Did Jesus die and rise from the dead?

[Trailblazer]

How do you know that? There are not even reliable records of eyewitnesses, one of the weakest forms of evidence.

Is there even any proof that the body of Jesus was placed in the tomb?
My atheist friends on other forums told me nobody ever witnessed that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am not going over anything more tonight. I've had a full, busy day and am tired and going to bed. Have a good night and oh yeah....

He is Risen!

And I could say with more authority "He has not". Do you want to believe or do you want to know?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is there even any proof that the body of Jesus was placed in the tomb?
My atheist friends on other forums told me nobody ever witnessed that.

There is no reliable evidence that I know of.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you go over those one at a time, you will discover that all the prophecies for the coming of Messiah the Jews were waiting for were fulfilled by Baha'u'llah. Their exact fulfillment is explained in Thief in the Night by William Sears.

I have my doubts about that too. The people to ask would be the Jews and not the Baha'i.

 

[Trailblazer]

There is no reliable evidence that I know of.

Then why do Christians believe it? And not only Christians, but non-Christians believe in the resurrection. Look at all the people who celebrate Easter. If there was no proof that Jesus was ever placed in the tomb, I cannot understand why people were surprised He was not found there later.

 

[Trailblazer]

I have my doubts about that too. The people to ask would be the Jews and not the Baha'i.

Baha'u'llah either fulfilled those prophecies or He did not. The Jews no not know because they do not even bother to look at how Baha'u'llah fulfilled the prophecies, because just like the Christians, they have made up their minds that the Messiah is yet to come.
People can read that book and then they can decide for themselves. In the Baha'i Faith, we call that independent investigation of truth.

 

[blü 2]

It appears all the apostle were willing to hold that belief till death

The history of religion shows people again and again being willing to die for stories. The Christians demanding martyrdom in the arena are an example. So are the volunteers who came from all corners of the globe to be part of Daesh.

None of the six accounts of the resurrection in the NT is an eyewitness account, a contemporary account or an independent account. Each of the six contradicts the other five in major ways. The earliest account is Paul's, 1 Corinthians 15 (c. 53-54 CE), 20 years after the later traditional date (33 CE) for the crucifixion. The next is Mark's (c. 75 CE) but it ends at the empty tomb, the appearances being added later. The last is Acts 1, maybe after 100 CE.

The evidence, in other words, is a forensic disaster. Even if we had a credibly authenticated eyewitness account of the resurrection, it would by overwhelming probability be an error or a fraud, but we don't have one, or anything like it. What we have doesn't get us within 20 years of the event.

 

[Left Coast]

I believe Jesus alone as fully human/fully God alone had the power to resurrect. Why should I doubt that the Creator of heaven and earth could rise from the dead?

That rests on the assumption that there is a "Creator of heaven and earth," which you would have to demonstrate.

the scriptures are consistent and based in historical context and I find them to be reliable.

Again, you're just claiming things. I'm trying to figure out how you arrived at your conclusions.

As for the Gospels, the 4 accounts of the resurrection (let alone the rest of the books) are hopelessly inconsistent with each other. How many women went to the tomb? Was the stone already rolled away when they got there? How many angels appeared to them? Were they joyful or fearful? Did they tell anyone what happened when they left? And so on. Virtually every plot detail varies based on which Gospel you're reading.

And even if the story were consistent, that doesn't make it true.


Sure, many humans have been willing to die for something they honestly believed in, but the difference is that the disciples of Jesus not only believed Jesus was dead, they KNEW He was dead because they saw Him die. [/QUOTE]
Again, you are simply accepting the Bible's word for it on that count. How the heck did you conclude that the Bible is a book you should believe in the first place?

My point is it was only seeing Him alive that changed their whole lives, understanding, and caused them to be willing to suffer and die because they knew He had risen from the grave.

No, believing they saw him alive caused them to be willing to suffer and die. I have no doubt people saw visions of Jesus. The question is whether those visions were of a real resurrected person.

 

[Thief]

Why do you believe that? Jesus is not dead, only His physical body is dead. His soul ascended to the spiritual world (heaven) and it took on a spiritual body comprised of spiritual elements that exist in that realm. The SAME exact thing will happen to all of us when our body dies. The physical body once dead, remains dead. It does not rise from the grave. It is this kind of superstitious belief that has discredited religion.

oh but I do strongly suspect.....He did resurrect
spiritually
and we do the same
I think we are on the same page

but there are other pages not dealt with so far......or maybe I overlooked them

seems there is report that He did eat and drink with His disciples
and one of them insisted upon a tactile proving.....fingers in the wounds

and the women that saw Him first after His rise.....were cautioned....
Do not touch Me
I have not yet ascended to My Father

conflicting reports?
yeah

 

[tigrers2019]

The only physical evidence we have of Jesus is His burial shroud. Skeptics throw everything they have against it every year to try to disprove it's authenticity but it comes through.

Scientists still cannot identify the radiation that left the bodily imprint in this cloth though they have tried many times.

 

[lukethethird]

Did Jesus die and rise from the dead?
How naive and gullible can we be?

 

[Audie]

It appears all the apostle were willing to hold that belief till death

You find such behaviour admirable, or proof of
validity? See Heaven's Gate, for one of some several
examples of people following some cult belief unto death.

 

[Audie]

The only physical evidence we have of Jesus is His burial shroud. Skeptics throw everything they have against it every year to try to disprove it's authenticity but it comes through.

Scientists still cannot identify the radiation that left the bodily imprint in this cloth though they have tried many times.

Ah, so every single "holy relic" but that one is
yet another Christian fraud. So we have one (1)
bit of real evidence for "Jesus" amidst thousands of
fakes.

As for "throwing everything", they church is very
careful to keep it from being tested adequately.

 

[Audie]

So what is your point, that you believe what The Bible teaches?

I wonder if you have a feel for what an
impossible-to-answer question that is?
40,000 sects all think it teaches something
different.

 

[Audie]

The best explanation, though controversial for being religious, is that Jesus was really there to be seen. In other words, yes, Jesus rose from the dead.

Is it.

Tell, me, though this is irrelevant to the "resurrection".
do you also believe there was a literal Adam and Eve,
the first people,and a literal world wide flood?

Because if you do, then what you are looking at is not
the "best explanation", but rather, the one that best
comforts you in your chosen belief.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Then why do Christians believe it? And not only Christians, but non-Christians believe in the resurrection. Look at all the people who celebrate Easter. If there was no proof that Jesus was ever placed in the tomb, I cannot understand why people were surprised He was not found there later.

Numbers of believers is not evidence.

The only physical evidence we have of Jesus is His burial shroud. Skeptics throw everything they have against it every year to try to disprove it's authenticity but it comes through.

Scientists still cannot identify the radiation that left the bodily imprint in this cloth though they have tried many times.

Are you talking about the shroud of Turin? That was shown to be a fraud. And you have that backwards, there are some people living in fantasy land that can't stand the fact that they were highly suspicious of it being a fraud from the start and every test has shown it to be a fraud. Some people just love to believe in magic.

 

[Audie]

Numbers of believers is not evidence.

Are you talking about the shroud of Turin? That was shown to be a fraud. And you have that backwards, there are some people living in fantasy land that can't stand the fact that they were highly suspicious of it being a fraud from the start and every test has shown it to be a fraud. Some people just love to believe in magic.

Then too, it is widely noted that god is not into
providing proof.
Them xians try to have it both ways, sometimes.

Oh, plz provide a good source on how it is shown to be a fraud.

 

[InChrist]

That rests on the assumption that there is a "Creator of heaven and earth," which you would have to demonstrate.


Again, you're just claiming things. I'm trying to figure out how you arrived at your conclusions.

As for the Gospels, the 4 accounts of the resurrection (let alone the rest of the books) are hopelessly inconsistent with each other. How many women went to the tomb? Was the stone already rolled away when they got there? How many angels appeared to them? Were they joyful or fearful? Did they tell anyone what happened when they left? And so on. Virtually every plot detail varies based on which Gospel you're reading.

And even if the story were consistent, that doesn't make it true.

Listen to the testimonies of a variety of witnesses in a courtroom concerning any event and you will hear various details presented about the same event. This is not inconsistency, but rather gives credibility to the accounts as each person expresses or highlights things a little differently from their own perspective or what stood out to them, yet with a consistency concerning the main theme of the event. If every gospel account was precisely identical down to the detail, then I'd say you would have reason to wonder about the truthfulness of the accounts.

Again, you are simply accepting the Bible's word for it on that count. How the heck did you conclude that the Bible is a book you should believe in the first place?

No, believing they saw him alive caused them to be willing to suffer and die. I have no doubt people saw visions of Jesus. The question is whether those visions were of a real resurrected person.

The scriptures state that Jesus appeared alive to more than 500 people, on twelve separate occasions, even talking, walking, and eating with some of these people. This does not sound like only mystical visions to me. In the case of Thomas, Jesus told him to touch His hands and side were He had been wounded. And He specifically clarified to the disciples He was risen bodily and not just a spirit.

And He said to them, “Why are you troubled? And why do doubts arise in your hearts? Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.”
When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His feet. But while they still did not believe for joy, and marveled, He said to them, “Have you any food here?” So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb. 43 And He took it and ate in their presence. Luke 24: 38-42

I conclude the Bible is reliable because it makes sense and is set in historical context, provides real names of people and places and other details which the writers including for the very purpose of giving validity to their testimonies. There were plenty of those around who were hostile to Jesus and the resurrection who could have very easily disproved the gospel accounts, were they not true and the early church would never have gotten started. But the resurrection of Christ was not disproved then because it did take place and even the enemies of Jesus knew it had, so they tried to hide it and then began the persecution of the first Jewish followers of Christ.

I am a born again believer. That means that at one time I did not understand, nor trust in Christ or the Bible. But at the point I did see my need for a Savior and believe it was Jesus, my eyes were opened to the scriptures, their accuracy, truthfulness, and the theme of God's redemption throughout.

 

[InChrist]

And I could say with more authority "He has not". Do you want to believe or do you want to know?

I don't expect you to know since you do not know Jesus, but I know Him.

These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God. 1 John 5:13

 

[Audie]

Listen to the testimonies of a variety of witnesses in a courtroom concerning any event and you will hear various details presented about the same event. This is not inconsistency, but rather gives credibility to the accounts as each person expresses or highlights things a little differently from their own perspective or what stood out to them, yet with a consistency concerning the main theme of the event. If every gospel account was precisely identical down to the detail, then I'd say you would have reason to wonder about the truthfulness of the accounts.




The scriptures state that Jesus appeared alive to more than 500 people, on twelve separate occasions, even talking, walking, and eating with some of these people. This does not sound like only mystical visions to me. In the case of Thomas, Jesus told him to touch His hands and side were He had been wounded. And He specifically clarified to the disciples He was risen bodily and not just a spirit.

And He said to them, “Why are you troubled? And why do doubts arise in your hearts? Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.”
When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His feet. But while they still did not believe for joy, and marveled, He said to them, “Have you any food here?” So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb. 43 And He took it and ate in their presence. Luke 24: 38-42

I conclude the Bible is reliable because it makes sense and is set in historical context, provides real names of people and places and other details which the writers including for the very purpose of giving validity to their testimonies. There were plenty of those around who were hostile to Jesus and the resurrection who could have very easily disproved the gospel accounts, were they not true and the early church would never have gotten started. But the resurrection of Christ was not disproved then because it did take place and even the enemies of Jesus knew it had, so they tried to hide it and then began the persecution of the first Jewish followers of Christ.

I am a born again believer. That means that at one time I did not understand, nor trust in Christ or the Bible. But at the point I did see my need for a Savior and believe it was Jesus, my eyes were opened to the scriptures, their accuracy, truthfulness, and the theme of God's redemption throughout.

We do not doubt that you believe. It is what believers
do; they believe things. Singers sing, believers believe.

Lookee this! The Book of Mormon has to be true!!

The Testimony of Eight Witnesses
Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shown unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shown unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen. And we lie not, God bearing witness of it.

Christian Whitmer

Jacob Whitmer

Peter Whitmer, Jun.

John Whitmer

Hiram Page

Joseph Smith, Sen.

Hyrum Smith

Samuel H. Smith