joelr
Well-Known Member
Wrong at so many levels
1 no i didnt say that there is conclusive evidence for the resurrection (i said that it is the best explanation we currently have)
No, the best explanation is this is a myth and is religious syncretism since world saviors (virgin born) were predicted by the Persians, who occupied Israel from 500BC-300BC.
And they were occupied by the Greeks 100BC when Hellenism was huge and influential on all surrounding religions.
Does this sound familiar? This is all from Hellenism -
-the seasonal drama was homologized to a soteriology (salvation concept) concerning the destiny, fortune, and salvation of the individual after death.
-his led to a change from concern for a religion of national prosperity to one for individual salvation, from focus on a particular ethnic group to concern for every human. The prophet or saviour replaced the priest and king as the chief religious figure.
-his process was carried further through the identification of the experiences of the soul that was to be saved with the vicissitudes of a divine but fallen soul, which had to be redeemed by cultic activity and divine intervention. This view is illustrated in the concept of the paradoxical figure of the saved saviour, salvator salvandus.
-Other deities, who had previously been associated with national destiny (e.g., Zeus, Yahweh, and Isis), were raised to the status of transcendent, supreme
-
- The basic forms of worship of both the Jewish and Christian communities were heavily influenced in their formative period by Hellenistic practices, and this remains fundamentally unchanged to the present time. Finally, the central religious literature of both traditions—the Jewish Talmud (an authoritative compendium of law, lore, and interpretation), the New Testament, and the later patristic literature of the early Church Fathers—are characteristic Hellenistic documents both in form and content.
-Other traditions even more radically reinterpreted the ancient figures. The cosmic or seasonal drama was interiorized to refer to the divine soul within man that must be liberated.
-Each persisted in its native land with little perceptible change save for its becoming linked to nationalistic or messianic movements (centring on a deliverer figure)
-and apocalyptic traditions (referring to a belief in the dramatic intervention of a god in human and natural events)
- Particularly noticeable was the success of a variety of prophets, magicians, and healers—e.g., John the Baptist, Jesus, Simon Magus, Apollonius of Tyana, Alexander the Paphlagonian, and the cult of the healer Asclepius—whose preaching corresponded to the activities of various Greek and Roman philosophic missionaries
Hellenistic religion - Beliefs, practices, and institutions
2 I said that there is conclusive evidence that the apostoles saw something that they interpreted as having seen the risen Jesus.
3 The case for the resurrection is a cumulative case with multiple lines of evidence..... if you whant to argue that Ron and Jesus are analogous then you should consider all the evidence and not just a portion.
This is a summary that represents short case for the resurrection
The Resurrection of Jesus | Reasonable Faith
Please read the article and spot the flaws, spot the specific points that you disagree with.
FACT #1: After his crucifixion, Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea.
That is what a myth says? Wiki on the town - "The historical location of Arimathea is uncertain,"
WLC thinks if this didn't happen there would be some other information about where Jesus was buried. Uh, not if the whole thing was a made up story?????
FACT #2: On the Sunday following the crucifixion, Jesus’ tomb was found empty by a group of his women followers.
WLC admits Mark is using the old passion source. But since it's so simple it can't be imbelleshed. Whoops, except it fits the mythotype plot device to a T.
Again, the explanation that it's a savior demigod myth fits far better.
It's just hat religious folks can't say that so they have to do this tapdance to make it somehow seem plausible.
FACT #3: On multiple occasions and under various circumstances, different individuals and groups of people experienced appearances of Jesus alive from the dead.
Yeah, the story does say that. And Morgoth returned from the dead as well in Middle Earth. This is your source? Myths?
FACT #4: The original disciples believed that Jesus was risen from the dead despite their having every predisposition to the contrary.
The disciples were great. You do realize they are fictional characters with no evidence of being historical? This is like arguing for Thor and citing Marvel comics?
It gets worse:
1. It has great explanatory scope: it explains why the tomb was found empty, why the disciples saw post-mortem appearances of Jesus, and why the Christian faith came into being.
It's a fictional story and it always will be? This is not evidence? But as a story it has cohesion. The Greek school produced good writers.
2. It has great explanatory power: it explains why the body of Jesus was gone, why people repeatedly saw Jesus alive despite his earlier public execution, and so forth.
Yes, Mark was a great writer. It's good fiction. He knows ring structure, chisasmus, tansfiguration, this is Greek school fiction of that time period.
3. It is plausible: given the historical context of Jesus’ own unparalleled life and claims, the resurrection serves as divine confirmation of those radical claims.
Same with Inanna and Romulus. And every supernatural story. Do you actually believe this nonsense he's selling?
4. It is not ad hoc or contrived: it requires only one additional hypothesis: that God exists. And even that needn’t be an additional hypothesis if one already believes that God exists.
No, it requires only one hypothesis. Religions are fictional stories created from older fictional stories. And look, this plays out exactly like that!
5. It is in accord with accepted beliefs. The hypothesis: “God raised Jesus from the dead” doesn’t in any way conflict with the accepted belief that people don’t rise naturally from the dead. The Christian accepts that belief as wholeheartedly as he accepts the hypothesis that God raised Jesus from the dead.
Yes and one in Islam accepts whatever miracles happened on their watch. Mormons accept the Joe Smith miracle. It's what you do when you don't care about what is actually true.
6. It far outstrips any of its rival hypotheses in meeting conditions (
No it doesn't. Not even a little. The OT is a bunch of Mesopotamian/Babylonian myths and then we get Greek and Persian myths. Yes, more attention and apologetics were applied to Christianity. Maybe because Rome made it law in 380. So much for free thinking? So smart theologians had a choice, think about how great God is and expand the theology or sit in prison before prisoners rights were a thing.
When WLC is your source you are no longer interested in truth in any meaningful way.
Last edited: