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?

[Claire Evans]

The supernatural is not interchangeable with aliens.

A possible interpretation of the supernatural is alien activity. When Cortez arrived the natives naturally took these alien beings to be gods.

I agree with this.

Julius Caesar, seeing a mobile phone in operation, would attribute it to the work of Mercury, perhaps. And people experiencing an empty tomb, or at least a tomb with a strange guy sitting in it, would possibly see the man as an angel and the missing body as a resurrection. We get the picture through the eyes of simple souls but we don't have to accept their miraculous explanation.

I think a mobile phone in operation is not the same as a resurrection. Julius Caesar never saw the phone before. However, they most certainly knew when someone was dead, they were dead especially when they witnessed the death itself. We know how a mobile phone works, but can we explain rising from the dead?

You also make out that these people were stupid as hell. People don't have to accept the resurrection at face value. Yet many unbelievers have examined it and have come to the conclusion that the only explanation is the rising from the by examining the reliability of the gospels.

[Claire Evans]

[Replying to Claire Evans]

The supernatural is alien. Did they come from this planet? No, and that's for starters.

The supernatural:

...of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.

This is a description of the supernatural not exclusive to aliens. Supernatural beings are described as spirits. And since it is described as just residing in other dimensions, they have always been here. No one has ever claimed they came from out of space.

[Claire Evans]

[Replying to post 1456 by alexxcJRO]

God is alien... you didn't change the story at all.

The supernatural is not interchangeable with aliens.

Of course it is, Shermer's Variant of Arthur Clarke's Third Law (Any sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial intelligence is indistinguishable from God). Shermer, Michael (2002-01-01). "Shermer's Last Law". Scientific American.

What is this person talking about? God is known as a spirit and not a physical being. No one claims aliens are spirits.

[H.sapiens]

[Replying to post 1456 by alexxcJRO]

God is alien... you didn't change the story at all.

The supernatural is not interchangeable with aliens.

Of course it is, Shermer's Variant of Arthur Clarke's Third Law (Any sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial intelligence is indistinguishable from God). Shermer, Michael (2002-01-01). "Shermer's Last Law". Scientific American.

What is this person talking about? God is known as a spirit and not a physical being. No one claims aliens are spirits.

Prior to further bloviation you might go read the Scientific American article that I cited.

[alexxcJRO]

[Replying to Claire Evans]

Avoiding my posts again.

Number of avoidance = 2.

“What is this person talking about? God is known as a spirit and not a physical being. No one claims aliens are spirits.�

No need for spirits. No need for the God hypothesis when the aliens hypothesis is sufficient.

It is not outlandish to think super advanced aliens are involved behind the Jesus’s story too.

Let me create a science fiction narrative:

Aliens created all the ancient religions of the world as a psychological experiment. This aliens are responsible for the Jesus story.

Virgin birth of Maria : Some of these aliens impregnated Maria in vitro. Jesus was an genetically modified, more evolved human being capable of Psychokinesis, Telekinesis, Incredible Healing capabilities and so one.
Later the aliens implanted some fake memories in Jesus head that he was the son of God, that he is divine and so on. He started preaching about this.

After crucifixion Jesus was teleported to the mother-ship and healed by the aliens(He could have healed on his own, but they wanted his holes in the hands and legs to remain; so to be convincing)
After 3 days he was teleported back on the Earth.
Jesus when he woke up really believed he was dead and rose from the dead, this fortify his delusion he was the son of God and had a divine nature.

“19 After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God.� (Mark 16-19)
50 When he had led them out to the vicinity of Bethany, he lifted up his hands and blessed them. 51 While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven.� Luke 24(50-51)

“He was taken into Heaven�,� he left them and was taken up into heaven�; meaning vanished in mid-air and being teleported to the mother-ship which is in orbit (no visible to the naked eye).


"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Sir Arthur Charles Clarke

Simply put it technology and magic were the same to the uninitiated, ignorant.

This was just sufficiently advanced technology, but for them the uninitiated, ignorant aka the apostles this was magic, divine.

[marco]

However, they most certainly knew when someone was dead, they were dead especially when they witnessed the death itself.

Put it this way: Either the people watching knew that the body that seemed lifeless above them was dead and so a resurrection took place
OR they thought the person was dead because he seemed to be.

One leads to miracles and the other leads to simple human error.

You also make out that these people were stupid as hell.

I made no comment on the degree of their stupidity. I merely commented on their simplicity, relative to what we understand now.

Yet many unbelievers have examined it and have come to the conclusion that the only explanation is the rising from examining the reliability of the gospels.

And in such an examination we must take account of the fact that in that world many people believed in a variety of divinities and their minds were more accessible to divine explanations. Nowadays we would first discount such an explanation unless astounding evidence were presented. True, evidence has been presented, but not of the required astounding nature.

[PghPanther]

[Replying to Inigo Montoya]

Perhaps this might help Goose............about what happens among those with a vested interest in the actions of hearsay oral story transmissions.....

Back when I was very active as a Christian we heard of a story that happened locally that spread far and wide among Christians and even was told from the pulpit in some churches as a validate miracle in the power of God.

The story was this..............a Christian was at one of the local churches during a weeknight Bible study.....it was in a rough area of town and as the believer left the Bible study to go to his car in the parking lot he encountered a person who pulled a gun on him and told him to give him his wallet.......the Christian person handed over his wallet and then proceeded in an attempt to witness to this person holding him up.

The story goes that this person hated Christians and told this guy to deny Christ on the spot or the robber will shoot him dead right there.............the Christian would not deny Christ and the robber shot him point blank......

.....but..

The bullets fell miraculous to the ground right in front of the Christian and he looked up at heaven and praised God while the robber in complete shock ran away and was never found.

That was the story that made the rounds everywhere throughout the local county area in the state where I lived at the time to the point that ministers and youth groups were all telling it............

What happened to this story is that the Christian who this happened to told his story the next day to some friends at school and it started circulating and then after a few days the story came back to the Christian and he couldn't believe what it turned into and explained he was the person who told the story because it happened to him and nobody would believe him anymore because they believed the hearsay rather than the actually story from the person it happened to........

So what really happened to this Christian?

The Christian left the Bible study and was threaten by a person to hand over the wallet to them or else they would 'beat them up".....no gun no knife on this robber just a physical threat..........so the Christian handed over the wallet and proceeded to tell the robber about the Gospel and the guy laughed in his face and took off with the wallet.........

That's it......no guns, no firing, no bullets and no miraculous falling bullets to the ground......

....and all the embellishment of the gun threat and supernatural intervention of the bullets happened in short order by nothing more than oral misunderstandings and embellishments with hours and days of him telling it to someone else in school who told it to others....

....the story took on a life of its own and there you have it.......

.....believers wanting it to be true and believing it to be true even when the person it actually happened to could not convince them it was an exaggeration of what happened to him.

Hey did you hear what happened to brother (guys name)?.......No what?........he was saved by God with a miracle when he was threatened with a knife by a robber after Bible study and the blade fell right out of the knife when the robber tried to stab him!!!...............really, I heard it was a knife but a gun and the bullets fell in front of him after they were fired..................yeah and I heard it was point blank too!!.....................

Don't you see how even the most sincere people will mess this stuff up?

and that my friend is the Biblical gospels in a nutshell................and this happened in real life where I lived back in the 70's.

So Goose do you see how a weather balloon crash in Roswell, NM can turn into aliens found alive from a flying saucer crash and kept in area 51 where we learned to back engineer antigravity machines from them......in as little as a few years of story and gossiping among UFOlogists?

and the Bible didn't even get their stories down in writing until decades after all the believers zealous story telling and gossiping occurred............

Goose your faith has its foundation in story telling not an actual historical event......

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to Inigo Montoya]

Perhaps this might help Goose............about what happens among those with a vested interest in the actions of hearsay oral story transmissions.....

Back when I was very active as a Christian we heard of a story that happened locally that spread far and wide among Christians and even was told from the pulpit in some churches as a validate miracle in the power of God.

The story was this..............a Christian was at one of the local churches during a weeknight Bible study.....it was in a rough area of town and as the believer left the Bible study to go to his car in the parking lot he encountered a person who pulled a gun on him and told him to give him his wallet.......the Christian person handed over his wallet and then proceeded in an attempt to witness to this person holding him up.

The story goes that this person hated Christians and told this guy to deny Christ on the spot or the robber will shoot him dead right there.............the Christian would not deny Christ and the robber shot him point blank......

.....but..

The bullets fell miraculous to the ground right in front of the Christian and he looked up at heaven and praised God while the robber in complete shock ran away and was never found.

That was the story that made the rounds everywhere throughout the local county area in the state where I lived at the time to the point that ministers and youth groups were all telling it............

What happened to this story is that the Christian who this happened to told his story the next day to some friends at school and it started circulating and then after a few days the story came back to the Christian and he couldn't believe what it turned into and explained he was the person who told the story because it happened to him and nobody would believe him anymore because they believed the hearsay rather than the actually story from the person it happened to........

So what really happened to this Christian?

The Christian left the Bible study and was threaten by a person to hand over the wallet to them or else they would 'beat them up".....no gun no knife on this robber just a physical threat..........so the Christian handed over the wallet and proceeded to tell the robber about the Gospel and the guy laughed in his face and took off with the wallet.........

That's it......no guns, no firing, no bullets and no miraculous falling bullets to the ground......

....and all the embellishment of the gun threat and supernatural intervention of the bullets happened in short order by nothing more than oral misunderstandings and embellishments with hours and days of him telling it to someone else in school who told it to others....

....the story took on a life of its own and there you have it.......

.....believers wanting it to be true and believing it to be true even when the person it actually happened to could not convince them it was an exaggeration of what happened to him.

Hey did you hear what happened to brother (guys name)?.......No what?........he was saved by God with a miracle when he was threatened with a knife by a robber after Bible study and the blade fell right out of the knife when the robber tried to stab him!!!...............really, I heard it was a knife but a gun and the bullets fell in front of him after they were fired..................yeah and I heard it was point blank too!!.....................

Don't you see how even the most sincere people will mess this stuff up?

and that my friend is the Biblical gospels in a nutshell................and this happened in real life where I lived back in the 70's.

So Goose do you see how a weather balloon crash in Roswell, NM can turn into aliens found alive from a flying saucer crash and kept in area 51 where we learned to back engineer antigravity machines from them......in as little as a few years of story and gossiping among UFOlogists?

and the Bible didn't even get their stories down in writing until decades after all the believers zealous story telling and gossiping occurred............

Goose your faith has its foundation in story telling not an actual historical event......

Okay, so you tell this story of yours, of how a simple story of a man leaving a Bible study becomes embellished, and you compare this story to the Biblical accounts, and come away with the conclusion that, "the Christian faith has its foundation in story telling not an actual historical event?"

You know, on another thread I was accused of making "reaches and jumps" and that "I go beyond what information we have and ignore perfectly rational alternative conclusions." However, this was not the case and my response was to ask, "what reaches and jumps I had made", and went on to demonstrate how I had considered the other alternatives, and even spoke of what would have had to occur, for these other alternatives to be true.

I then went on to explain that, "this street runs both ways." In other words, making "reaches and jumps" is not simply confined to the Christian, because unbelievers can make "reaches and jumps" as well, and your post here certainly seems to demonstrate this. In other words, you seem to be saying that "since this story of the Christian man leaving the Bible study, became so embellished, this demonstrates that "the foundation of the Christian Faith must be based upon the same thing." Otherwise, you would not say, "the Christian Faith HAS its foundation in story telling not an actual historical event", but would rather say something like, "this demonstrates that the Christian Faith COULD have its foundation in story telling not an actual historical event." If I am correct, your post here is a classic example of jumping to conclusions.

I went on to explain in the other post that, there is a lot to analyze when considering things such as Christianity, and it takes a considerable amount of time, effort, and energy, that must be exerted, and it is not wise to assume anything at all.

So then, it is foolish for Christians to simply assume that what they have been taught is true, without actually analyzing what they have been taught to determine if this teaching can hold up to scrutiny. However, I also believe it is unwise for those who reject Christianity to do so based upon, certain experiences they may have had, such as the one you describe above, or simply based upon what they believe to be to extraordinary to believe, etc.

At any rate, it may be best for you to read a response I gave a few days ago, on a thread entitled, "Telling Stories" which deals with exactly what you are saying here, and my response here would be the same as there. Here is that link ref:Re: Telling stories

I certainly hope you read this, and would love to hear your response. However, if you wish not to read it, allow me to quote my last paragraph here.

After all is said and done, you and I may come to completely different conclusions, and I have no problem with this at all. In fact, I have studied these things so intently, that I can understand unbelief, and I can understand the reasons some folks give for their unbelief. What I cannot possibly understand, or except, is when someone tells me that I have no reason to believe! I do, or I would not!

[marco]

If I am correct, your post here is a classic example of jumping to conclusions.

I don't see that any conclusions were jumped to - the tale is an illustration of how stories change in the telling. Eventually the preferred version is circulated.

You point out the consistency between gospel authors, which is fine, and obviously to be expected if they get their submissions from the same source. This does not rule out the possibility that a simple tale was exaggerated in the manner of the illustration, so that simple deed becomes miracle.

As far as truth goes, it is reported that Christ said he'd be back within the lifetime of some listeners. That was untrue.

I know we can wriggle out of all problems with the Bible, until we eventually call bad good and death kindness. I have spent many decades analysing, but I have reached conclusions that differ from yours. The simplest way is to accept what is rational unless the irrational is shown in vivid colour. It isn't. But I have read and I appreciate your viewpoint.

[Realworldjack]

If I am correct, your post here is a classic example of jumping to conclusions.

I don't see that any conclusions were jumped to - the tale is an illustration of how stories change in the telling. Eventually the preferred version is circulated.

You point out the consistency between gospel authors, which is fine, and obviously to be expected if they get their submissions from the same source. This does not rule out the possibility that a simple tale was exaggerated in the manner of the illustration, so that simple deed becomes miracle.

As far as truth goes, it is reported that Christ said he'd be back within the lifetime of some listeners. That was untrue.

I know we can wriggle out of all problems with the Bible, until we eventually call bad good and death kindness. I have spent many decades analysing, but I have reached conclusions that differ from yours. The simplest way is to accept what is rational unless the irrational is shown in vivid colour. It isn't. But I have read and I appreciate your viewpoint.

I would love to discuss and debate several things you say here, but as we have seen, this at times causes us to become far too involved, to the point we never really arrive at a bottom line. With this being the case, lets us discuss one thing at a time. You say,

You point out the consistency between gospel authors, which is fine, and obviously to be expected if they get their submissions from the same source.

NO! I did not "point out the consistency between gospel authors." Rather, I pointed out the consistency between Luke, who was a Gospel author, and Paul, who was not a Gospel author. Your comment shows a lack of understanding of the content of the Bible, which is one of the things I was referring too.

In other words, you seem to have rejected what is contained in the Bible, but the simplest knowledge of the Bible, would understand the difference between those letters that are said to be, "Gospel letters" verses those that were epistles.

On top of this, Paul specifically claims to NOT have obtained his information in the same way as the other Apostles claimed to have received their information. Now, if you would like to debate this, I am up for the challenge, but to simply say, "all the Biblical writers received their information from the same source" is simply assuming, unless of course you can demonstrate this?

Next, you would really help yourself out here, if you could explain how the letters attributed to Luke, coincide, or back up the information from the letters of Paul. If you cannot do this, (which by the way I can) you will be demonstrating your lack of knowledge of the Bible, and it would probably be better for you to exit the conversation.

If your response is that, it should be no big deal that Luke and Paul coincide with each other, then again you will be demonstrating a tremendous lack of knowledge.

As I have said, "there is a tremendous amount to consider when analyzing things such as this, and to simply assume certain things is not a wise thing to do."

So then, if you can explain how in the world that the letters of Luke, coincided so well with the letters of Paul, and how they both talk of the things that occurred on the missionary journeys of Paul, then maybe we could come to some sort of resolution together, and discuss the other things you bring up here.