Let's imagine the scenario where Jim Wilson of modern times talks to a few friends in the backroom of a tavern and announces that the wine he's drinking is his blood. He's a pious and studious man.
What would be our conclusion?
Should our conclusion be any different when the words are attributed to a pious person who lived 2000 years ago in an area noted then as now for its political unrest?
This is my blood - really?
Moderator: Moderators
-
Tired of the Nonsense
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 5680
- Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:01 pm
- Location: USA
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #91
Reply to EarthScienceguy
[1]Jesus died by crucifixion. --- Plausible.
[2]He was buried. --- First we must consider the nature of these sorts of tombs, which were common and actually a status symbol among rich people. Tombs such as these were constructed to be FAMILY crypts, intended to inter multiple generations of family members. Typically these tombs were constructed with a flat level ledge for laying out the body of the deceased. After a few months the bones would be collected, placed into a stone ossuary with the deceased person's name carved into it, and then ossuary would be placed into a niche cut into the wall. In this manner whole generations of family members would be interred together.
Joseph's tomb was never intended for a single person. It was a newly constructed family crypt. It was the custom of the Jews to inter their dead with other deceased family members. Why would Joseph bury Jesus, a non family member, in a newly constructed, and very expensive, tomb he intended to be used to inter generations of his own family. If Joseph REALLY wanted to honor Jesus, he would have presented the body of Jesus to family members so that Jesus could be interred with members of his own family.
[3]His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope.--- The apostles went into hiding. We don't directly know anything about their state of mind
[4]The tomb was empty. --- The tomb proved to be empty on Sunday morning according to all four canonical accounts. Christians have declared that the empty tomb indicates that the dead body of Jesus returned to life and left the tomb. Is that a realistic conclusion, however?
Jesus was not a member of Joseph's family and his body was never intended to be permanently interred in Joseph's private family crypt. Joseph's tomb was simply used that Friday because the hour was late and it was convenient,"nigh at hand," to the place of crucifixion and a private place to wash and prepare the body. When the priests went out and took possession of the tomb sometime the next day, the body of Jesus was ALREADY GONE, presumably already on route to it's true final intended destination. We can conclude this to a near certainty because the secured tomb proved to be EMPTY on Sunday morning. And because in the real world an empty tomb and a missing corpse are VASTLY more likely to be the result of actions taken by the living, then the result of actions taken by the corpse.
[5]The disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus --- The disciples spread the rumor that Jesus had arisen from the dead, just as the priests suspected they intended to do. Something only the disciples were witness to. It is now, and was then, an unrealistic claim.
[6]The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers.--- The disciples made a living for years from traveling about telling this story.
[7]The resurrection was the central message. --- Agreed.
[8]They preached the message of Jesus’ resurrection in Jerusalem. --- And throughout Judea.
[9]The Church was born and grew.--- The Church would eventually be made up almost exclusively of NON JEWISH gentiles (goy). In other words, people who were nowhere near Jerusalem when Jesus was alive and had no direct knowledge of what actually happened. The people who WERE in Jerusalem when Jesus was alive and who DID have direct knowledge of what occurred there, the Jewish population of Jerusalem, overwhelmingly rejected the story.
[10]Orthodox Jews who believed in Christ made Sunday their primary day of worship. --- Saturday was and is the Sabbath to the Jews.
Wikipedia
Sabbath
Shabbat
Jewish Shabbat (Shabbath, Shabbes, Shobos, etc.) is a weekly day of rest, observed from sundown on Friday until the appearance of three stars in the sky on Saturday night.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath
The Jews, the very people in the best position to know what actually occurred, overwhelmingly rejected the story of the "risen" Jesus, both at the time and to this day.
The problem you have with your reasoning is
[1]. How did the Church start in Jerusalem the city in which they saw Jesus die with the message being that He was raised from the dead? --- The early disciples were Jewish. But the story of the "risen" Jesus was overwhelmingly rejected by the Jewish population.
[2.] How did the Church start period, in the city in which all the events of Jesus’ death occurred. --- See above.
[3.] Why would Church move their day of worship to the first day of the week? --- This is a Christian practice which occurred much later.
Wikipedia
Sabbath
Christianity
Main article: Sabbath in Christianity
See also: Gregorian calendar
In Eastern Christianity, the Sabbath is considered still to be on Saturday, the seventh day, in remembrance of the Hebrew Sabbath. In Catholicism and most sects of Protestantism, the "Lord's Day" (Greek Κυ�ιακή) is considered to be on Sunday, the first day (and "eighth day"). Communal worship, including the Holy Mysteries, may take place on any day, but a weekly observance of the resurrection is made consistently on Sunday. Western Christianity sometimes refers to the Lord's Day as a "Christian Sabbath", distinct from the Hebrew Sabbath, but related in varying manner.
First-day
Further information: Puritan Sabbath
Since Puritan times, most English-speaking Protestants identify the "Lord's Day" (viz., Sunday) with a "Christian Sabbath", a term Roman Catholics in those areas may also celebrate with the Eucharist. It is considered both the first day and the "eighth day" of the seven-day week.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath
[4.] Why would someone like Paul a well education man listen to fishermen?--- According to Acts 9, while on the road to Damascus Paul became stricken. Acts specifically indicates that at one point Paul went three days without drinking. Whatever the cause, Paul was clearly severely dehydrated. Three days without water is a critical condition. Severe dehydration commonly affects the eyesight, as the vitreous fluid in the eye thickens and is diminished, and causes the neurons in the brain to misfire from lack of fluid, inevitably resulting in hallucinations. Among other symptoms. So, sick and disoriented Paul had to be helped into the city by his traveling companions who then left him at the home of a CHRISTIAN MAN to be cared for. This is a significant point! Sick and delirious from dehydration, and while being tended to and prayed over by a CHRISTIAN MAN, Paul came to believe after his recovery that during his illness he had experienced a face to face visitation with the years dead Jesus. This experience proved to be life changing for Paul and after his recovery Paul became a confirmed Christian. Hardly a surprise, really, given the circumstances. But we in the 21st century, in the light of reason and logic, are left to consider whether it is more reasonable to conclude that Paul, in his delirium, and while being tended to and prayed over by a Christian, hallucinated a vision of Jesus. Or, conversely, whether it is reasonable to conclude that it is more likely that Paul actually MET WITH AND CONVERSED WITH A DEAD MAN! I notice that which side of this question opinion tends to fall invariably has a very direct correlation to whether or not a person has been programmed from an early age to uncritically accept stories of flying reanimated corpses, and the like.
[5.] Why would the disciples die and become outcast for a man that did not day and raised from the died? --- Please provide examples anywhere in scripture that detail that the apostles of Jesus died as a result of their spreading the rumor of Jesus' resurrection. I am even willing to help you start your search. Acts chapter 12 begins with the beheading of James the brother of John at the hands of Herod Agrippa. Now YOU provide the accounts taken from scripture detailing the martyrdom of the remaining apostles.
[5.] People back then did not raise from the dead as much as people today do not raise from the dead. Even if Jesus somehow survived the crucifixion.--- This much at least I wholeheartedly agree with.
TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM ACTS AND THE GOSPELS THEMSELVES, HERE IS A CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE EMPTY TOMB WHICH PROVIDES A COMPLETELY NATURAL EXPLANATION FOR THE ORIGINS OF THE MYTH OF THE RESURRECTED JESUS. NO FLYING REANIMATED CORPSES ARE REQUIRED.
I apologize for the length, but this is a complicated subject and requires much detail to explain..
John 19:
[31] The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
[32] Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.
[33] But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:
When was Jesus executed? ON THE DAY OF PREPARATION. In other words, on Friday, the day BEFORE Saturday, which that year was a special high holy day because of the confluence of the Sabbath and Passover.
Matthew 27:
[46] And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
[47] Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said, This man calleth for Elias.
[48] And straightway one of them ran, and took a spunge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink.
[49] The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him.
[50] Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
What time did Jesus die? Sometime in the NINTH HOUR, on the day of preparation. Nine hours after sunrise. Approximately 3:00 PM.
John 19:
[42] There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.
And so who now has possession of the body of Jesus? HIS DISCIPLES! After receiving permission from Pilate to take possession of the body of Jesus the disciples took the body to Joseph's brand new tomb. WHY? Because it was "nigh at hand," to the place where Jesus was executed and because it made a convenient private place to wash and prepare the body. And they prepared it exceedingly well, according to John 19:39-40. Joseph's personal and very expensive, carved into the living rock, brand new family crypt was never intended to be the eternal resting place of Jesus. Such family crypts were intended to be the final resting place for family members only.
Matt. 27:
[62] Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,
[63] Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
[64] Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.
[65] Pilate said unto them, Ye have a watch: go your way, make it as sure as ye can.
[66] So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.
When did the priests go to Pilate and request a guard at the tomb? Sometime THE NEXT DAY. That would be on Saturday, the holy day. And so the priests went out to the closed tomb, sealed it with seals consisting of cords and wax or clay embossed with an official seal, and then set a guard. But they did not open it to inspect it for the body of Jesus, due to the nature of the day and the prohibition of their own laws. Their actions according to Matthew 27:66 tell us SPECIFICALLY that they were uncertain if the body was still inside. If the priests had known for a certainty that the body was still in the tomb, no seals would have been needed. Posting the guard would have been enough. Anyone intent enough on gaining the body of Jesus by attacking a group of armed guards would not have been dissuaded by a few official seals.
Being unsure if the body was inside necessitated the placement of official seals, to insure that whatever the condition inside the tomb was, it would remain exactly in that condition until the priests could come back and inspect the tomb for the body. And the earliest that could be accomplished would be the next morning... SUNDAY MORNING. Placing seals on the tomb insured against the possibility of the guards taking a bribe and allowing the body to be taken, since the priests were unsure if the body was actually inside. The seals served to indemnify the guards against any possible accusation of failure to do their duty should the tomb ultimately prove to be empty. WHICH IT DID! Since the priests DID set seals, then clearly they were unsure if the body was inside. And since the tomb proved to be empty the next morning, then OBVIOUSLY the tomb was empty when the priests took possession of it on Saturday. As they were afraid it might be. Concluding that the corpse came back to life and left on it's own is pretty FAR FROM OBVIOUS!
So the priests went out and took possession of a CLOSED TOMB, setting a guard to protect it. But they didn't open it to inspect it for contents. WHY? Because it was the Sabbath, and Passover." Opening the tomb would have involved a great deal of manual labor on the Sabbath. And it would have exposed them to a human corpse, the most unclean thing in Jewish tradition. So quite reasonably, they waited. And tomb proved to be empty the next morning, just as they feared. This tells us specifically and conclusively THAT THE PRIESTS AND GUARDS TOOK POSSESSION OF AN EMPTY TOMB. In modern colloquial terms this is known as "closing the barn door after the horse is already gone."
So who then was ACTUALLY in possession of the body of Jesus? Well, WHO WERE THE LAST ONES WITH IT?
JOHN 19:
[38] And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus.
[39] And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight.
And the answer would be that HIS DISCIPLES GOT PERMISSION FROM THE ROMAN GOVERNOR to take possession of the body of Jesus and were therefore the last ones to be clearly in control of it. And the body was legally theirs to do with as they saw fit! They did not have to "steal" it because they had legal possession of it. And they had every legal right to bury it where ever they chose to bury it. We last read of the body of Jesus, in the tomb, being prepared by his followers. Heavily wrapped with ONE HUNDRED POUNDS of sweet smelling aromatic spices mixed into the wrappings. If they had been INTENDING on taking the body on a journey of many days, they could hardly have prepared it any better, within the limits of the technology available to them at the time. Formaldehyde would not be invented for centuries yet and so their only real option, if they expected to be in close proximity to the body for an extended period, was to attempt to mask the smell of putrefaction as best as they could. And to be off as soon as possible!
Matthew27:
[59] And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,
[60] And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed.
The disciples left the tomb at this point, closing it behind them to keep out the unwanted. Since the tomb proved later to be empty, we can safely conclude that the body of Jesus, now clean and heavily wrapped and coated with 100 pounds of aromatic spices, began it journey to it's final resting place at this point. Because an un-preserved body would begin to decompose quickly in a warm climate. And where would have been the most obvious destination for the final resting place of their friend, Jesus? As a manner of common practice of that age, Jews traditionally buried their dead with other deceased family members. So, where is the obvious place one would transport a corpse for burial? And that would be back to the dead man's HOME. And where was Jesus from? That would be GALILEE!
And where DID the followers of Jesus journey following his execution?
Matthew 28:
[16] "Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them."
They went to the dead man's home region, Galilee. Some 90 miles to the north east of Jerusalem. A good five or six day journey on foot with an animal drawn cart through mountainous countryside with a corpse. So they would have had every reason to have been in a hurry to get underway as soon as possible. Presumably the mountain mentioned in Matt. 28 would be 1886 foot high Mt. Tabor, which dominates the southern plain of Galilee, and is traditionally believed by Christians to be the site of the Transfiguration. Mount Tabor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mountain caves were commonly used as burial sites. And we know that the apostles, at least, journeyed back to the dead man's home region right after his death. The dead man's mother also disappears from the story during this period. She is at the crucifixion, but NOT at the empty tomb on Sunday morning. Where do we next pick her up? WITH THE DISCIPLES SOME SIX WEEKS LATER, NEWLY RETURNED FROM GALILEE. (Acts 1:12-14).
So what conclusion can be reached from these facts? First and most important, that the tomb was discovered to be empty, not because the corpse came back to life and wandered away, but because the priests had secured AN EMPTY TOMB. And it was empty because the followers of Jesus had already moved the body. Moved it where? Where did the apostles go immediately after the crucifixion? GALILEE! The dead man's home. The followers of Jesus DID have legal possession of his body, they DID heavily wrap it and prepared it with 100 pounds of sweet smelling aromatic spices, and they DID travel back to Galilee, the dead man's home after his execution. And Joseph's new rock tomb DID prove to be empty. All of this is specifically contained in the Gospels. If the apostles did not return the body of Jesus home for burial with his family, one would have to wonder WHY NOT? What was there to stop them?
Keep in mind that on that Passover weekend Jerusalem was filled with pilgrims for the celebration of the holy day. One million, according to Josephus. That number is almost certainly a vast overestimate, but even a quarter of that number would have been a huge amount of people, moving around inside and outside of the city. With the body of Jesus loaded into an animal drawn cart, and how ELSE would it have been transported, once the group traveling with the body had mixed in with the throngs of people, they were essentially gone. When Joseph and Nicodemus, along with the remaining apostles and perhaps some few other of the earliest followers of Jesus who might have been secretly involved, had finished prepping the body they simply packed up and left, loading the heavily wrapped body into the same cart they would have used to transport the body to the tomb from Calvary in the first place, and disappeared out into the throngs of pilgrims, closing the tomb behind them to keep out the unwanted. By Sunday they were just one group moving towards Galilee out of thousands of groups undertaking the return trip home after the Passover celebration. No great trick or sleight of hand involved, but no flying reanimated corpse either.
But what of the hundreds of eyewitness accounts of the risen Jesus? The fact is THEY DON'T ACTUALLY EXIST!!! Far from hundreds of eyewitnesses attesting to the appearances of Jesus after his death that Christians proclaim exist we have in fact only six accounts: Gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, as well as Paul's account in 1 Corinthians, and a brief mention of the resurrection in 1 Peter. Hundreds or even dozens of breathless eye witness accounts SIMPLY DO NOT EXIST.
Paul records in 1 Corinthians 15:6 that the resurrected Jesus was witnessed by "above 500" of his followers on one particular occasion. Paul was NOT HIMSELF present at this "event" however, and no accounts by the "above 500" themselves exist, or have ever been known to exist. Nor are there any other accounts which would serve to support Paul's claim of the "above 500." Paul did not convert to Christianity until some years after the execution of Jesus, never met Jesus personally, and was not a personal witness to any of the events detailed in the Gospels. Paul's account in 1 Corinthians. written circa 55, represents the FIRST EVER mention of the risen Jesus. The first quarter of a century after the resurrection was supposed to have occurred provided not the slightest ripple of comment from ANYONE! And the very people in the best position to have known what occurred, the Jewish population of Jerusalem, never believed in or accepted a hoax perpetrated by his followers. So relatively few were buying the story early on. Certainly not the Jewish population of Jerusalem. But where the story of the man-God come to earth to die in agony for the salvation of mankind, only to rise from the dead, DID have success, was among the gentile population; especially the Hellenic or people of Greek background, who already had such beliefs as an intrinsic part of their religious background. The story of the risen Jesus that Paul and others brought to the Hellenic peoples was the story of the very messiah that they already believed was coming to save the world. And so the belief caught on, and by the second century had begun to have historical impact. But not so among the people who had been present at the time and were in the best position to know what actually occurred. These people were uniformly UNIMPRESSED.
Even in the story at hand, the one provided in documents considered by Christians to be above suspicion, we can clearly see that the obvious and most likely suspects in the case of the empty tomb WERE THE FOLLOWERS OF JESUS. Not only did his followers have the means, motive and opportunity to have relocated the body of Jesus from Joseph's tomb, THEY HAD THE BODY, given to them by the Roman governor, and a clear path legally to take the body where ever they chose. The first chapters of Acts details the followers of Jesus spreading the rumor of the risen Jesus, whom, according to them, they personally knew to have been resurrected from the dead. But only after, according to them, the resurrected corpse flew off up into the sky and disappeared into the clouds. So from the very beginning no ACTUAL resurrected dead man was provided as proof. Only a rumor spread by the followers of Jesus. Just the sort of mischief the chief priests had suspected the followers intended to attempt.
As long as the most obvious explanation for the story of the risen Jesus can easily be seen to have been a result of actions taken by the living, his followers, then the story of the corpse that comes back to life and flies away is just as unbelievable and silly as is SHOULD be to everyone simply upon first hearing.
[1]Jesus died by crucifixion. --- Plausible.
[2]He was buried. --- First we must consider the nature of these sorts of tombs, which were common and actually a status symbol among rich people. Tombs such as these were constructed to be FAMILY crypts, intended to inter multiple generations of family members. Typically these tombs were constructed with a flat level ledge for laying out the body of the deceased. After a few months the bones would be collected, placed into a stone ossuary with the deceased person's name carved into it, and then ossuary would be placed into a niche cut into the wall. In this manner whole generations of family members would be interred together.
Joseph's tomb was never intended for a single person. It was a newly constructed family crypt. It was the custom of the Jews to inter their dead with other deceased family members. Why would Joseph bury Jesus, a non family member, in a newly constructed, and very expensive, tomb he intended to be used to inter generations of his own family. If Joseph REALLY wanted to honor Jesus, he would have presented the body of Jesus to family members so that Jesus could be interred with members of his own family.
[3]His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope.--- The apostles went into hiding. We don't directly know anything about their state of mind
[4]The tomb was empty. --- The tomb proved to be empty on Sunday morning according to all four canonical accounts. Christians have declared that the empty tomb indicates that the dead body of Jesus returned to life and left the tomb. Is that a realistic conclusion, however?
Jesus was not a member of Joseph's family and his body was never intended to be permanently interred in Joseph's private family crypt. Joseph's tomb was simply used that Friday because the hour was late and it was convenient,"nigh at hand," to the place of crucifixion and a private place to wash and prepare the body. When the priests went out and took possession of the tomb sometime the next day, the body of Jesus was ALREADY GONE, presumably already on route to it's true final intended destination. We can conclude this to a near certainty because the secured tomb proved to be EMPTY on Sunday morning. And because in the real world an empty tomb and a missing corpse are VASTLY more likely to be the result of actions taken by the living, then the result of actions taken by the corpse.
[5]The disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus --- The disciples spread the rumor that Jesus had arisen from the dead, just as the priests suspected they intended to do. Something only the disciples were witness to. It is now, and was then, an unrealistic claim.
[6]The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers.--- The disciples made a living for years from traveling about telling this story.
[7]The resurrection was the central message. --- Agreed.
[8]They preached the message of Jesus’ resurrection in Jerusalem. --- And throughout Judea.
[9]The Church was born and grew.--- The Church would eventually be made up almost exclusively of NON JEWISH gentiles (goy). In other words, people who were nowhere near Jerusalem when Jesus was alive and had no direct knowledge of what actually happened. The people who WERE in Jerusalem when Jesus was alive and who DID have direct knowledge of what occurred there, the Jewish population of Jerusalem, overwhelmingly rejected the story.
[10]Orthodox Jews who believed in Christ made Sunday their primary day of worship. --- Saturday was and is the Sabbath to the Jews.
Wikipedia
Sabbath
Shabbat
Jewish Shabbat (Shabbath, Shabbes, Shobos, etc.) is a weekly day of rest, observed from sundown on Friday until the appearance of three stars in the sky on Saturday night.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath
The Jews, the very people in the best position to know what actually occurred, overwhelmingly rejected the story of the "risen" Jesus, both at the time and to this day.
The problem you have with your reasoning is
[1]. How did the Church start in Jerusalem the city in which they saw Jesus die with the message being that He was raised from the dead? --- The early disciples were Jewish. But the story of the "risen" Jesus was overwhelmingly rejected by the Jewish population.
[2.] How did the Church start period, in the city in which all the events of Jesus’ death occurred. --- See above.
[3.] Why would Church move their day of worship to the first day of the week? --- This is a Christian practice which occurred much later.
Wikipedia
Sabbath
Christianity
Main article: Sabbath in Christianity
See also: Gregorian calendar
In Eastern Christianity, the Sabbath is considered still to be on Saturday, the seventh day, in remembrance of the Hebrew Sabbath. In Catholicism and most sects of Protestantism, the "Lord's Day" (Greek Κυ�ιακή) is considered to be on Sunday, the first day (and "eighth day"). Communal worship, including the Holy Mysteries, may take place on any day, but a weekly observance of the resurrection is made consistently on Sunday. Western Christianity sometimes refers to the Lord's Day as a "Christian Sabbath", distinct from the Hebrew Sabbath, but related in varying manner.
First-day
Further information: Puritan Sabbath
Since Puritan times, most English-speaking Protestants identify the "Lord's Day" (viz., Sunday) with a "Christian Sabbath", a term Roman Catholics in those areas may also celebrate with the Eucharist. It is considered both the first day and the "eighth day" of the seven-day week.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath
[4.] Why would someone like Paul a well education man listen to fishermen?--- According to Acts 9, while on the road to Damascus Paul became stricken. Acts specifically indicates that at one point Paul went three days without drinking. Whatever the cause, Paul was clearly severely dehydrated. Three days without water is a critical condition. Severe dehydration commonly affects the eyesight, as the vitreous fluid in the eye thickens and is diminished, and causes the neurons in the brain to misfire from lack of fluid, inevitably resulting in hallucinations. Among other symptoms. So, sick and disoriented Paul had to be helped into the city by his traveling companions who then left him at the home of a CHRISTIAN MAN to be cared for. This is a significant point! Sick and delirious from dehydration, and while being tended to and prayed over by a CHRISTIAN MAN, Paul came to believe after his recovery that during his illness he had experienced a face to face visitation with the years dead Jesus. This experience proved to be life changing for Paul and after his recovery Paul became a confirmed Christian. Hardly a surprise, really, given the circumstances. But we in the 21st century, in the light of reason and logic, are left to consider whether it is more reasonable to conclude that Paul, in his delirium, and while being tended to and prayed over by a Christian, hallucinated a vision of Jesus. Or, conversely, whether it is reasonable to conclude that it is more likely that Paul actually MET WITH AND CONVERSED WITH A DEAD MAN! I notice that which side of this question opinion tends to fall invariably has a very direct correlation to whether or not a person has been programmed from an early age to uncritically accept stories of flying reanimated corpses, and the like.
[5.] Why would the disciples die and become outcast for a man that did not day and raised from the died? --- Please provide examples anywhere in scripture that detail that the apostles of Jesus died as a result of their spreading the rumor of Jesus' resurrection. I am even willing to help you start your search. Acts chapter 12 begins with the beheading of James the brother of John at the hands of Herod Agrippa. Now YOU provide the accounts taken from scripture detailing the martyrdom of the remaining apostles.
[5.] People back then did not raise from the dead as much as people today do not raise from the dead. Even if Jesus somehow survived the crucifixion.--- This much at least I wholeheartedly agree with.
The disciples spread the rumor of the "risen" Jesus. Who witnessed the "risen" Jesus? The disciples and ONLY the disciples. WHO witnessed the "risen" Jesus bodily fly off up into the sky (Acts 1:9). The disciples and ONLY the disciples. We know what the disciples claimed. What the disciples actually believed is an entirely different matter.EarthScienceguy wrote: The disciples believed that they saw the risen Lord. And somehow the fisherman’s story was convincing enough that not only Paul but other religious leaders believed that Jesus raised from the dead also.
James, who grew up with Jesus and knew him intimately well, was not especially impressed by Jesus until AFTER Jesus was unfairly and cruelly executed, and the family's honor was besmirched.EarthScienceguy wrote: Some how the fisherman’s story was convincing enough that even James his brother believed.
Okay, let's go into detail.EarthScienceguy wrote: So any theory that try’s to suggest that Jesus did not raise from the dead has to have some explanation for the facts listed above.
TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM ACTS AND THE GOSPELS THEMSELVES, HERE IS A CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE EMPTY TOMB WHICH PROVIDES A COMPLETELY NATURAL EXPLANATION FOR THE ORIGINS OF THE MYTH OF THE RESURRECTED JESUS. NO FLYING REANIMATED CORPSES ARE REQUIRED.
I apologize for the length, but this is a complicated subject and requires much detail to explain..
John 19:
[31] The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
[32] Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.
[33] But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:
When was Jesus executed? ON THE DAY OF PREPARATION. In other words, on Friday, the day BEFORE Saturday, which that year was a special high holy day because of the confluence of the Sabbath and Passover.
Matthew 27:
[46] And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
[47] Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said, This man calleth for Elias.
[48] And straightway one of them ran, and took a spunge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink.
[49] The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him.
[50] Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
What time did Jesus die? Sometime in the NINTH HOUR, on the day of preparation. Nine hours after sunrise. Approximately 3:00 PM.
John 19:
[42] There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.
And so who now has possession of the body of Jesus? HIS DISCIPLES! After receiving permission from Pilate to take possession of the body of Jesus the disciples took the body to Joseph's brand new tomb. WHY? Because it was "nigh at hand," to the place where Jesus was executed and because it made a convenient private place to wash and prepare the body. And they prepared it exceedingly well, according to John 19:39-40. Joseph's personal and very expensive, carved into the living rock, brand new family crypt was never intended to be the eternal resting place of Jesus. Such family crypts were intended to be the final resting place for family members only.
Matt. 27:
[62] Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,
[63] Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
[64] Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.
[65] Pilate said unto them, Ye have a watch: go your way, make it as sure as ye can.
[66] So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.
When did the priests go to Pilate and request a guard at the tomb? Sometime THE NEXT DAY. That would be on Saturday, the holy day. And so the priests went out to the closed tomb, sealed it with seals consisting of cords and wax or clay embossed with an official seal, and then set a guard. But they did not open it to inspect it for the body of Jesus, due to the nature of the day and the prohibition of their own laws. Their actions according to Matthew 27:66 tell us SPECIFICALLY that they were uncertain if the body was still inside. If the priests had known for a certainty that the body was still in the tomb, no seals would have been needed. Posting the guard would have been enough. Anyone intent enough on gaining the body of Jesus by attacking a group of armed guards would not have been dissuaded by a few official seals.
Being unsure if the body was inside necessitated the placement of official seals, to insure that whatever the condition inside the tomb was, it would remain exactly in that condition until the priests could come back and inspect the tomb for the body. And the earliest that could be accomplished would be the next morning... SUNDAY MORNING. Placing seals on the tomb insured against the possibility of the guards taking a bribe and allowing the body to be taken, since the priests were unsure if the body was actually inside. The seals served to indemnify the guards against any possible accusation of failure to do their duty should the tomb ultimately prove to be empty. WHICH IT DID! Since the priests DID set seals, then clearly they were unsure if the body was inside. And since the tomb proved to be empty the next morning, then OBVIOUSLY the tomb was empty when the priests took possession of it on Saturday. As they were afraid it might be. Concluding that the corpse came back to life and left on it's own is pretty FAR FROM OBVIOUS!
So the priests went out and took possession of a CLOSED TOMB, setting a guard to protect it. But they didn't open it to inspect it for contents. WHY? Because it was the Sabbath, and Passover." Opening the tomb would have involved a great deal of manual labor on the Sabbath. And it would have exposed them to a human corpse, the most unclean thing in Jewish tradition. So quite reasonably, they waited. And tomb proved to be empty the next morning, just as they feared. This tells us specifically and conclusively THAT THE PRIESTS AND GUARDS TOOK POSSESSION OF AN EMPTY TOMB. In modern colloquial terms this is known as "closing the barn door after the horse is already gone."
So who then was ACTUALLY in possession of the body of Jesus? Well, WHO WERE THE LAST ONES WITH IT?
JOHN 19:
[38] And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus.
[39] And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight.
And the answer would be that HIS DISCIPLES GOT PERMISSION FROM THE ROMAN GOVERNOR to take possession of the body of Jesus and were therefore the last ones to be clearly in control of it. And the body was legally theirs to do with as they saw fit! They did not have to "steal" it because they had legal possession of it. And they had every legal right to bury it where ever they chose to bury it. We last read of the body of Jesus, in the tomb, being prepared by his followers. Heavily wrapped with ONE HUNDRED POUNDS of sweet smelling aromatic spices mixed into the wrappings. If they had been INTENDING on taking the body on a journey of many days, they could hardly have prepared it any better, within the limits of the technology available to them at the time. Formaldehyde would not be invented for centuries yet and so their only real option, if they expected to be in close proximity to the body for an extended period, was to attempt to mask the smell of putrefaction as best as they could. And to be off as soon as possible!
Matthew27:
[59] And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth,
[60] And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed.
The disciples left the tomb at this point, closing it behind them to keep out the unwanted. Since the tomb proved later to be empty, we can safely conclude that the body of Jesus, now clean and heavily wrapped and coated with 100 pounds of aromatic spices, began it journey to it's final resting place at this point. Because an un-preserved body would begin to decompose quickly in a warm climate. And where would have been the most obvious destination for the final resting place of their friend, Jesus? As a manner of common practice of that age, Jews traditionally buried their dead with other deceased family members. So, where is the obvious place one would transport a corpse for burial? And that would be back to the dead man's HOME. And where was Jesus from? That would be GALILEE!
And where DID the followers of Jesus journey following his execution?
Matthew 28:
[16] "Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them."
They went to the dead man's home region, Galilee. Some 90 miles to the north east of Jerusalem. A good five or six day journey on foot with an animal drawn cart through mountainous countryside with a corpse. So they would have had every reason to have been in a hurry to get underway as soon as possible. Presumably the mountain mentioned in Matt. 28 would be 1886 foot high Mt. Tabor, which dominates the southern plain of Galilee, and is traditionally believed by Christians to be the site of the Transfiguration. Mount Tabor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mountain caves were commonly used as burial sites. And we know that the apostles, at least, journeyed back to the dead man's home region right after his death. The dead man's mother also disappears from the story during this period. She is at the crucifixion, but NOT at the empty tomb on Sunday morning. Where do we next pick her up? WITH THE DISCIPLES SOME SIX WEEKS LATER, NEWLY RETURNED FROM GALILEE. (Acts 1:12-14).
So what conclusion can be reached from these facts? First and most important, that the tomb was discovered to be empty, not because the corpse came back to life and wandered away, but because the priests had secured AN EMPTY TOMB. And it was empty because the followers of Jesus had already moved the body. Moved it where? Where did the apostles go immediately after the crucifixion? GALILEE! The dead man's home. The followers of Jesus DID have legal possession of his body, they DID heavily wrap it and prepared it with 100 pounds of sweet smelling aromatic spices, and they DID travel back to Galilee, the dead man's home after his execution. And Joseph's new rock tomb DID prove to be empty. All of this is specifically contained in the Gospels. If the apostles did not return the body of Jesus home for burial with his family, one would have to wonder WHY NOT? What was there to stop them?
Keep in mind that on that Passover weekend Jerusalem was filled with pilgrims for the celebration of the holy day. One million, according to Josephus. That number is almost certainly a vast overestimate, but even a quarter of that number would have been a huge amount of people, moving around inside and outside of the city. With the body of Jesus loaded into an animal drawn cart, and how ELSE would it have been transported, once the group traveling with the body had mixed in with the throngs of people, they were essentially gone. When Joseph and Nicodemus, along with the remaining apostles and perhaps some few other of the earliest followers of Jesus who might have been secretly involved, had finished prepping the body they simply packed up and left, loading the heavily wrapped body into the same cart they would have used to transport the body to the tomb from Calvary in the first place, and disappeared out into the throngs of pilgrims, closing the tomb behind them to keep out the unwanted. By Sunday they were just one group moving towards Galilee out of thousands of groups undertaking the return trip home after the Passover celebration. No great trick or sleight of hand involved, but no flying reanimated corpse either.
But what of the hundreds of eyewitness accounts of the risen Jesus? The fact is THEY DON'T ACTUALLY EXIST!!! Far from hundreds of eyewitnesses attesting to the appearances of Jesus after his death that Christians proclaim exist we have in fact only six accounts: Gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, as well as Paul's account in 1 Corinthians, and a brief mention of the resurrection in 1 Peter. Hundreds or even dozens of breathless eye witness accounts SIMPLY DO NOT EXIST.
Paul records in 1 Corinthians 15:6 that the resurrected Jesus was witnessed by "above 500" of his followers on one particular occasion. Paul was NOT HIMSELF present at this "event" however, and no accounts by the "above 500" themselves exist, or have ever been known to exist. Nor are there any other accounts which would serve to support Paul's claim of the "above 500." Paul did not convert to Christianity until some years after the execution of Jesus, never met Jesus personally, and was not a personal witness to any of the events detailed in the Gospels. Paul's account in 1 Corinthians. written circa 55, represents the FIRST EVER mention of the risen Jesus. The first quarter of a century after the resurrection was supposed to have occurred provided not the slightest ripple of comment from ANYONE! And the very people in the best position to have known what occurred, the Jewish population of Jerusalem, never believed in or accepted a hoax perpetrated by his followers. So relatively few were buying the story early on. Certainly not the Jewish population of Jerusalem. But where the story of the man-God come to earth to die in agony for the salvation of mankind, only to rise from the dead, DID have success, was among the gentile population; especially the Hellenic or people of Greek background, who already had such beliefs as an intrinsic part of their religious background. The story of the risen Jesus that Paul and others brought to the Hellenic peoples was the story of the very messiah that they already believed was coming to save the world. And so the belief caught on, and by the second century had begun to have historical impact. But not so among the people who had been present at the time and were in the best position to know what actually occurred. These people were uniformly UNIMPRESSED.
Even in the story at hand, the one provided in documents considered by Christians to be above suspicion, we can clearly see that the obvious and most likely suspects in the case of the empty tomb WERE THE FOLLOWERS OF JESUS. Not only did his followers have the means, motive and opportunity to have relocated the body of Jesus from Joseph's tomb, THEY HAD THE BODY, given to them by the Roman governor, and a clear path legally to take the body where ever they chose. The first chapters of Acts details the followers of Jesus spreading the rumor of the risen Jesus, whom, according to them, they personally knew to have been resurrected from the dead. But only after, according to them, the resurrected corpse flew off up into the sky and disappeared into the clouds. So from the very beginning no ACTUAL resurrected dead man was provided as proof. Only a rumor spread by the followers of Jesus. Just the sort of mischief the chief priests had suspected the followers intended to attempt.
As long as the most obvious explanation for the story of the risen Jesus can easily be seen to have been a result of actions taken by the living, his followers, then the story of the corpse that comes back to life and flies away is just as unbelievable and silly as is SHOULD be to everyone simply upon first hearing.
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." -- Albert Einstein -- Written in 1954 to Jewish philosopher Erik Gutkind.-
Tired of the Nonsense
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 5680
- Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:01 pm
- Location: USA
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #92
Again, my appologies for the length of my previous post. Allow me to summerize.EarthScienceguy wrote: You have several problems with your line of reasoning.
1st most critical scholars believe the following
No one really doubts that the resurrection is the central message of Christianity. It was true today just as much as it was true when the Church first started.Jesus died by crucifixion.
He was buried.
His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope..
He was buried.
His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope.
The tomb was empty
The disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus
The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers.
The resurrection was the central message.
They preached the message of Jesus’ resurrection in Jerusalem.
The Church was born and grew.
Orthodox Jews who believed in Christ made Sunday their primary day of worship.
The problem you have with your reasoning isThe disciples believed that they saw the risen Lord. And somehow the fisherman’s story was convincing enough that not only Paul but other religious leaders believed that Jesus raised from the dead also. Some how the fisherman’s story was convincing enough that even James his brother believed.
- 1. How did the Church start in Jerusalem the city in which they saw Jesus die with the message being that He was raised from the dead?
2. How did the Church start period, in the city in which all the events of Jesus’ death occurred.
3. Why would Church move their day of worship to the first day of the week?
4. Why would someone like Paul a well education man listen to fishermen?
5. Why would the disciples die and become outcast for a man that did not day and raised from the died? People back then did not raise from the dead as much as people today do not raise from the dead. Even if Jesus somehow survived the crucifixion.
So any theory that try’s to suggest that Jesus did not raise from the dead has to have some explanation for the facts listed above.
The body of Jesus was turned over to his disciples, direct from the cross, by the Roman governor. The followers of Jesus were the only ones to have been in clear possession of the body of Jesus. The Jewish priests took possession of a closed tomb. They did not immediately open the tomb to make sure that the corpse of Jesus was actually inside. The tomb proved to be empty the next morning.
I raised the question of why Joseph of Arimathea would bury Jesus in his personal new tomb? The more appropriate way to honor Jesus would have been to return the body to the family of Jesus for burial with other family members. Jesus was from Galilee, about 90 miles from Jerusalem ( a downhill journey, I might add). Everyone has assumed that Joseph took the body of Jesus to his personal tomb for burial, but if we consider that Joseph's tomb was only used as a convenient, private (nigh at hand) place to wash and prepare the body of Jesus according to Jewish custom, we have an explanation for why the tomb was empty when the Jewish priests took possession of it. The claim by Christians that the tomb was empty because the corpse returned to life and left of its own accord is in fact the least plausible explanation.
I should also point out that all of these details were extracted from the Gospels and Acts, all of which were written decades after Jesus lived and died, by anonymous individuals who were themselves true believers, and who supposed, like most Christians from that time to this, that Joseph took Jesus to his personal tomb with the intention of burying the body there. But we can see pretty clearly from the fact that the tomb proved to be empty, that this assumption was in error. The body was likely already on its way to its intended final destination when the Jewish priests arrived and took possession of the closed tomb.
I'm sorry, but the assumption made by Christians that the tomb was empty because the corpse came back to life and subsequently flew away is actually pretty childish.I hope this answers your original question:
"what is your reasoning behind (y)our doubt?"
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." -- Albert Einstein -- Written in 1954 to Jewish philosopher Erik Gutkind.
