Priest..and you blatantly ignored it, yet maintaining this high priest stuff as if it is a point of contention, which it isn't.

The messiah was to be a high priest, but every high priest was not to be the messiah..which is why only one person was called Christ...Jesus.

There were PLENTY high priests that came and went, and neither one of them had the "Christ" title following them around wherever they went...except one.

JESUS :D
The concept of the Christ in Christianity originated from the concept of the messiah in Judaism
Sure, it was prophesied in Judaism and fulfilled in Christianity.

And?
So, Josephus was Jewish. He would not be using the christian concept. He might use the Greek work for anointed, which is Christ (literally it means 'wetted).
What do you mean might use? How about did use?

Because that is what he used.

And i already addressed Josephus' usage of "called Christ" and you've offered no response to it, so as far as im concerned it stands.
So the term Christ in Greek is messiah is Hebrew, and in the Hebrew bible a messiah is a king or high priest.
.....

Here, hold this L and lets keep it moving.
I showed that High priests were christs. Of course, there is a translation going on.. since in Hebrew in Jerusalem, it would Messiah. High priests were messiahs. A messiah, or (Moishe), would be Christ in the language Greek.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

User avatar
Difflugia
Prodigy
Posts: 3005
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 3232 times
Been thanked: 1984 times

Re: Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Post #122

Post by Difflugia »

We_Are_VENOM wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 3:11 amYou were challenged to show proof that high priests were called a "christ", because that was your original (false) claim.
Proof? The Bible. That's like "Bible 101." Every king and every high priest of Israel is called mashiach in Hebrew and christos in Greek. Glance through Leviticus 4 and count the number of times the word "anointed" is used to refer to Aaron and his sons. Do the same thing with the books of Samuel and Kings. David and Saul get the lion's share, but enough kings are attached to the term that it should be clear that it refers to kings in general. Psalm 105 unambiguously refers to the prophets in general as the christs of Yahweh (verse 15).

Isaiah 45:1 is a really fun example because it actully refers to the Persian king Cyrus:

Hebrew:
כֹּה־אָמַ֣ר יְהוָה֮ לִמְשִׁיחֹו֮ לְכֹ֣ורֶשׁ
"Thus says Yahweh to Cyrus, his Mashiach..."

Greek Septuagint:
οὕτως λέγει κύριος ὁ θεὸς τῷ χριστῷ μου Κύρῳ
"Thus says the Lord God, 'Cyrus, my Christ...'"
We_Are_VENOM wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 3:11 amHere, hold this L and lets keep it moving.
I just thought this needed to be here for context.
My pronouns are he, him, and his.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7862
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 922 times
Been thanked: 3466 times

Re: Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Post #123

Post by TRANSPONDER »

"In post-exilic times, the high priest, filling the place formerly occupied by the king, is spoken of as "ha-Kohen ha-Mashiaḥ" (the anointed priest; Lev. iv. 3, 5, 16; vi. 5), also (Dan. ix. 25, 26) as "Mashiaḥ Nagid" (an anointed one, a ruler) and simply "Mashiaḥ" (an anointed one), referring to Onias III. As the anointing of the high priest consecrated him above all his brethren to God's service and gave him immediate access to God (comp. Lev. viii. 12, xxi. 10-12; Zech. iii. 7), so the anointing of the king made him Meshiaḥ Yhwh, placed him in a special relationship to God, and established him as the one chosen by God to represent His rulership in Israel and to bear witness to His glory before the nations (comp. II Sam. vii. 8-11" Jewish Encyclopaedia)

This supports what it well known (outside lay Christian circles, at least) that a messiah is an anointed representative of God, and may be either a High priest or a king, or rather all High Priests and Kings were messiahs.

It is also known that Cyrus was considered a messiah because he (influenced by God, of course) released the Jews from the Exile. There was also the example of Josephus saying that Vespasian was a messiah (or The messiah) for whatever reason.

It is also well known that there were claimant Messiahs, notably those who tried to organise some kind of uprising. The Maccabean one succeeded. The Bar - Kochba revolt succeeded for a time. Others failed.

There is a possible argument that calling Jesus 'called the Christ' in Josephus (James passage) is simply translating 'Jesus who was called a messiah' or The messiah, because he was made a High Priest (By Albinus). More probably (I think) it is a gloss by a helpful Christian who noted that Jesus the brother of James wasn't clearly identified as the Gospel -Jesus and so he glossed it for us.

I reckon now that the whole passage related to the story of the sons of Damnaeus (and is too late for Gospel Jesus) and cannot be claimed as support for the Gospels. I know that believers deny this as I've argued it in the past, but the point is that it cannot be used to push doubters into accepting it as evidence for Gospel -Jesus because it isn't.

User avatar
We_Are_VENOM
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1632
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:33 am
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Post #124

Post by We_Are_VENOM »

Difflugia wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:05 pm Proof? The Bible. That's like "Bible 101." Every king and every high priest of Israel is called mashiach in Hebrew and christos in Greek.
No, see that is where you are WRONG, which we are about to expose below.
Difflugia wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:05 pm Glance through Leviticus 4 and count the number of times the word "anointed" is used to refer to Aaron and his sons. Do the same thing with the books of Samuel and Kings. David and Saul get the lion's share, but enough kings are attached to the term that it should be clear that it refers to kings in general. Psalm 105 unambiguously refers to the prophets in general as the christs of Yahweh (verse 15).

Isaiah 45:1 is a really fun example because it actully refers to the Persian king Cyrus:

Hebrew:
כֹּה־אָמַ֣ר יְהוָ[לִמְשִׁיחֹו֮ לְכֹ֣ורֶשׁ

"Thus says Yahweh to Cyrus, his Mashiach..."

Greek Septuagint:
οὕτως λέγει κύριος ὁ θεὸς τῷ χριστῷ μου Κύρῳ

"Thus says the Lord God, 'Cyrus, my Christ..'"
Well, I can sum up everything you just said by simply stating, again...you are WRONG.

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/psalms/105.htm

That is the Hebrew-Greek interlinear.

If you look up Ps 105:15, it is rendered as my anointed ones. I don't see anything about Christ, or Christos..do you?

If you look up Strong's Hebrew Concordance 4899.

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/4899.htm

Go to this^, and look long and hard.

Do you see anything about Christ/Christos? No, you don't..because it isn't in there.

And 4899 covers ALL of those scriptures you mentioned, neither one of which references any Christ/Christos.

However, when we go to...lets say, Matthew 16:16 (when Jesus asked Peter who do he (Peter) say he (Jesus) am.

16 Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

Check this out..

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/16.htm

What do you see? I bet you see Christos in there, don't you? Sure you do.

And what does Strong's Concordance 5547. say?

https://biblehub.com/greek/5547.htm

The page is flooded with "Christ".

You guys are fallaciously equivocating "anointed ones" and "messiah" with "Christ"..and the point I keep stressing is...to say Jesus is Christ certainly means he is/was anointed and the messiah...but just because a king or high priest is anointed and/or a messiah, DOESN'T mean that this person is Christ.

So I said all of that to say this, you are WRONG..as has been the case on most occasions. :D
Venni Vetti Vecci!!

User avatar
We_Are_VENOM
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1632
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:33 am
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Post #125

Post by We_Are_VENOM »

Goat wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 9:50 am I showed that High priests were christs. Of course, there is a translation going on..

since in Hebrew in Jerusalem, it would Messiah. High priests were messiahs. A messiah, or (Moishe), would be Christ in the language Greek.
So please explain to me why no other high priests' name of whom Josephus mentions in Antiquities, has the title "Christ" tied to it.

You only see tied to Jesus' name, no one else.

And that is where you will say "that is because a later Christian embellished the passage"...and that is where I will say, once again...no...because that is not how Christians refer to Jesus in virtually any context, especially not that one.

When Josephus stated that Jesus was called Christ, it is because it was simply telling it like it is...that Jesus, brother of James, was called Christ, which was the prevailing view at that time.

And I wonder why :D
Venni Vetti Vecci!!

User avatar
We_Are_VENOM
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1632
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:33 am
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Post #126

Post by We_Are_VENOM »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 3:33 am Can you tell me what point you made that isn't fully answered by my response, because i can't think of anything relevant. Angels turning up later do not address the problem.

I have refuted attempts to argue that one or other of the Marys somehow didn't see the angel or hear the message. I really don't know what useful response you can make other that, 'sure there is a serious contradiction between John and the synoptics'.
I already addressed all of that...and I've yet to see a response.

So, we can leave it right there...I've done my job.
Venni Vetti Vecci!!

User avatar
We_Are_VENOM
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1632
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:33 am
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Post #127

Post by We_Are_VENOM »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 3:40 am #110 set out the passage. Jesus son of Damnaeus is identified as the person made the High priest.
I agree.
TRANSPONDER wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 3:40 am I know that some deny it, but argument is that the previous mention of Jesus also relates to Jesus son of Damnaus and the reference to Jesus known as the Christ is likely a gloss by a Christian editor since the story seems to have no relevance to Gospel Jesus.
What??? What do you mean it has no relevance to Gospel Jesus??

Reading comprehension.

Jesus was referenced as an identifier of James, of whom the passage was about.

"James, brother of Jesus (called Christ)".

That, WAS the relevance and the only relevance needed.

And notice you didn't say Damnaus had no relevance..probably because you don't have a problem accepting that "son of Damnaus" was just an identifier of (the other) Jesus.

But only when it comes to the Jesus of Nazareth, all bets are off.

We put on our skeptical capes and become super skeptical because anything related to Jesus of Nazareth must be a sham.

It is a double standard, and disgusting..quite frankly.
TRANSPONDER wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 3:40 am Lucceius Albinus 62–64

this Roman governor, named in the account, is obviously governor of Judea long after Jesus' time.
Point?
Venni Vetti Vecci!!

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Re: Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Post #128

Post by Goat »

We_Are_VENOM wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 9:02 pm
Goat wrote: Sun Jul 03, 2022 9:50 am I showed that High priests were christs. Of course, there is a translation going on..

since in Hebrew in Jerusalem, it would Messiah. High priests were messiahs. A messiah, or (Moishe), would be Christ in the language Greek.
So please explain to me why no other high priests' name of whom Josephus mentions in Antiquities, has the title "Christ" tied to it.

You only see tied to Jesus' name, no one else.

And that is where you will say "that is because a later Christian embellished the passage"...and that is where I will say, once again...no...because that is not how Christians refer to Jesus in virtually any context, especially not that one.

When Josephus stated that Jesus was called Christ, it is because it was simply telling it like it is...that Jesus, brother of James, was called Christ, which was the prevailing view at that time.

And I wonder why :D
It seems you are failing to read the response about that, since Transponder showed a source where that was done.

viewtopic.php?p=1083697#p1083697
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

User avatar
We_Are_VENOM
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1632
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:33 am
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Post #129

Post by We_Are_VENOM »

Goat wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 9:52 pm It seems you are failing to read the response about that, since Transponder showed a source where that was done.

viewtopic.php?p=1083697#p1083697
I did fail to read that post (missed it).

However, I just read it, and am now discarding it.

The challenge was to show one instance where the title "Christ" (specifically CHRIST) was used as a title for ANYONE except Jesus, brother of James.

I dont want to see anything about titles of messiahs or anointed ones...specifically, the title of Christ.

Until you can do that; false equivalency.

This is about the third time I've asked and it doesn't look like I will get it.
Venni Vetti Vecci!!

User avatar
Difflugia
Prodigy
Posts: 3005
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 3232 times
Been thanked: 1984 times

Re: Resolved: Jesus Rose from the Dead

Post #130

Post by Difflugia »

We_Are_VENOM wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 8:54 pmIf you look up Ps 105:15, it is rendered as my anointed ones. I don't see anything about Christ, or Christos..do you?
Do you know what the Septuagint is?
We_Are_VENOM wrote: Mon Jul 04, 2022 8:54 pmYou guys are fallaciously equivocating "anointed ones" and "messiah" with "Christ"..and the point I keep stressing is...to say Jesus is Christ certainly means he is/was anointed and the messiah...but just because a king or high priest is anointed and/or a messiah, DOESN'T mean that this person is Christ.
I can't tell if you're trying to play some sort of pedantic word game or if you genuinely don't understand the relationship between "messiah," "anointed," and "christ." How would one distinguish between "anointed one," "messiah," and "Christ" in Hellenistic Greek?
My pronouns are he, him, and his.

Post Reply