Did Jesus really rise from the dead?

[polonius]

From several historical writings (Josephus, Tacitus, and Suetonius) we learn that a an itinerant preacher named Jesus was executed about 30 AD by Pontius Pilate for insurrection. (Claiming to be king of the Jews).

Starting with Paul who wasn't a witness to the crucifixion writing 25 years later, we hear that Jesus was seen alive by 500 people (before his "Ascension"). Unfortunately, Paul wrote this to the Corinthians 800 miles from Jerusalem who who would not be expected to have first hand knowledge. He did not write to any Romans.

But curiously although Jerusalem at that time had many literate Hebrews, Romans, Greeks, and others, and this fantastic story would have been widely spread, there are no written reports about it. Nor is this alleged appearance to 500 reported in any of the Gospels.

The Gospels were written by non-witnesses between 70 and 95 AD.

Is Paul's really a fictional story that caught on later? The purported ascension made verification impossible. Maybe that's why it had to be written as it was.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 1 by polonius]

Early Christianity accepted much more fanciful accounts than the books that make up the NT today.

Much of Paul's theology is based on 2 Enoch for instance. I'm confused why it is that believers want to portray the a Gospels as accurate historical accounts using an argument that contrived stories wouldn't have been believed.

They were believed for hundreds of years until declared non canonical.

[marco]

Is Paul's really a fictional story that caught on later? The purported ascension made verification impossible. Maybe that's why it had to be written as it was.

If Paul believed, with a touch of insanity, that God knocked him off his horse and shouted at him then he was capable of believing rumours of a resurrection. It may well be that Paul didn't believe he met God but since others did, his importance was conveniently magnified. So he let things be.


Paul took scraps of stories and gave them literary clothing, thus building what we see today as Christianity, something probably never envisaged by Christ himself. Of course the resurrection didn't happen, but it is a short path from rumour into fact. Paul was a capable writer.

[polonius]

Is Paul's really a fictional story that caught on later? The purported ascension made verification impossible. Maybe that's why it had to be written as it was.

If Paul believed, with a touch of insanity, that God knocked him off his horse and shouted at him then he was capable of believing rumours of a resurrection. It may well be that Paul didn't believe he met God but since others did, his importance was conveniently magnified. So he let things be.


Paul took scraps of stories and gave them literary clothing, thus building what we see today as Christianity, something probably never envisaged by Christ himself. Of course the resurrection didn't happen, but it is a short path from rumour into fact. Paul was a capable writer.

RESPONSE: It was Luke in Acts who has the three versions of Paul's falling off his horse on the road to Damascus.

None of Paul's epistles have such a story.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 4 by polonius]

But Paul did claim that he had received his gospel through divine revelation and that he had persecuted the early believers. Somebody must have been accusing him falsehood.




Galatians 1:11-20 New International Version (NIV)

Paul Called by God

11 I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

13 For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. 14 I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased 16 to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any human being. 17 I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia. Later I returned to Damascus.

18 Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas[a] and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. 20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.

[The Tanager]

But curiously although Jerusalem at that time had many literate Hebrews, Romans, Greeks, and others, and this fantastic story would have been widely spread, there are no written reports about it. Nor is this alleged appearance to 500 reported in any of the Gospels.

These are some of the questions that come to my mind when thinking about your comments here. What writings do we have from the time before Paul and the Gospels? Why should we expect the Gospels to report the appearance to 500? They do report appearances, which is enough for their purposes. Why would writings by non-Christians, which would look down on the Christian claims, be written at all during the beginning period of Christian growth or, if they were, be concerned with Christianity or be the type of documents that were saved?

[postroad]

[Replying to post 6 by The Tanager]


Are we placing balance of probabilities as a lower standard than a minute possibility?

Just wondering because the Christian position seems to be perpetually defended on some concept of it not being absolutely impossible.

[The Tanager]

Are we placing balance of probabilities as a lower standard than a minute possibility?

Just wondering because the Christian position seems to be perpetually defended on some concept of it not being absolutely impossible.

I was not arguing for the Christian position in my post, I was arguing against polonius' statement that the supposed curiosities are good reasons to think Christianity was fictional. I was questioning whether those things were all that curious.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 8 by The Tanager]

I'm wondering if in the first century anybody much cared what the multiple sects were writing. They certainly weren't public. In fact numerous Gospels and assorted writing circulated among various groups and were considered as authoritative until the cannon was finalized.

[polonius]

postroad pointed out that:

But Paul did claim that he had received his gospel through divine revelation and that he had persecuted the early believers. Somebody must have been accusing him falsehood.

RESPONSE:

I have a friend who claims to that he is receiving divine revelations. We're quite worried about him.

Keep in mind that Paul became a follower of Christ three years after the crucifixion. That would have been in 36 AD at the latest. He didn't start turning out his Epistles until 52 AD. That was lots of time to come up with "divine revelations."