Historical Jesus

[oldbadger]

I don't have special powers, I've had special dreams and some visions. You may be right about Tiberius's concern for Jesus or a man claiming divinity. I made an assumption because of my dream about a Roman soldier beating Jesus. If you research the crucifixion you don't find historical confirmation for it. I had a vision about two pearls of equal size next to one another. It told me about God's duality. Then, I had a dream about two Gods in a sphere in heaven. They were reacting to angels surrounding the sphere. The two Gods captivated all the angels. One God would react to some communication with an angel and the other would pop into view and react to the exchange. I assume when God was in the world as Jesus both entities would function in one body to interact with others. I find the most amount of information about Jesus by reading "Jesus sayings" in the NT and prior gospels. I have come to doubt the dramatic and miraculous NT stories about Jesus. I think references to what Jesus said about the "Kingdom of Heaven" are most revealing for his identity.

Good luck in your research endeavors.

Wow! I wish that I had dreams like those you described. Although mine can be exciting for other reasons....

Romans beating Jesus..... I don't think that Jesus went South of Galilee during the 11-12 months of his mission until that last journey to Jerusalem, and there weren't any Romans in Galilee because it was controlled by Herod Antipas and his forces; he just paid over Tributes, Taxes and fees to the Romans each year.

Whilst Matthew, Luke and John have interesting 'pieces' of information, I only trust G-Mark for the story of Jesus and his mission, but even then I exclude any parts which mention 'Christ' or which try to tell me which prophesy was fulfilled by which event. The remaining story shows a much different mission to that which most Christians believe happened.... hence the rather heated posts from a Christian to me in this thread.

 

[Repox]

Wow! I wish that I had dreams like those you described. Although mine can be exciting for other reasons....

Romans beating Jesus..... I don't think that Jesus went South of Galilee during the 11-12 months of his mission until that last journey to Jerusalem, and there weren't any Romans in Galilee because it was controlled by Herod Antipas and his forces; he just paid over Tributes, Taxes and fees to the Romans each year.

Whilst Matthew, Luke and John have interesting 'pieces' of information, I only trust G-Mark for the story of Jesus and his mission, but even then I exclude any parts which mention 'Christ' or which try to tell me which prophesy was fulfilled by which event. The remaining story shows a much different mission to that which most Christians believe happened.... hence the rather heated posts from a Christian to me in this thread.

I should present the full version of my dream about the Roman soldier beating Jesus. According to my dream, a husky Roman soldier stood over Jesus on his knees beating him with his fists. As the soldier struck Jesus in the face, a Roman officer stood next to them watching. The Roman soldier beating Jesus was dressed with an armor chest plate and helmet. The officer wore armor and a flat hat resembling a sailor's hat. I have researched Roman uniforms but have not found any hat resembling the officer's cap. Jesus, on his knees, wore a tattered robe, or some kind of nondescript clothing. The beating was on a dirt road. In the scene, there were no other people or trees. However, it was a close up view showing only a dirt road. While I witnessed the beating, I knew it was Jesus on his knees. In my dreams, I don't have any doubts about interpretations.

Roman soldiers were in Judea, which included Galilea, during the time of Christ, and apparently, they were not friendly toward Jews.

http://www.larp.com/legioxx/holyland.html

I have found historical accounts of events for the period unclear or fragmented, so I don't think one can conclude actual conditions, just probabilities. I recall reading about highways in that part of world under the control of the Roman Empire. After my dream, I did some research and found no historical documents for the crucifixion. Then, I read Mack's book about the lost gospel. Apparently, son of God and crucifixion stories happened about 40 to 50 years after Jesus was killed. It requires a long explanation for how Mark and other scholars have derived at such conclusions, but it is highly reliable. It has to do with tracing phases of gospel Q whereas the gospel underwent editing to change meanings over a period of years divided into four time periods. Apparently, son of God and crucifixion stories occurred during the third time period before the four NT gospels were written.

The problem for doing Bible research is one is tempted to insert their religion or religious ideology into their studies. Because I don't buy into fairyland Christianity, I avoid the problem. I believe Jesus was God, not the son of God. Even though I have a belief, I try to remain objective. I don't believe God favors stories without evidence.

 

[Repox]

Historical documents, including early gospels, are evidence for “the son of God” becoming part of the Jesus movement about thirty years after Jesus died. If you research lost but now found gospels, you find gospel authors proclaimed Jesus to be a wise or sage man, not the son of God, and there was no mention of the crucifixion of Jesus. If Jesus was the son of God, why did it take so long? Why didn’t his followers immediately say Jesus was the son of God? Why wouldn’t they recall Jesus taking about himself as the son of God? Unfortunately, Christian scholars prefer to avoid debating it. For them to question their own faith is difficult if not painful. Based on historical records, the Jesus movement gained momentum when leaders added Jesus as the son of God. Then, after the crucifixion story, a new theme emerged; now it was Jesus, the Lamb of God, sacrificing to save all humankind. Subsequently, Christianity became a major world religion.

 

[oldbadger]

I should present the full version of my dream about the Roman soldier beating Jesus. According to my dream, a husky Roman soldier stood over Jesus on his knees beating him with his fists. As the soldier struck Jesus in the face, a Roman officer stood next to them watching. The Roman soldier beating Jesus was dressed with an armor chest plate and helmet. The officer wore armor and a flat hat resembling a sailor's hat. I have researched Roman uniforms but have not found any hat resembling the officer's cap. Jesus, on his knees, wore a tattered robe, or some kind of nondescript clothing. The beating was on a dirt road. In the scene, there were no other people or trees. However, it was a close up view showing only a dirt road. While I witnessed the beating, I knew it was Jesus on his knees. In my dreams, I don't have any doubts about interpretations.

OK...... I cannot think of where your dream would fit into any HJ research of mine. Maybe another member might come forward to help you with that.

Roman soldiers were in Judea during the time of Christ, and apparently, they were not friendly toward Jews.

Yes. And they were is Samaria and Idumea. But Herid Antipas controlled Perea and Galilee, and I believe that Herod Philip controlled Gaulanitus, Trachonea, Decapolis.

I have found historical accounts of events for the period unclear or fragmented, so I don't think one can conclude actual conditions, just probabilities. I recall reading about highways in that part of world under the control of the Roman Empire. After my dream, I did some research and found no historical documents for the crucifixion.

I don't think that an execution of three convicts would attract much notice back then. Documentation of Pilot's Prefecture was scanty...... even.

Then, I read Mack's book about the lost gospel. Apparently, son of God and crucifixion stories happened about 40 to 50 years after Jesus was killed. It requires a long explanation for how Mark and other scholars have derived at such conclusions, but it is highly reliable. It has to do with tracing phases of gospel Q whereas the gospel underwent editing to change meanings over a period of years divided into four time periods. Apparently, son of God and crucifixion stories occurred during the third time period before the four NT gospels were written.

If all the mentions of Christ, all particularly Christian mentions, and all of G-Mark after the empty tomb report are removed, G-Mark is a most useful account of what happened, imo. Even most of the miracles seem (to me) to have a factual basis although they got expanded somewhat...!

The problem for doing Bible research is one is tempted to insert their religion or religious ideology into their studies. Because I don't buy into fairyland Christianity, I avoid the problem. I believe Jesus was God, not the son of God.

Fair enough. I'm not sure why I became so interested in the Jesus story, but I did, and became a student of HJ. I am a Deist so I'm immune to Christian legend and mythology, but Jesus and his mission existed alright.

And so I don't please anybody, neither extreme atheists nor fundamental Christians! See some of the earlier posts to me!

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

So another "Historical Jesus" thread goes nowhere of any worth.

 

[Repox]

OK...... I cannot think of where your dream would fit into any HJ research of mine. Maybe another member might come forward to help you with that.


Yes. And they were is Samaria and Idumea. But Herid Antipas controlled Perea and Galilee, and I believe that Herod Philip controlled Gaulanitus, Trachonea, Decapolis.


I don't think that an execution of three convicts would attract much notice back then. Documentation of Pilot's Prefecture was scanty...... even.

If all the mentions of Christ, all particularly Christian mentions, and all of G-Mark after the empty tomb report are removed, G-Mark is a most useful account of what happened, imo. Even most of the miracles seem (to me) to have a factual basis although they got expanded somewhat...!


Fair enough. I'm not sure why I became so interested in the Jesus story, but I did, and became a student of HJ. I am a Deist so I'm immune to Christian legend and mythology, but Jesus and his mission existed alright.

And so I don't please anybody, neither extreme atheists nor fundamental Christians! See some of the earlier posts to me!

Thanks for the mention of sharing research, I have been a lone wolf for a long time. I just like to share ideas. I don't do co-author projects. Many years ago I published an academic study about higher education. It is found in major university libraries in the US and Europe. It went out of print in 2,000, but it remains in demand. Recently, some hard bound copies have been offered on Amazon for $499 and $500. Maybe my book will come back into print. I don't believe I'll write a book about my dreams and visions, it is too controversial. It is human nature to dislike something which violates biases. What I have been doing is researching my dreams. So far, I have unearthed a whole bunch of material to substantiate the events.

I suggest you read Mack's book, it has outstanding research material about Jesus. It is however, heavy duty research, the four periods of Jesus ideas are not easy to understand, but they are remarkably insightful.

Incidentally, based on my dreams, there was no crucifixion. It is interesting, there is no historical documentation for the crucifixion. Except for typical executions of criminals common to the Roman army, there is nothing. You should research Roman execution of criminals, it is fascinating. The NT gospels don't count as authentic, they are mostly fabricated stories intended to captivate and convert readers. If you do some research, you'll find no historical documentation for a single NT story. It is remarkable how easily persuaded Christians are, they don't do research.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I can and will respond with exactly what you request very soon, but for the moment let me give you the conclusions in the context of your questions from a much greater scholar than I. He is one (if not the) of the greatest experts on testimony and evidence in the history of mankind.
Testimony of the Evangelists by Simon Greenleaf

Please give it a read, it is only a few pages long but the information it contains can't be over estimated. I will respond personally to the questions in your second paragraph soon.

Thanks for that. It is good to read and again and be reminded of the conservative Christian position of the four gospels. Obviously there is much debate about some of the details but I'm comfortable with what is in the link you have sent me as a starting point. In regards to arguments for the physical resurrection of Christ lets see how that plays out. My position is that the resurrection of Christ is solely spiritual and can't possibly be physical. I think its good to consider both perspectives and see what emerges. The most likely outcome of all this is we remain committed to our particular perspectives but an open honest investigation in to this matter from a knowledgeable and sincere Christian would be excellent.

 

[Repox]

What would Christianity be like if there were no older gospels, the ones written thirty to forty years after the death of Jesus? Early gospels like The Gospel of Thomas did not mention Jesus as the son of God or his crucifixion. The following is what I believe happened to Jesus.

God (a duality) was not born as other men; he came into the world as Jesus, a mature adult male. As I mentioned on this thread, I have had dreams and a vision about the duality of God. It is interesting, if you research Joseph and Mary, proposed parents of Jesus, you do not find historical confirmation, nor do you find them in Jewish ancestral records. You find them mentioned by an early Christian church, later to become the Catholic Church. With the NT four gospels, the church continued the Christ myth about the virgin birth of Jesus. In my opinion, Revelation 11 about the two witnesses is the most accurate story about God coming into the world to give testimony to his chosen people. It is also the only literal reference to the “duality of God” in the Bible. I understand the issue about the historical time for this chapter, as well as Chapter 12. If you notice, for both chapters 11 and 12, the time for events are the same (1,260 days). Chapter 11 is about the two witnesses (God) giving testimony while chapter 12 is about Satan battling God’s angels to protect Jesus (God).

 

[Repox]

The soldiers did not put the body of Jesus in a tomb. He lay on the ground dead for about three days before ascending into heaven. For leaders of the new Jesus movement, the Roman murder of Jesus and disrespect for the body would not be a pleasant or appealing story; it had no romantic twists or glorious moments. It is also possible that members of the Jesus movement had little or no knowledge of the humiliating murder of Jesus. What we know is thirty to forty years later, Jesus movement leaders invented son of God and crucifixion stories. Subsequently, we have a horrible perversion of truth, a Christian sacrificial lamb story, or a religious fairytale, instead of the true story about the brutal murder of God’s human form (Jesus).

 

[oldbadger]

So another "Historical Jesus" thread goes nowhere of any worth.

Yeah...... but you;'ve been moaning about HJ threads for yonks, and in that time HJ research has leapt forward in leaps and bounds, imo.

While you've been moaning, we've been learning! And if the subject continues to develop at a similar pace, who knows how much new ground might be covered in future years?

So moan away! BTW..... before you ask for a free 'armchair' listing of all those exciting new progresses, may I invite you to trawl around the different theological, religious, Christian and philosophical web-sites to discover all? A thing worked for is a thing more valued, wouldn't you say?

 

[oldbadger]

Thanks for the mention of sharing research, I have been a lone wolf for a long time. I just like to share ideas. I don't do co-author projects. Many years ago I published an academic study about higher education. It is found in major university libraries in the US and Europe. It went out of print in 2,000, but it remains in demand. Recently, some hard bound copies have been offered on Amazon for $499 and $500. Maybe my book will come back into print. I don't believe I'll write a book about my dreams and visions, it is too controversial. It is human nature to dislike something which violates biases. What I have been doing is researching my dreams. So far, I have unearthed a whole bunch of material to substantiate the events.

I suggest you read Mack's book, it has outstanding research material about Jesus. It is however, heavy duty research, the four periods of Jesus ideas are not easy to understand, but they are remarkably insightful.

Thankyou for your advice about Mack's book.
You won't be alone here, and the more heated the HJ conversations, so the more exciting points show themselves!

Incidentally, based on my dreams, there was no crucifixion. It is interesting, there is no historical documentation for the crucifixion. Except to typical executions of criminals common to the Roman army, there is nothing. You should research Roman execution of criminals, it is fascinating. The NT gospels don't count as authentic, they are mostly fabricated stories intended to captivate and convert readers. If you do some research, you'll find no historical documentation for a single NT story. It is remarkable how easily persuaded Christians are, they don't do research.

I do not think that Jesus died. Either Pilate disfigured Jesus Barabbas' features with bloody whippings and thorn crown and nailed him up, or Jesus was taken down within hours and saved. After all, he did appear in Galilee not long afterwards.

The people of Kashmir have a legend that Jesus got there, lived there, healed folks there and they have a tomb there which they claim is his.

Muslims do not believe that Jesus was executed.

A Legend exists that Jesus was exiled to Gaul with Magdalene, who he no doubt loved. This isn't such a crazy idea, any more than those above.

The people of Cornwall have a legend that Jesus was taken by Joseph of Arimathea to a Cornish Island. The Boats of Tyre and Sidon traded with Cornwell for many hundreds of years, because Cornwall was a major centre flor the tin trade.

 

[1robin]

Thanks for that Robyn. I'll provide a more detailed response some stage soon. Its probably important to indicate that I have been a Baha'i for over 25 years and as such would share many beliefs with the Christians but there are some important differences. I grew up a Christian but I became a Baha'i in my mid 20s. I am a medical doctor and for the last 5 years have been doing volunteer work at a Christian Medical Centre. I currently facilitate a Bible study with some of my Christian colleagues so have a reasonable degree of familiarity with the bible. Of the Holy Bible Abdu'l-Baha has said:

THIS book is the Holy Book of God, of celestial Inspiration. It is the Bible of Salvation, the Noble Gospel. It is the mystery of the Kingdom and its light. It is the Divine Bounty, the sign of the guidance of God.

Bahá'í Reference Library - ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in London, Pages 17-18

I have a family with 2 teenage sons so like you I am very busy.

Pretty much every book that has ever been written contains some truth. I would agree with most of what Abdu'l-Baha says about the bible above. However I would probably disagree with many of his other statements. I also applaud the personal work you are doing. I have debated Baha'is many times. I find them to be polite and respectful but to hold to contradictory doctrine. Are you wanting my assessment of Baha'i or do you want me to defend any particular biblical belief?

 

[1robin]

You can't even get that right....
It is you who has written nearly 13000....
I have written about 8500,,,,

That is what I meant. I have had 13000 debates and never seen anyone cave in that bad before.

 

[Repox]

Analyze the “two witnesses” from Revelation 11 according to three assumptions.

1. Jesus was God. God is two persons in one, equally powerful and holy.
2. Revelation is both past and future.
3. John, the author, believed, as did others, Jesus was the son of God, not God. Moreover, none of the Jesus movement followers believed God was a duality. Therefore, we would expect John's beliefs to influence his narrative.

Rev.11. Read Revelation 11 about the two witnesses (duality of God), or Jesus. The math fits, but the narrative is sketchy. However, the story, based on fact and symbolism, is consistent. Here are verses and my interpretations.

John was told “Go and measure the temple of God and the alter, and count the worshipers there. But exclude the outer court; do not measure it because it has been given to the gentiles. They will trample on the city for 42 months. And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days (Jesus ministry), clothed in sackcloth.” Rev. 11:1-3. These are symbols of Jewish places where Jesus gave testimony.

Multiple 42 by 30, the results are 1,260 days. Divide 1,260 days by 365. The results are 31/2 years. The period of time that Gentiles tramped the holy city and the time Jesus “will prophesy” is 31/2 years.

Read Revelations 11:7-9. “Now when they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them. Their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified. For three and a half days men from every people, tribe, language and nation will gaze at their bodies and refuse them burial.” According to my dream, a Roman soldier beat Jesus to death with his firsts.

Read Revelations 11:11. “But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and terror struck those who saw them. Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, ‘come up her.’ And they went up into heaven in a cloud, while their enemies looked on.” Jesus was not in a tomb, he lay on the ground for 31/2 days. Then, Jesus (God) ascended back to heaven in a bright holy cloud. Witnesses were frightened and astonished. God ceased being the man, Jesus. Now. having departed from the material world, he was again God in heaven with His twelve angels.

Rev. 12. Now read Revelation 12 about the woman and the dragon. It is about God’s angels fighting Satan while God was in the world as Jesus. Notice the women (God), “clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth.” Jesus was beset with dissention and hardships giving testimony to His chosen people. (Rev. 12:1&2) Take note of the twelve stars on her (God) head. They represent God’s twelve angels; Satan is the thirteenth angel. Jesus (God) gave testimony to His chosen people. Then, Satan threatened Jesus (God).

“The dragon stood in front of the woman (God) who was about to give birth. She gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” (Rev. 12:4&5) The male child was Jesus (God).

“The women fled into the desert to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1, 260 days.” Rev. 12:6. The time in Chapter 11 and 12 is the same, 1,260 days, and both chapters refer to the same event, the time God was in the world as Jesus. Then, Michael, God's General of Angels, fought Satan in heaven. "And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. The great dragon was hurled down---that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan., who leads the whole world astray." (Rev. 12:7-9). "When the dragon saw that he had been hurled to the earth, he pursued the woman who gave birth to the male child.” (Rev. 12:13). The child was Jesus (God). “Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring --- those who obey God’s commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus.” Rev. 12:17. Thus, we have nearly two thousand years of Anti-Semitism and the holocaust.

 

[1robin]

Thanks for that. It is good to read and again and be reminded of the conservative Christian position of the four gospels. Obviously there is much debate about some of the details but I'm comfortable with what is in the link you have sent me as a starting point. In regards to arguments for the physical resurrection of Christ lets see how that plays out. My position is that the resurrection of Christ is solely spiritual and can't possibly be physical. I think its good to consider both perspectives and see what emerges. The most likely outcome of all this is we remain committed to our particular perspectives but an open honest investigation in to this matter from a knowledgeable and sincere Christian would be excellent.

I have not responded to the second part of your first post. I promised to do so, so if you would still like a response to anything in your first post can you repost them for me to address?

The evidence does not show that Christ merely spiritually rose from death. That was what I would have expected to find if the apostles were frauds. They had no need (if they were lying) to assume the empirical burden a physical resurrection would require. For a physical resurrection they needed an empty tomb, a faked crucifixion, some ninjas to get by the guards, and a magic Roman seal that could break it's self. Why didn't Rome just open the tomb and trot out the body? Why are you affirming a spiritual resurrection instead of a physical one? If any miracle is possible, why limit it's scope or power? There have been resuscitations before, but Christ was the first and only (so far)resurrection. He was to be an example of what we hope will occur to ourselves, the first fruits. All the men at the time had to conclude was that a man was dead (something the Romans excelled in), and to see that a man is alive (something we are all capable of). I have to know something before I know which direction I need to go in. At which specific point do your views diverge from the mainstream doctrines? Was he scourged? Was he ever nailed to the cross? Was the body stolen? etc..... At what point do your views diverge from the bible?

• "When therefore it was evening, on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst, and said to them, "Peace be with you." 20 And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples therefore rejoiced when they saw the Lord." (John 20:19-20).

• "And He said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? 39 "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." (Luke 24:38-39).

• "Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." 20 The Jews therefore said, "It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?" 21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body." (John 2:19-21)

Jesus' Resurrection was physical | CARM Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry

 

[metis]

What did Jesus really say and what is only attributed to him?

Virtually impossible to say objectively, but I do believe there are areas whereas we can at least get an idea of what may be correct. Especially his statements about the "end times" seem logical because it didn't happen but yet still show up in synoptics. Also, the arguments over the Law, which could easily be taken to be anti the Law, seems most likely. His being baptized by John the Baptist is interesting because it was an extension of the mikvah that "washed away sins", which actually posits Jesus in an inferior position vis-a-vis John, so is more likely to have happened.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Pretty much every book that has ever been written contains some truth. I would agree with most of what Abdu'l-Baha says about the bible above. However I would probably disagree with many of his other statements. I also applaud the personal work you are doing. I have debated Baha'is many times. I find them to be polite and respectful but to hold to contradictory doctrine. Are you wanting my assessment of Baha'i or do you want me to defend any particular biblical belief?

I'm pleased you have had a positive experience in you discussions with Baha'is and hope that our discussions will be courteous and respectful, regardless of our perspectives.

I like that you have set out a framework to consider what conservative Christians would argue is known about Jesus. I would argue that Baha'is believe in the same God, Jesus, and Bible as the Christians. Clearly we have some differences in regards to what some Christians would hold to be core beliefs. As this thread is about the historic Jesus then I feel its best to remain within that framework. So a good starting point is the framework you as a Christian have laid out as to your personal understanding about who Christ is. I agree your beliefs are shared by many Christians.

A broader assessment of the Baha'i Faith doesn't really belong on this thread but I'm happy to discuss it on another thread if you want.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I have not responded to the second part of your first post. I promised to do so, so if you would still like a response to anything in your first post can you repost them for me to address?

All good. Lets investigate, discuss and debate the resurrection of Jesus the Christ.

The evidence does not show that Christ merely spiritually rose from death.

What matters is that through the Teachings of Jesus we too can be resurrected. You have affirmed this although we understand it differently. We can have spiritual life and not be spiritually dead. Through Christ the church was raised to new life.

Many Christians believe the resurrection is proof of Jesus' Divinity because only God has power over death. The Baha'i perspective, though different, also provides proof of Jesus sovereignty over death, in particular the death of the soul. Jesus' spiritual effect on the lives of His followers and the establishment of the Church demonstrates the power of His love and affirms the claims of His sovereignty. HIs Glorious Being and his Divine Perfections prove that He is a 'Manifestation' of God.

The physical resurrection is not necessary to prove Jesus' Divinity or Power to impart eternal life. Other world religions believe that God is All-Powerful including the power to provide eternal life. Why would God who is All-loving, All merciful, All-powerful, and omnipotent limit Himself to just one religion and prevent the salvation of so many?

The true meaning of the resurrection?

Jesus came from heaven:
John 3:13, John 6:38, John 6:41-2

The risen body of Christ is the Church:
Roman 12:5 'one body in Christ'
1 Corinthians 12:12-13 'baptised into one body'
1 Corinthians 12:25 'no schism in the body'
1 Corinthians 12:27 'you are the body of Christ'
Colossians 1:18 'He is the head of the body'
Ephesians 2:5-6 'members of His body, and His flesh'

The spiritual resurrection:
1 Corinthians 15:42-4 'it is raised in a spiritual body'
1 Corinthians 15:50 'flesh and blood can not inherit the kingdom'

That was what I would have expected to find if the apostles were frauds.

The apostles were guided by God's unerring spirit.

They had no need (if they were lying) to assume the empirical burden a physical resurrection would require. For a physical resurrection they needed an empty tomb, a faked crucifixion, some ninjas to get by the guards, and a magic Roman seal that could break it's self.

They were not lying.

Lets consider Christ's manner of speech throughout His ministry. He used words and phrases with literal meanings to convey spiritual messages and truths. How do we understand verses such as 'unless one is born again he can not see the kingdom of God' (John 3:3) or 'unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink HIs blood, you have no life in you'? (John 6:53). When the apostles spoke of Christ as being risen they spoke as Christ spoke. The use of symbols is necessary to convey truths that can not be readily understood with literal speech. The symbolic verses are also God's way of testing the hearts of His true followers.

Mathew 13:10-17
"And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.
For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them."

Why didn't Rome just open the tomb and trot out the body?

There are of course much more plausible explanations for what happened to Jesus' body other than a physical resurrection.

Why are you affirming a spiritual resurrection instead of a physical one? If any miracle is possible, why limit it's scope or power?

I agree. God is all-Powerful and Omnipotent. The problem is that we have a physically resurrected Jesus rising through the stratosphere to join His father in the heavens. However most religionists, myself included do not see heaven as a literal place up in the sky. Do you?

It should also be noted in scripture that flesh can not inherit the Kingdom of heaven. 1 Corinthians 15:50, John 3:3

There have been resuscitations before, but Christ was the first and only (so far)resurrection.

There are other resurrection stories in the bible. It was a strong part of the mythology of Greco-Roman culture. Paul for example taught the gentiles and used the language and symbolism known to those people to convey the spiritual truths of the gospel of Christ.

He was to be an example of what we hope will occur to ourselves, the first fruits.

Through His Teachings we can have spiritual life makes more sense than Him enabling us to be physically resurrected too.

All the men at the time had to conclude was that a man was dead (something the Romans excelled in), and to see that a man is alive (something we are all capable of).

I have to know something before I know which direction I need to go in. At which specific point do your views diverge from the mainstream doctrines? Was he scourged? Was he ever nailed to the cross? Was the body stolen? etc..... At what point do your views diverge from the bible?

There is no problem with accepting the crucifixion of Christ. It is a plausible story that requires nothing miraculous except the 'Son of Man' willing to die for a Cause in which He believes. So unlike the story of Christ's resurrection it is much easier to accept as both an historic fact and literal truth.

There was much invested in having possession of Jesus' body for the Romans, Jews, and Christians. Sometimes we just don't know the answers in regards to matters where we were not present and happened so long ago.

"When therefore it was evening, on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst, and said to them, "Peace be with you." 20 And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples therefore rejoiced when they saw the Lord." (John 20:19-20).

"And He said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? 39 "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." (Luke 24:38-39).

Once you have responded I am happy to consider what I believe was really behind Luke and John's words.

"Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." 20 The Jews therefore said, "It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?" 21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body." (John 2:19-21)

These are very important verses but I will argue later they refer to another very important teaching of Christ.

 

[Dawnofhope]

"When therefore it was evening, on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst, and said to them, "Peace be with you." 20 And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples therefore rejoiced when they saw the Lord." (John 20:19-20).

It is easy to believe, with verses like these, that Jesus really did appear to many witnesses. There is Jesus' appearance to a multitude of 500 believers (1 Corinthians 15:6), the appearance to the Emmaus disciples (Luke 24:13-33), to the women returning to the tomb (Matthew 28:9-10), to Stephen (Acts 7:55), and to John on Patmos (Revelations 1:10-19).

All the witnesses are believers however, and none of the verses conclusively indicate the appearance of Christ should be understood literally as the resurrection of His physical body. Are they witnesses to the appearance of the physically resurrected Jesus or the reawakening of the Church ('He is the head of the body, the Church' Colossians 1:18)? There are no outside accounts from non-believers who saw a resurrected body that they identified as Jesus. There is no account when viewed symbolically, that does not suggest spiritual significance.

Paul says the resurrected Christ appeared to him last (1 Corinthians 15:7-9). However the accounts of the appearance of Christ to Paul recorded in Acts (Chapters 9, 22, and 26) strongly suggest descriptions of a vision. In one instance while in a trance praying, Paul describes hearing Christ (Acts 22:17-21). The most significant appearance to Paul is on the road to Damascus ((Acts 9:4, Acts 22:7, Acts 26:12). Christ asks Paul 'why are you persecuting me?'. However we know that Christ has been crucified, rather His followers are persecuted. Why does the risen Christ say to Paul 'why are you persecuting Me?' if the risen Christ is not the living Church? Of course it is Paul who continually refers to the living body of Christ with the Church.

 

[Dawnofhope]

"And He said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? 39 "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." (Luke 24:38-39).

Admittedly this too could be a compelling argument for a physical resurrection. Jesus has appeared not as a spirit, but physically as flesh and bones. Lets consider this further by considering the verse in context.

"And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.
And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.
And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?
And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.
And he took it, and did eat before them.
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures.." Luke 24:36-45)

In this context the word 'spirit' is used, not in a benevolent manner, but as something threatening and negative. If we understand that the resurrected Christ is symbolic of the living Church and the believers resurrected from the death of unbelief, then there is reason for the apostles to be afraid. They were known associates of Christ and identified leaders of His Cause. Opposition had been aroused to the extent the authorities had crucified Christ. The apostles realised that the Cause of Christ did not die with their beloved, but instead was alive and well. They had good reason to be fearful for their lives. Consider that after Jesus was arrested His apostles forsook Him and fled (Matthew 26:56). Peter even denied Him three times to save HIs life (Matthew 26:69-75).

So when the apostles first saw Christianity still alive they feared for their lives. But then they realised that the Cause of Christ (symbolised by spirit) should not frighten them as it had qualities of substance (symbolised by flesh and bones) they became assured. They resolved that they should devote themselves to HIs cause. If this meant sacrificing their lives for His cause then they would be happy for this was a Cause worth dying for. For Christ had taught 'he who loses his life for My sake shall will find it' (Matthew 10:39). Therefore Paul calls the believers the 'flesh' and 'bones' of Christ (Ephesians 5:29-30).

Later in this verse Christ giving food can be likened to giving spiritual guidance and sustenance to the believers representing the body of the risen church. We could also understand it as the apostles accepting their rightful role as leaders of the Church.

There are other understandings that can be gleaned from this symbolism but this will suffice for now.