He is Risen - The Evidence

[nPeace]

First you have to prove that the Bible historically absolutely reliable to believe what it says, only then your thesis can be taken seriously.

Oh good. Done. Easy.
No. Actually, that's like saying prove that you went to the bathroom exactly one million times during your lifetime.
In other words, provide proof that every single account in the Bible can be verified by us.
We call those strawman arguments.

 

[nPeace]

Yes, but an earthquake can't made dead bodies rise up and walk into Jerusalem. Get real.

Maybe you didn't read the post? No resurrection occured then.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It wouldn’t have sustained, as a literary phenomenon, for all this time, if it didn’t have depth and substance.

Why do you think people still read and perform plays by Shakespeare? And quote him? Why do we still read Homer, and Ovid and Virgil? And Milton and Shelley and mad beautiful autodidactic visionary William Blake. Because, I would suggest, their writing contains precious gems of both truth and beauty. Not necessarily literal truths, but abiding truths nonetheless.

Truth and beauty being, to heretical mystic John Keats, utterly synonymous. Keats never turned his nose up at the KJV, and neither did his friend and rival Percy Shelley, even after being expelled from Oxford for writing a treatise on atheism. Nor, incidentally, did Hunter S Thompson, a champion of the KJV who is unlikely to have ever darkened many church doors.

Why not? You could say the same about Islam which looks like it is going to eventually pass Christianity. I don't see anything all that special.

And Hunter S. Thompson was a fan of the KJV? Are you serious?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oh good. Done. Easy.
No. Actually, that's like saying prove that you went to the bathroom exactly one million times during your lifetime.
In other words, provide proof that every single account in the Bible can be verified by us.
We call those strawman arguments.

No, that is not a strawman argument.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Why not? You could say the same about Islam which looks like it is going to eventually pass Christianity. I don't see anything all that special.

And Hunter S. Thompson was a fan of the KJV? Are you serious?

Hunter S Thompson turned me onto the KJV, over 30 years ago. Can’t find my copy of Generation of Swine, but here you go...

 

[firedragon]

No. Actually, that's like saying prove that you went to the bathroom exactly one million times during your lifetime.

No. Its called "prove the book is valid source of history".

Going to the bathroom a million times is irrelevant.

 

[sayak83]

Persons are making the claim that there is no evidence for Jesus' resurrection.
In this thread, I will show that claim is false, and that it is both irrational, amd unreasonable, to demand particular expectations be met.
The following is looking at the facts reasonably.

First, it is important to mention the false claims...
The Christ myth theory, also known as the Jesus myth theory, Jesus mythicism, or the Jesus ahistoricity theory, is described by Bart Ehrman paraphrasing Earl Doherty, as the position that "..the historical Jesus did not exist. Or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity." It includes the view that the story of Jesus is largely mythological, and has little basis in historical fact. It is a fringe theory, supported by few tenured or emeritus specialists in biblical criticism or cognate disciplines. It is criticised for its outdated reliance on comparisons between mythologies and deviates from the mainstream historical view.

There are three strands of mythicism, including the view that there may have been a historical Jesus, who lived in a dimly remembered past, and was fused with the mythological Christ of Paul. A second stance is that there was never a historical Jesus, only a mythological character, later historicized in the Gospels. A third view is that no conclusion can be made about a historical Jesus, and if there was one, nothing can be known about him.

This sound very similar to what critics say about most of the characters and events in the Bible.
They claim myths, based on what...
Most Christ mythicists follow a threefold argument: they question the reliability of the Pauline epistles and the Gospels to establish the historicity of Jesus; they note the lack of information on Jesus in non-Christian sources from the first and early second centuries; and they argue that early Christianity had syncretistic and mythological origins, as reflected in both the Pauline epistles and the gospels, with Jesus being a celestial being who was concretized in the Gospels. Therefore, Christianity was not founded on the shared memories of a man, but rather a shared mytheme.

Jesus - The man
What we know : The Facts
The Bible centuries ago, before modern acceptance, stated factually, that a Jewish man called Jesus the Christ / Messiah walked the earth; had followers; was put to death by the Romans.
It was not until recent, that critics of the Bible, finally conceded that there was indeed a man called Jesus Christ, who had followers, and was put to death by the Romans.
Virtually all scholars support the historicity of Jesus and reject the Christ myth theory that Jesus never existed. Among these scholars was G. A. Wells, a well-known mythicist who changed his mind and ultimately believed in a minimal historical Jesus.

Most scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed. Historian Michael Grant asserts that if conventional standards of historical textual criticism are applied to the New Testament, "we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned."
In other words, Michael is actually calling out the hypocrites.

The Bible had also stated how Jesus, was put to death, and that was also recently accepted by Bible critics.
Based on both Biblical, and extra-Biblical sources, the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.

The lesson that should have been learned...
The Bible was telling the truth... again, even though it was not believed by critics.

The resurrection - Evidence
Past
What we know : The Facts
It was the followers of Jesus who claimed that Jesus was risen.
The Bible says Jesus appeared - not to the Romans; not to the Jewish leaders, who wanted him dead, and would certainly have been happy to kill him a second time - but to his faithful followers.
Why did Jesus show himself only to his followers, and not the world? He wanted them to know that he was alive, as he promised he would be.
How did he go, undetected? Surely, if he was risen, people would know, and it would be widely reported. It would make "headline news".
No. Here is why...
(John 20:14-20) 14 After saying this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus.

Spoiler: Read further...

15 Jesus said to her: “Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you looking for?” She, thinking it was the gardener, said to him: “Sir, if you have carried him off, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.” 16 Jesus said to her: “Mary!” On turning around, she said to him in Hebrew: “Rabboni!” (which means “Teacher!”) 17 Jesus said to her: “Stop clinging to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.’” 18 Mary Magdalene came and brought the news to the disciples: “I have seen the Lord!” And she told them what he had said to her. 19 When it was late that day, the first day of the week, and the doors were locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them: “May you have peace.” 20 After saying this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples rejoiced at seeing the Lord.

Luke 24:13-43 ; John 21:1-8

The Bible shows without any doubt, Jesus could not be recognized in person. Even his own relatives, and close associates, did not recognize him.
This is because Jesus was not raised in (with) a physically body, and he did not manifest in the same body he was put to death with.
So people passing Jesus, would not have been "Look! There is that man the Romans crucified."
This is a simple fact made in the Bible. Only Jesus follower had clear proof of Jesus' resurrection.
So only Jesus' followers were in a position to record that fact. No one else knew.

What lesson should people have learned, that keeps repeating itself?
What the Bible says, is true, but people keep denying it until they have no choice but to concede, when it is proven.

Present
What we know : The Facts
The Bible says... (Matthew 9:35-38) 35 And Jesus set out on a tour of all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and preaching the good news of the Kingdom and curing every sort of disease and every sort of infirmity. 36 On seeing the crowds, he felt pity for them, because they were skinned and thrown about like sheep without a shepherd. 37 Then he said to his disciples: “Yes, the harvest is great, but the workers are few. 38 Therefore, beg the Master of the harvest to send out workers into his harvest.”
(Luke 4:43) But he said to them: “I must also declare the good news of the Kingdom of God to other cities, because for this I was sent.”

Jesus preached about the kingdom of God, to the cities and villages.
Jesus' followers did the same. Jesus promised to be with his followers in this work, which they were to carry on. Matthew 24:14 ; Matthew 28:18-20

Today, millions of Christian followers of Jesus, are preaching the same message - the kingdom of God, in the same manner that Jesus did, throughout the entire globe, and amazing growth is seen as more disciples are added.

What is the evidence Jesus is with them?
In 33 CE, the evidence was seen in 1) the holy spirit empowering Jesus followers, and 2) the growth in the disciples, and their activity.
Today, the same is seen among his faithful followers.
While it is expected that there will be imitators, and counterfeits, this does not render the evidence void, just as fraud in science does not render the other evidence void.
This is reasonable, is it not?

Unreasonable demands and irrational expectations
Based on the above, it is unreasonable to demand that Jesus should have left any trace outside what we have - the testimony of those who witnessed Jesus alive after his murder.
It is irrational to expect that Jesus should somehow appear to unbelievers to prove to them that he live, and perhaps beg them to accept that fact.

The Bible says... (1 Corinthians 2:8-10) 8 It is this wisdom that none of the rulers of this system of things came to know, for if they had known it, they would not have executed the glorious Lord. 9 But just as it is written: “Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, nor have there been conceived in the heart of man the things that God has prepared for those who love him.” 10 For it is to us God has revealed them through his spirit, for the spirit searches into all things, even the deep things of God.
In other words, God does not care that the opponents of the Bible, do not believe. He cares only that those who know him, or want to know him, based on the available evidence, are blessed with more - knowledge, wisdom, and understanding.
Why?
The Bible says... (1 Corinthians 2:14) But a physical man does not accept the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot get to know them, because they are examined spiritually.
To the proud person, the things of God are foolishness.

Imagine that you had some pearls of very high value, and you wanted to share them with everyone.
However, some people don't see the value in them. They take them and just throw them away, or pound them to dust, to make some kind of recreational drug. Would you give those people your pearls?
That would be like giving food to people who take it and bury it in the earth. Matthew 7:6

If you could predict what a person would do, you would be selective in whom you give good things to.
This is the way God deals. Because God knows the heart of man, he is selective in who receives truth.
That's reasonable, isn't it?

What other evidence for the resurrection of Jesus would there be?

This post is supposed to be convincing?? This reads more like an exercise to convince the ingroup of their righteousness than anything else. I wonder why such an exercise at self justification is needed?
If God does not care about those who do not believe in the resurrection, we do not care about it either. The idea of a secret resurrection in a completely different body so that only those select who really believed could sense it, and that too only for a brief few days before ascension to heavens is supposed to be convincing? If you wish to believe this personally on faith and personal experience, fine. But don't say there is any sort of convincing public evidence here , as that will be patently false.

 

[sayak83]

Interesting how a compendium of writing which, when tested “fails again and again”, remains one of the most widely read, most influential, inspirational, controversial achievements in world literature. Why do you think this is?

Colonial conquests?

 

[RestlessSoul]

Colonial conquests?

In part, certainly.

But that doesn’t explain it’s enduring capacity to inspire and infuriate in equal measure

 

[sayak83]

In part, certainly.

But that doesn’t explain it’s enduring capacity to inspire and infuriate in equal measure

I do not see it as particularly special. Islam will soon have more adherents than Christianity. Newer religions are also there that are growing quickly. The explosive growth of Christianity outside Europe happened due to the expansion of European powers in the new world, Africa, Australia and Asia. In this way the growth is EXACTLY similar to the growth of European languages like English, Spanish Portuguese throughout the world. People follow the culture, language and religion of the dominant powers at a given point in history. Nothing strange or unexpected about that.

 

[ChristineM]

I'm sure it's in the OP.
You didn't see it? That's odd.
I'll isolate it specially for you Christine.
The crucifixion of Jesus occurred in 1st-century Judea, most likely in either AD 30 or AD 33. Jesus' crucifixion is described in the four canonical gospels, referred to in the New Testament epistles, attested to by other ancient sources, and is established as a historical event confirmed by non-Christian sources, although there is no consensus among historians on the exact details.

Oops. Sorry. You meant the resurrection.
It's in the OP. Evidence, past and present. Sorry Christine.

Do you know the meaning of independent?

The biblical gospels confirming themselves most definitely isn't it.

Please provide links to some of these independent sources you claim, they were not in the OP and skirted around in passing in your reply here.


Yes the crucifixion of whi you see as worthy of your faith and i see as a terrorist seems to have occurred. As to "he is risen" not so much

 

[pearl]

There is even an entire parable that is like to have been added.

The story of the woman caught in adultery is a later insertion here, missing from all early Greek manuscripts. A Western text-type insertion, attested mainly in Old Latin translations, it is found in different places in different manuscripts: here, or after Jn 7:36 or at the end of this gospel, or after Lk 21:38, or at the end of that gospel. There are many non-Johannine features in the language, and there are also many doubtful readings within the passage. The style and motifs are similar to those of Luke, and it fits better with the general situation at the end of Lk 21: but it was probably inserted here because of the allusion to Jer 17:13 (cf. note on Jn 8:6) and the statement, “I do not judge anyone,” in Jn 8:15. The Catholic Church accepts this passage as canonical scripture.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I do not see it as particularly special. Islam will soon have more adherents than Christianity. Newer religions are also there that are growing quickly. The explosive growth of Christianity outside Europe happened due to the expansion of European powers in the new world, Africa, Australia and Asia. In this way the growth is EXACTLY similar to the growth of European languages like English, Spanish Portuguese throughout the world. People follow the culture, language and religion of the dominant powers at a given point in history. Nothing strange or unexpected about that.

Do you believe in re-incarnation? If so, I’ll have a bet with you that, 1000 years from now, people will still read the Bible. And the Bhagavad Gita. And the Quran.

 

[sayak83]

Do you believe in re-incarnation? If so, I’ll have a bet with you that, 1000 years from now, people will still read the Bible. And the Bhagavad Gita. And the Quran.

I do not claim there is convincing public evidence that reincarnation happens.
How about 5000 years from now? 1000 years is not a lot of time for a complete overhaul of the main players of human civilization.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I do not claim there is convincing public evidence that reincarnation happens.
How about 5000 years from now? 1000 years is not a lot of time for a complete overhaul of the main players of human civilization.

Even 5000 years is but the blinking of an eye. Let’s make it 10000

Though it is by no means certain that humanity will still exist even 100 years from now. And if the crows build the next civilisation - crows are very smart - they will probably create their own sacred texts.

 

[sayak83]

Even 5000 years is but the blinking of an eye. Let’s make it 10000

Though it is by no means certain that humanity will still exist even 100 years from now. And if the crows build the next civilisation - crows are very smart - they will probably create their own sacred texts.

I don't have a clue on what crows will do. If cats build the civilization, they will probably worship themselves though...

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Fabrication? What are you talking about? An earthquake can spill bodies from their burial place. It's not fabricated. It's a fact. No resurrections occurred then.

The passage describes the saints getting up out of their tombs, going into the city and appearing before people.

Are you seriously suggesting that a hypothetical earthquake that opened some tombs matches this description?

 

[Revoltingest]

Persons are making the claim that there is no evidence for Jesus' resurrection.
In this thread, I will show that claim is false, and that it is both irrational, amd unreasonable, to demand particular expectations be met.

It's a darn shame to invest so much work in using a fairy
tale & believers in the fairy tale to prove the same fairy tale.
It is indeed reasonable to dismiss such an argument.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Giving thought to what you said here. You caught me napping earlier.
Why would a mass resurrection be any more significant to the miracles Jesus is reported to have performed?

This speaks to a point you made in the OP: that Jesus's resurrection could have been missed by many because it was hard to recognize the resurrected Jesus as Jesus.

Even if that were true, we would still expect people to notice when an army of dead people emerge from their tombs, walk into the city, and appear before "many people."

Didn't the same people that wanted Jesus dead, claim that these works were Devil works, and didn't some think Jesus was a magician, i.e. a trickster?
Wouldn't these be waved away as nonsense, in the same way you do?

Sure. So show me where people did wave it off as nonsense.

Show me the passage in Josephus or the Talmud or whatever that says something like "the false prophet Jesus staged a fake zombie invasion of Jerusalem. It frightened many, but was condemned as trickery"... or "many dead saints walked into the city. The followers of Jesus claimed that he had also been resurrected, but Jesus was not seen among the dead that walked through Jerusalem."

... anything like that.

Do you at least agree that if "many" dead people rise from the grave, walk into the city and are seen by "many" people, this is the sort of event that should get noticed by chroniclers?

 

[ElishaElijah]

It was not that God raised Jesus out of death that Jews could not believe, what they could no believe is that Jesus was their Messiah.

RESURRECTION - JewishEncyclopedia.com

You haven't got any evidence. Your only evidence is that 12 men who we are not even sure were real--at least there is no historical evidence for any of them-- CLAIM they saw Jesus. That's it. And they didn't leave any written testimony behind. It's a rumor, hearsay, stories handed down from generation to generation. If you took this into a court you'd be laughed out the building.

The Court Case is coming we are only in the deposition stage. I’m one of the witnesses.