Jesus' Life and Resurrection.

[LiamOS]

In his Head-To-Head debate with otseng, WinePusher claimed that Jesus' life and resurrection can be attested to with outside, objective evidence.

For debate:
Can the life and resurrection of Jesus Christ be supported with objective evidence? If so, please provide such evidence.

[Druijf]

2) The tomb was discovered empty. This is proven by the fact that the body of Jesus could not be produced, and there is a wide concurrence of scholarship on this issue.

This appeal to a wide concurrence of scholarship does not impress me. There are, broadly speaking, two kinds of biblical scholarship.

1. Evangelical - conservative scholarschip - done in theology departments
2. Secular scholarship done in religious studies departments.

There are probably some people in camp 1 who concur that the empty tomb is a historical fact. Could you mention a scholar of the second category who made such a statement?

[Druijf]

And the claim of an empty tomb has been verified to be factual due to objective, corresponding evidence such as the inability for the Sanhedrin to produce the body.

Maybe the Sanhedrin just didn't care that some Galileans thought their crucified leader was risen and by the time christianity became significant enough to react upon the body was already decayed. Maybe they couldn't find the body because it was eaten by dogs or was dumped in a mass grave. Since Paul's account of the resurrection does not require an empty tomb, it is also likely to other christians thought Jesus resurrection occured in heaven.

So you reject the martydom of Peter, James, the imprisonment of John, and the death of Paul? However, the amount of time that elasped between the actual events and the persecutions as no relevance, unless the persons mentioned in the actual events were not persecuted and martyed, they were though.

Martyrdom does not prove the truth of the belief of the martyr, only that the martyr was convinced of his belief. Plus, we don't know what happened to the apostles, we only have late church traditions. Given the fact that martyrdom was something christians aspired to (Ignatius), it is not unlikely that such stories were made up.

Your argumentation rests on a uncritical reading of the gospels.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

If you are going to quote scripture, Matthew 27:64 clearly states that Pilate placed guards before the tomb to prevent the body from being stolen. This implies that a tomb was provided by Joseph of Arimathea, and that Jesus' body lay in it.

[62] "Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate," [Matt.27]

Sometime the NEXT DAY the chief priests got permission to secure the tomb, which they did by placing a seal on the stone and setting a guard. What they didn't do was open the tomb and inspect it first. Why not? BECAUSE IT WAS A HIGH HOLY DAY, the Sabbath and Passover. Jewish law required all bodies be concealed lest God should be offended. So the priests did the best they could, which was to seal the tomb and set a guard. The tomb proved to be empty the next day. The body was ALREADY GONE.

If we're going off the story presented to us, it states that women disciples were the first to discover the tomb empty and the tomb was provided by a Jew. As William Lane Craig points out, it is unlikely that if the disciples created their own myth, that they would include a Jew as a hero-type character because they would have viewed the Jews as the people who killed their savior.

I don't know if this is a shock to you or not, but Jesus and his men WERE JEWS themselves. Many people do consider Jesus to be "a hero-type character" I believe. This despite the fact that he If the entire story is purely a myth then the mythical disciples of a mythical savior could hardly have created said myth themselves could they! I am not suggesting that Joseph of Arimethea was a mythical character any more then I am suggesting that Jesus and the apostles were purely mythical. Joseph is specifically referred to as a "rich man," and only a rich man could have expected to ask and receive favors from the Roman governor, with a the help of a small remuneration.

It is also unlikely that women, would be the first to discover the tomb empty rather then men.

when you use terms like "unlikely," remember you are the one supporting the assertion that a corpse became reanimated, whole hordes of dead came up out of their graves and wandered the streets, (Matt.27 52-53)
and that a reanimated corpse flew up into the sky and disappeared into the clouds. Calling this assertion "unlikely" is an understatement if ever there was one. But speaking of unlikely:


[1] "And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
[2] And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
[3] And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?" (Mark 16)

We are given to understand that the women with full knowledge that the entrance to the tomb was covered by a stone of many tons, went out to add even MORE spices to a body already covered in 100 pounds of spices and ointments, based on some vague hope that perhaps some nice men who just happened to be hanging around a grave yard at the break of dawn would be good enough to move the great stone for them. Or perhaps they were expecting that those nice soldiers who were placed at the tomb SPECIFICALLY to prevent anyone from getting near the body would do it for them. But you see, this story only begins to make sense if the women knew full well that the tomb was open and unguarded when they went out to visit it. And if they knew that much, it was because they surely knew it was also EMPTY. The whole point of them going out to the tomb was to point out to everyone that the tomb was empty. And on the third day as specified!

If the disciples did this, they would know that Jesus' resurrection is a lie because they manufactured that lie. However, they are beaten by the Sanhedrin and persecuted by the Roman Empire without denouncing this. So, their deep conviction in this story (proven by their martyrdom) cancels out the theory that they stole the body and created a legend.

What martyrdom? James the brother of John, one of the "sons of thunder," was executed by Herod Agrippa, according to Acts 12. Beyond that, name the passage that provides any information on the "martyrdom" of any of the rest of the apostles.

Let's bring Paul into the mix. A persecutor of the Church and of Christians, it is recorded that he converted to Christianity. What prompted this conversion?

According to Acts 9, some years now after the execution of Jesus, Paul was traveling to Damascus with some traveling companions when he was struck very ill. His companions carried him into the city and left him to be cared for BY A CHRISTIAN.[,B] Sick and delirious, unable to eat or drink for three days, Paul is nursed back to health BY A CHRISTIAN.[,B] During his illness, Paul claimed to have had a vision of Jesus. After his recovery, Paul became a confirmed Christian. so we are faced with two possibilities:

1. In his delirium, and while being cared for by a Christian, Paul hallucinates a vision of Jesus.

OR

2. Paul actually had a conversation with A DEAD MAN.

Which version is the more likely? Again, attempt to remain objective in your answer.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

If you are going to quote scripture, Matthew 27:64 clearly states that Pilate placed guards before the tomb to prevent the body from being stolen. This implies that a tomb was provided by Joseph of Arimathea, and that Jesus' body lay in it.

[62] "Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate," [Matt.27]

Sometime the NEXT DAY the chief priests got permission to secure the tomb, which they did by placing a seal on the stone and setting a guard. What they didn't do was open the tomb and inspect it first. Why not? BECAUSE IT WAS A HIGH HOLY DAY, the Sabbath and Passover. Jewish law required all bodies be concealed lest God should be offended. So the priests did the best they could, which was to seal the tomb and set a guard. The tomb proved to be empty the next day. The body was ALREADY GONE.

If we're going off the story presented to us, it states that women disciples were the first to discover the tomb empty and the tomb was provided by a Jew. As William Lane Craig points out, it is unlikely that if the disciples created their own myth, that they would include a Jew as a hero-type character because they would have viewed the Jews as the people who killed their savior.

I don't know if this is a shock to you or not, but Jesus and his men WERE JEWS themselves. Many people do consider Jesus to be "a hero-type character" I believe. This despite the fact that he was a Jew himself. If the entire story is purely a myth then the mythical disciples of a mythical savior could hardly have created said myth themselves could they! I am not suggesting that Joseph of Arimethea was a mythical character any more then I am suggesting that Jesus and the apostles were purely mythical. Joseph is specifically referred to as a "rich man," and only a rich man could have expected to ask and receive favors from the Roman governor, with a the help of a small remuneration.

It is also unlikely that women, would be the first to discover the tomb empty rather then men.

When you use terms like "unlikely," remember you are the one supporting the assertion that a corpse became reanimated, whole hordes of dead came up out of their graves and wandered the streets, (Matt.27 52-53)
and that a reanimated corpse flew up into the sky and disappeared into the clouds. Calling this assertion "unlikely" is an understatement if ever there was one. But speaking of unlikely:


[1] "And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
[2] And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.
[3] And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?" (Mark 16)

We are given to understand that the women with full knowledge that the entrance to the tomb was covered by a stone of many tons, went out to add even MORE spices to a body already covered in 100 pounds of spices and ointments, based on some vague hope that perhaps some nice men who just happened to be hanging around a grave yard at the break of dawn would be good enough to move the great stone for them. Or perhaps they were expecting that those nice soldiers who were placed at the tomb SPECIFICALLY to prevent anyone from getting near the body would do it for them. But you see, this story only begins to make sense if the women knew full well that the tomb was open and unguarded when they went out to visit it. And if they knew that much, it was because they surely knew it was also EMPTY. The whole point of them going out to the tomb was to established to everyone that the tomb was empty. And on the third day as specified!

If the disciples did this, they would know that Jesus' resurrection is a lie because they manufactured that lie. However, they are beaten by the Sanhedrin and persecuted by the Roman Empire without denouncing this. So, their deep conviction in this story (proven by their martyrdom) cancels out the theory that they stole the body and created a legend.

What martyrdom? James the brother of John, one of the "sons of thunder," was executed by Herod Agrippa, according to Acts 12. Beyond that, name the passage that provides any information on the "martyrdom" of any of the rest of the apostles.

Let's bring Paul into the mix. A persecutor of the Church and of Christians, it is recorded that he converted to Christianity. What prompted this conversion?

According to Acts 9, some years now after the execution of Jesus, Paul was traveling to Damascus with some traveling companions when he was taken very ill. His companions carried him into the city and left him to be cared for BY A CHRISTIAN. Sick and delirious, unable to eat or drink for three days, Paul is nursed back to health BY A CHRISTIAN. During his illness, Paul claimed to have had a vision of Jesus. After his recovery, Paul became a confirmed Christian. so we are faced with two possibilities:

1. In his delirium, and while being cared for by a Christian, Paul hallucinates a vision of Jesus.

OR

2. Paul actually had a conversation WITH A DEAD MAN.

Which version is the more likely? Again, attempt to remain objective in your answer.

[ChristShepherd]

[? The fact that the body could not be produced mens that the tomb was empty.

An empty tomb is not proof that the former occupant has resurrected.

My cousin, Kathy, moved to California, and wanted to move the body of my uncle from a cemetery in New Jersey to one in California close to where she was now residing. She went through a lot of legal haggling and eventually secured a court order to move the body. When they dug where the body was supposed to be, the coffin and body were missing. You may have read about this in your newspaper when my cousin sued. My family jokes about Uncle Ed being resurrected, and my Aunt Peggy claims she saw him in the stands while watching a football game on TV, but nobody seriously believes that he is walking around somewhere wearing the new suit he was buried in.

Yet this is the type of evidence that Christians present to prove that Jesus rose from the dead.

Don't you expect extraordinary evidence to prove extraordinary claims?

Or do you believe that Jesus and my uncle Ed are alive and hanging together at football games?

Christ Shepherd

[ChristShepherd]

Let's bring Paul into the mix. A persecutor of the Church and of Christians, it is recorded that he converted to Christianity. What prompted this conversion?

Paul, that murdering liar, discovered that he could make a great living fleecing the sheep.
1 Corinthians 9:11 (New American Standard Bible)
11If we sowed spiritual things in you, is it too much if we reap material things from you?

Christ Shepherd

[Flail]

Winepusher wrote:

I'm glad you see it my way . So, let's look at the points you raised.

1) Jesus of Nazareth died by Crucifixion and was laid to rest in a tomb provided by Joseph of Arimathea (a Jew).
2) The tomb was discovered empty. This is proven by the fact that the body of Jesus could not be produced, and there is a wide concurrence of scholarship on this issue.
3) The disciples claimed to have seen the risen Christ, and began a large campaign of evangelism across the Greco-Roman world in spite of persecution.

So, can these facts be better explained for in secular terms?

Let's look at what you are really saying.
1) There were stories told by some people to other people about Jesus of Nazareth being crucified and laid in a tomb, which was later found empty. No body was ever found.
2) The actual witnesses to these events were never clearly identified and little about them is known.
3) Some characters in the story-line claim to have observed the 'risen' Christ, believing he had come back from dead.
4) The stories about these matters were eventually recorded by others, also about whom little is known. Centuries later these stories were interpreted and promulgated in the Bible.
5) Some believers, indoctrinated into Christianity, claim these stories relate actual events, some do not. There is no present evidence either way.
6) Since that time, no scientific evidence has ever been produced to demonstrate the possibility that human bodies like that of Jesus, have ever risen after being dead for three days.

Winepusher, you referred to these stories as factual. Do you have any objective, verifiable evidence to corroborate these stories as actual/factual events, or are you simply choosing to believe these hearsay tales as factual based upon your own particular indoctrination and that of your chosen faith?

[ChristShepherd]

So you reject the martydom of Peter, James, the imprisonment of John, and the death of Paul? However, the amount of time that elasped between the actual events and the persecutions as no relevance, unless the persons mentioned in the actual events were not persecuted and martyed, they were though.

Christians often assert that there were many Christian martyrs, that Christians were persecuted, and that this is proof that Jesus was resurrected.
I doubt that the problems Christians had with the Roman Empire were related to their faith. More likely Christians were just trouble makers.
Matthew 10:34
" Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
And Jesus' followers wielded that sword.
Matthew 26:51
And behold, one of those who were with Jesus reached and drew out his sword, and struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his ear.

I have read numerous articles about martyrs and persecution. But they seem like mythical stories made up to bolster Christian faith. They are sketchy and lack details. There is really nothing there to make them credible. The stories seem like stuff somebody made up and others just keep repeating without any effort to investigate if they are true or not.

I often read about Christian leaders who are in trouble with the law. The FFRF prints accounts of the arrests and convictions of clergymen in their newspaper. We are all familiar with Jimmy Baker, and Jimmy Swaggart and a host of others. There is no doubt in my mind, that Christian troublemakers have been getting in trouble with the Legal authorities ever since Jesus beat the money changers out of the Temple and turned over their tables and poured the money on the ground. The money changers were performing a legal function sanctioned by the authorities. Jesus committed assault and battery and destruction of property. He was a sinner. But when Christians break the law, they view it as persecution. Christians will never admit that Jesus was a law breaker when he assaulted the money changers. But he was, and Christians have been crying persecution ever since as they go about causing trouble.

Christ Shepherd

[ChristShepherd]

[
[62] "Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate," [Matt.27]

Sometime the NEXT DAY the chief priests got permission to secure the tomb, which they did by placing a seal on the stone and setting a guard. What they didn't do was open the tomb and inspect it first. Why not? BECAUSE IT WAS A HIGH HOLY DAY, the Sabbath and Passover. Jewish law required all bodies be concealed lest God should be offended. So the priests did the best they could, which was to seal the tomb and set a guard. The tomb proved to be empty the next day. The body was ALREADY GONE.

""The body was ALREADY GONE.""

The corpse was buried with white linen, and 100 pounds of aloe and myrrh. These were very valuable items. Myrrh was one of the gifts given to baby Jesus, and was a gift given by the Queen of Sheba to Solomon. Anyone purchasing those items, and surely such a large quantity of spices, would have attracted the attention of thieves. IMO as soon as Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus closed the tomb and had walked out of sight, thieves were opening the tomb, and removing the corpse, and closing the tomb to conceal their crime. They probably took the corpse out to a quiet place out of town to scrape the resinous spices off the body, and discarded the corpse in a shallow grave in the dessert.

Christ Shepherd

[ChristShepherd]

Several forum members have mentioned the Apostle Paul.
IMO Paul is not credible.
Paul was guilty of felony murder in the murder of Stephen. He acted in concert with others who murdered Stephen.
Acts 22:4 (New American Standard Bible)
4"I persecuted this Way to the death, binding and putting both men and women into prisons
Acts 22:20 (New American Standard Bible)
20'And when the blood of Your witness Stephen was being shed, I also was standing by approving, and watching out for the coats of those who were slaying him.'
Acts 26:10 (New American Standard Bible)
10"And this is just what I did in Jerusalem; not only did I lock up many of the saints in prisons, having received authority from the chief priests, but also when they were being put to death I cast my vote against them.

Paul's own words condemn him as a murderer.

But what about that rule that you need two or three witnesses to establish if something is true? Who are Paul's witnesses that he heard the voice of Jesus? [Remember he saw nothing because he was blinded ]
Acts 9:7 (New American Standard Bible)
7The men who traveled with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one.
Acts 22:9 (King James Version)
9And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.
The men who were with Paul, saw nothing, and they either heard the voice, or they didn't hear the voice. They were not witnesses.

We only have the word of a murderer who says he heard Jesus' voice. How did he recognize the voice of Jesus whom he never met?

Paul explained his Damascus road experience in 2Corinthians
2 Corinthians 12:2-4 (New American Standard Bible)
2I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago--whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows--such a man was caught up to the third heaven.
3And I know how such a man--whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows--
4was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak.

Doesn't it sound like Paul is describing a hallucination? Perhaps brought about by sunstroke at midday on the dessert road to Damascus?

Paul's testimony is useless and meaningless.

Christ Shepherd