Jesus resurrection - Historical Reality?

[nazz]

On another note, seeing the "three day" thing. It wasn't really three days if he was crucified on Friday evening and resurrected on Sunday morning. It's at best 30-40 hours, not even two full days.

this assumes he was crucified on a friday

 

[CG Didymus]

I wonder that too. It seems like a lot of Christians aren't talking too much about this fact. Especially that people will come out of their graves on judgment day.

I know several really really nice and spiritual Christians and I assume (I should ask I guess) they believe in the resurrection as symbolism. And in the turn the other cheek advice that Jesus gave.

The little I know of Hinduism has this world being "maya" an illusion. The "Gita" has Krishna, an incarnation of God. It has Shiva, Vishnu, and Brahma--a three in one sort of Godhead. We all come and go several lifetimes in several different bodies. Taken symbolically, Christianity isn't that far from Hinduism.

But, some Christians need it to be literal. It's too bad that the spiritual message of Christianity can't be separated from the need to have a real resurrected Jesus. We, supposedly, can't be spiritual or good without a belief in a real Jesus. We are hopelessly lost and depraved in the more fundamental-types of Christianity. They need a Jesus that did exactly as described in their Bible. To say he was a great man and a prophet isn't good enough. His death and burial have to be real. His resurrection has to be real.

However, for the resurrection to be literally and historically true, the whole Bible has to be believed literal also. So Elijah and Enoch got taken up into the sky. How did they breath? What did they eat, etc.? The same with Jesus, he has a body and is in some heavenly realm?

Or, this place we think is real is all an illusion and what was seen as Jesus was some mystical spiritual being that can appear and disappear whenever he's needed? Or, the whole story was fabricated. I think either one of those two explanations is more likely than the historical, literal version.

 

[Ouroboros]

this assumes he was crucified on a friday

My understanding is that this is what the tradition says. Even Thursday evening doesn't make full three days.

 

[nazz]

My understanding is that this is what the tradition says. Even Thursday evening doesn't make full three days.

might have been wednesday

 

[Matthew78]

There is not any reasonable secular history that verifies how the apostles died.

It is well-known among many historians that there was very little persecution of Christians during the first century A.D.

The best selling book "The Rise of Christianity," by sociologist Dr. Rodney Stark, who has written over 50 books, says that there was very little persecution of Christians during the first century.

Well-known conservative Christian scholar and author N.T. Wright has said that during the first century A.D., there were not enough Christians to "mount a riot in a small village." As such, since Christians in the first century were barely noticeable, it is easy to understand that they were not considered to be much of a threat.

I agree. In fact, I suspect that the very few times that Christians were persecuted, such as during the fire of Rome that occured during the rule of Nero, Christians were more likely convenient scapegoats and not any real serious threat. It's only in later times that Christians began to grow in such numbers that they were considered a threat, IMO, to the Roman imperial order that Christians were persecuted.

Matthew

 

[Ouroboros]

might have been wednesday

So Mark 15:42 isn't literally correct? The "Preparation Day" wasn't the day before the sabbath?

 

[allright]

My understanding is that this is what the tradition says. Even Thursday evening doesn't make full three days.

The writers of the Gospels certainly knew what they meant by three days and that what they recorded concerning the resurrection fulfilled it

 

[Ouroboros]

The writers of the Gospels certainly knew what they meant by three days and that what they recorded concerning the resurrection fulfilled it

I don't understand. Could you explain?

 

[allright]

I don't understand. Could you explain?

The writers of the gospels wrote that Jesus said he would be in the grave three days.
They obviously would have been certain their account of his death and resurrection fulfilled that prophecy of what he meant by the three days.
Otherwise you have to claim they wrote that Jesus spoke it
and than they gave an account of his death and resurrection that showed it didnt happen and that his prophecy was false
Not very likely

 

[nazz]

So Mark 15:42 isn't literally correct? The "Preparation Day" wasn't the day before the sabbath?

It was the preparation day before the sabbath of Passover. that does not necessarily correspond to the weekly Sabbath.

 

[Ouroboros]

It was the preparation day before the sabbath of Passover. that does not necessarily correspond to the weekly Sabbath.

Ah. Ok. I accept that as an explanation.

 

[crocusj]

Figuring out exactly HOW that image was produced is the hard part.

Well, no it's not. Finding out exactly WHY that image was produced is the hard part.
Or it is if you believe it to be the shroud of a god. Apparently, the crucified man had to be an actual man for his death to have any meaning at all, otherwise it was a god playing games. And yet we have an image on a shroud that supposedly could not have been left by a man. The contradiction is both obvious and - if true - tacky.