Evidence for Jesus' Resurrection

[shunyadragon]

There is so much evidence that not a few atheists studying it 'changed jerseys'.

http://blog.drwile.com/category/atheists-who-became-christians/

Personal testimony by a few, does not represent evidence.

Statements like 'There is so much evidence' are not meaningful.' Nothing in the website cited evidence for the resurrection.

Again, evidence need to be objectively verifiable 'facts,' and so far in this thread and elsewhere none have been cited.

 

[Spartan]

In as much as there are no extra-biblical eyewitness accounts of the resurrection (part 2 listed above is abysmal apologetics) the whole issue comes down to; why believe the Bible?
.

Sorry, Skwin, but the Gospels and New Testament were "extra-biblical" eyewitness accounts, etc., during the 1st and 2nd centuries. They were written by different people at different times in different places. That's independent confirmations. The New Testament wasn't compiled into the "Bible" until several centuries later.

And the resurrection accounts are accurate. Recommended reading for you and folks who share your views: "The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by scholar Dr. Gary Habermas

 

[Spartan]

Personal testimony by a few, does not represent evidence.

It sure can be. People get sent to jail all the time based on personal testimony.

 

[Spartan]

Presumably you claim not to "kick Christ to the curb", has the ressurected body of Jesus made an appearance to you? If not I think my point stands

Has the corpse of Jesus been made known to you?

But hey - you want 1st century evidence carved in stone? Click on the link below. Photos included.

Jerusalem Burial Cave Reveals Names, Testimonies of First Christians

 

[Spartan]

Sorry Spartan. It's Christmas, but I'll I've got for you is a lump of coal. This series of 10 articles / blog posts is not at all convincing. Not. At. All.

The coal is for you for kicking the evidences cited to the curb.

 

[dybmh]

The coal is for you for kicking the evidences cited to the curb.

I tried.

There is no evidence.

It's absent. Please bring the evidence and I will give it a fair re-read.

Without evidence that the Bible is accurate, there is nothing left but faith. Faith is not evidence, but, that is not a bad thing. Faith is beautiful, powerful, and useful. But it will not ever be evidence, and that's good thing. Evidence is limited in scope. Faith is infinite and divine.

 

[shunyadragon]

It sure can be. People get sent to jail all the time based on personal testimony.

The bottomline is based on a careful comparison the answer is no.

Personal testimony in the court system must be based on documented first hand evidence at the time of the crime, and even that should be backed up by actual evidence. Many cases have been not lead to conviction or overturned when based on testimony only.

My testimony today claiming I saw ghosts, aliens, or three headed dragons breathing fire would not be accepted as factual evidence. Again . . . claims of supernatural and miraculous events are not considered factual evidence today, nor in any time in history in any of the ancient scriptures of any religion.

 

[Audie]

You're evidence that skeptics will automatically kick anything Christianity to the curb without doing their proper due-diligence.

Your stereotyping and bigorty are not very Christian.
As for your cheap shot assumption / lie about me and
millions of others you dont know, that is likewise
shameful.
And, btw, the automatic etc, such is
applied with more truth and less ca.umny to
yourself.

Oh, and "anything" Christian? That is so
overblown even you know it is phony.

You are a real poor rep for the "faith"
you claim. "Due deligence" indeed.

 

[Audie]

I tried.

There is no evidence.

It's absent. Please bring the evidence and I will give it a fair re-read.

Without evidence that the Bible is accurate, there is nothing left but faith. Faith is not evidence, but, that is not a bad thing. Faith is beautiful, powerful, and useful. But it will not ever be evidence, and that's good thing. Evidence is limited in scope. Faith is infinite and divine.

Accurate? Some parts more, some less so.
Aundant evidence that much of the bible is fairy tale. See "flood" for a start.

 

[Audie]

The evidence is quite good.

In fact there came to be a need for a anti grave robbery law at that time because it's hard to dispute a missing tomb with eyewitnesses willing to hold onto the story till death

Some like Paul were initially opponents of the gospel of God

Any evidence will do, for a miracle. For everything elsr, we need
facts.

As for "Paul", you only "know" what you choose to believe.

He evidently hijacked the religion, and put his own ideas into
it much as Brigham Young did with LDS (there are those who swore
before god at risk of their immortal souls that they saw the
gold books, and signed their names...beat that with your hearsay!)

If you did your ah, a due diligence insteaf of just soaking up lies
like good commies reading mao's little red book, you would
carefully examine Pauls snake bite miracle story, which is so
plainly phony it would tak a most unsophisticated, gullible
audience to believe it.

You guys never get it that the more you try to talk evidence- especially
totrained researcers like myself, the worse you look.

 

[Audie]

The only primary testimony we have is from Paul, and I see no reason why his references couldn’t be metaphorical given his reference to Christians being the “body of Christ”.

But assuming the creed he received was from others there is a good clip on how quickly rumours are added to stories here in the following OP: Miraculous shenanigans - or, a Miracle debunked

I can also think of scriptural reasons not to believe in the resurrection which I may not have time to post today, but will consider posting later.

It is kind of funny to see it said that Saul was "converted".
He converted the religion.

As for his claims, it only takes on bit of perjury
to spoil his pot. (See the snake story)

 

[sooda]

Sorry, Skwin, but the Gospels and New Testament were "extra-biblical" eyewitness accounts, etc., during the 1st and 2nd centuries. They were written by different people at different times in different places. That's independent confirmations. The New Testament wasn't compiled into the "Bible" until several centuries later.

And the resurrection accounts are accurate. Recommended reading for you and folks who share your views: "The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus," by scholar Dr. Gary Habermas

Neither Luke nor Paul ever knew Jesus.

 

[sooda]

Any evidence will do, for a miracle. For everything elsr, we need
facts.

As for "Paul", you only "know" what you choose to believe.

He evidently hijacked the religion, and put his own ideas into
it much as Brigham Young did with LDS (there are those who swore
before god at risk of their immortal souls that they saw the
gold books, and signed their names...beat that with your hearsay!)

If you did your ah, a due diligence insteaf of just soaking up lies
like good commies reading mao's little red book, you would
carefully examine Pauls snake bite miracle story, which is so
plainly phony it would tak a most unsophisticated, gullible
audience to believe it.

You guys never get it that the more you try to talk evidence- especially
totrained researcers like myself, the worse you look.

Paul and the snakebite? Evangelical pizzazz.

 

[Audie]

Paul and the snakebite? Evangelical pizzazz.

Sounds nicer than lie.

 

[shunyadragon]

Has the corpse of Jesus been made known to you?

But hey - you want 1st century evidence carved in stone? Click on the link below. Photos included.

Jerusalem Burial Cave Reveals Names, Testimonies of First Christians

Yes, it is accepted that were early Christians, but not those dated to the life of Jesus Christ as cited in your reference, and nothing addressing the question of evidence for the Resurrection. Absolutely nothing.

By first century it refers to archaeological finds after 50 CE. The Osarary is dated 70 CE.

 

[sooda]

Sounds nicer than lie.

Its quite a yarn. There are bit and pieces of Paul (relics) all over the Christian world.

A shipwreck on Malta? Dalmatia? Cephalonia?

"It was determined that we should sail into Italy ... And entering into a ship of Adramyttium ... we came to Myra ... And there the centurion found a ship of Alexandria sailing into Italy ... they sailed close by Crete. But not long after there arose against it a tempestuous wind ... no small tempest lay on us ... But when the fourteenth night was come, as we were driven up and down in Adria ... And falling into a place where two seas met, they ran the ship aground; and the forepart stuck fast, and remained unmovable, but the hinder part was broken with the violence of the waves.

The centurion ... commanded that they which could swim should cast themselves first into the sea, and get to land. And the rest, some on boards, and some on broken pieces of the ship. And so it came to pass, that they escaped all safe to land."

– Acts 27-28.

The Curious Yarn of Paul's "Shipwreck"

 

[Spartan]

Neither Luke nor Paul ever knew Jesus.

Well, neither do you.

 

[Spartan]

Your stereotyping and bigorty are not very Christian.
As for your cheap shot assumption / lie about me and
millions of others you dont know, that is likewise
shameful.
And, btw, the automatic etc, such is
applied with more truth and less ca.umny to
yourself.

Oh, and "anything" Christian? That is so
overblown even you know it is phony.

You are a real poor rep for the "faith"
you claim. "Due deligence" indeed.

As if you've done your due-diligence. If you had you wouldn't be a non-believer.

 

[sooda]

As if you've done your due-diligence. If you had you wouldn't be a non-believer.

The Early Christians Who Believed Jesus Was Saved From ...
www.manyprophetsonemessage.com/2017/06/30/the-early...
Jun 30, 2017 · There were early Christian groups who denied the crucifixion of Jesus, such as the first century scholar Basilides and his followers, the Basilidians. They believed that Jesus was saved from the crucifixion and that another, Simon of Cyrene, was crucified in his place:

 

[McBell]

As if you've done your due-diligence. If you had you wouldn't be a non-believer.

This has to be the most comical claim a believer can make.