Jesus Resurrection

[Subduction Zone]

Peter got a secretary to dictate because he wasnt a writer.

I have been busy as well and have not been able to fully answer you at times. The Wiki article that I linked said that Peter was not the author and it tells why:

"
Most biblical scholars have concluded Peter is not the author, considering the epistle pseudepigraphical.[3][4] Reasons for this include its linguistic differences from 1 Peter, its apparent use of Jude, possible allusions to 2nd-century gnosticism, encouragement in the wake of a delayed parousia, and weak external support.[5]

The questions of authorship and date are closely related. For Petrine authorship to be authentic, it must have been written prior to Peter's death in c. AD 65–67. The letter refers to the Pauline epistles and so must post-date at least some of them, regardless of authorship, thus a date before 60 is improbable. Further, it goes as far to name the Pauline epistles as "scripture"—the only time a New Testament work refers to another New Testament work in this way—implying that it postdates them by some time.[6]

Chester & Martin say scholars consider the epistle to be written between c. AD 100–150[7] and so contend that it is pseudepigraphical. For an argument for a late date see Harris.[8] For a 'middle date' see Bauckham who opts for a date between AD 80–90 as most probable.[9] For an early date and (usually) for a defense of the Apostle Peter's authorship see Kruger,[10] Zahn,[11] Spitta,[12] Bigg,[13] and Green.[14] Jeremy Duff argues that the various strands of evidence "point towards the period 60–130 CE, with some reason to favour 80–90 CE."[15]"

Let me go over that again. It may have been written as late as 150 AD but was most probably written in 80-90 AD, long after Peter's death.

Second Epistle of Peter - Wikipedia

 

[joelr]

Oh my God. Im gonna shoot myself for the thousanth time if i got to correct this SAME misrepresentation and false info again.

But, here goes.

Dying for a belief that is false, but you dont know is false, you believe its true, is different then dying for a cause like freedom which is a way of life, although beliefs and causes can be connected to. Like wanting to be free to believe whatever. But dying for what you KNOW is a lie is unheard of in any time in all of history, it only supposidly happened one time and thats with the apostles.

As for there opertunity to recant, yes we know they had opertunity to recant. Theres sources for that. Also we know they existed. If they did not exist then we are forced to believe a giant conspiracy theory.

Who would ever imply that the Apostles were dying for something they know was a lie?
Besides the fact that the gospels are just stories and not proof of anyone dying, I'm sure people died for Christianity and also thought it was true.
2000 years ago believing in the supernatural was a way of life.
Those ufo cult people actually believed there was a ufo waiting for them behind Saturn.

Suicide bombers believe they are going to heaven and getting 72 virgins.
There were many messianic dying-rising savior gods before Jesus and people will always die for their cult. There were 12 apostles in earlier savior cults as well. In there scripture some of the apostles probably die as well.

I don't really get your point?

 

[joelr]

You call Habermas a joke and then you refer to a fringe mythicist who made practically no contribution to contemporary historical Jesus scholarship and who makes a living off of writing biased and immature anti-religious blogs for a band of even less mature anti-theists since no university in the field wants him? No thanks.

I see this all the time, Ad-Hom on Carrier, try to discredit the person because his work is rock solid.
First Habermas is a joke, anyone who counts caner remission as proof of Jesus is a silly person. No need to get into that.
Now Carrier has done a 6 year historicity study on Jesus, backs up everything with endless sources and gives a 3-1 on Jesus being mythical based on the evidence.

He also explained the assumptions previous scholars were holding because no one wanted to be the one to draw attention to themselves (because christians will ad-hom you out of the country) so he explains all of the assumptions that scholars held about Jesus being a real person.
So he dispells those incorrect ideas and then builds an excellent case for mythicism.
He's gone against Licona and many other excellent scholars. I wanted to see his work tested by the leading scholars.

To do an honest Jesus study you can't work for a university because the Christians will make your life miserable.
Thomas Thompsons work is now peer reviewed and Moses and the Patriarchs are considered literary myths. But when his work first came out he had to move to Canada to work. It took a few generations for Christians to calm down and take a look at his work.
Emotions run high even in scholarship because many universities are funded by people who are very religious.

His work stands and will eventually become a field standard. The position on Jesus will likely eventually become a mythicist position. If you personally want to find issues with his personal life or career life so that you can poo-poo him away, or just are not ready to face what scholarship is finding out then go for it.

But he clearly smashed Licona and no one has found any real flaws in his work.

 

[The Anointed]

I see this all the time, Ad-Hom on Carrier, try to discredit the person because his work is rock solid.
First Habermas is a joke, anyone who counts caner remission as proof of Jesus is a silly person. No need to get into that.
Now Carrier has done a 6 year historicity study on Jesus, backs up everything with endless sources and gives a 3-1 on Jesus being mythical based on the evidence.

He also explained the assumptions previous scholars were holding because no one wanted to be the one to draw attention to themselves (because christians will ad-hom you out of the country) so he explains all of the assumptions that scholars held about Jesus being a real person.
So he dispells those incorrect ideas and then builds an excellent case for mythicism.
He's gone against Licona and many other excellent scholars. I wanted to see his work tested by the leading scholars.

To do an honest Jesus study you can't work for a university because the Christians will make your life miserable.
Thomas Thompsons work is now peer reviewed and Moses and the Patriarchs are considered literary myths. But when his work first came out he had to move to Canada to work. It took a few generations for Christians to calm down and take a look at his work.
Emotions run high even in scholarship because many universities are funded by people who are very religious.

His work stands and will eventually become a field standard. The position on Jesus will likely eventually become a mythicist position. If you personally want to find issues with his personal life or career life so that you can poo-poo him away, or just are not ready to face what scholarship is finding out then go for it.

But he clearly smashed Licona and no one has found any real flaws in his work.

Poo-poo!

 

[RESOLUTION]

Cosby found out.


If a witness said something happened but in the story, that person (not the witness) was alone or not with the witness, what you get are MANY biblical stories.


Where is this record? Can we trace people stationed in the Middle East to Britain?


The apostles. They tried to downplay their egos by saying they were doing it for or because of Jesus or God, but they acted as though they were the ones you should be grateful to, perhaps with room and board.


Yes. Some people want to be caught or killed because the public assumption of martyrdom will make them practically immortal. You believe them even NOW, centuries later.


Dead people don't bleed, for starters. Your heart still has to function for blood to gush out. He was stabbed, per the story, PRECISELY because he wasn't fully dead yet. Ask yourself if Jesus was verified to have these standards:

What do you know about death and the body after crucifixion?

When a person died from crucifixion it can result in death in two ways. Each way would cause a build up of blood and water in the pericardial sack, which when the spear was put in would rupture and the hence the flow of blood and water from a dead person. I see a lot of unreasoned arguments just a personal statement of what you decided to believe. That is fine but you cannot make a statement if you do not really put the facts to the test.

To do that would require a thirst for truth. An understanding and a heart that wants to know the truth. Proof of the pudding is in putting the Word to the test to see if the Word is true.
Till you have done that and more importantly want to do that. Your view is your own based on your own assumptions and not facts.

 

[Apologes]

I see this all the time, Ad-Hom on Carrier, try to discredit the person because his work is rock solid.

By rock solid you mean a fringe position not taken seriously by 99% of scholars working in the field.

First Habermas is a joke, anyone who counts caner remission as proof of Jesus is a silly person. No need to get into that.

No, someone who is willing to stand behind immature and vitriolic writing in which virtually all of contemporary scholars (far more experienced and qualified than Carrier) are painted as a band of liars and incompetent buffoons while at the same time begging for attention of said scholars is a joke.

Carrier has done a 6 year historicity

Like every other scholar in the field. Color me impressed.

backs up everything with endless sources
and gives a 3-1 on Jesus being mythical based on the evidence.

Sure he does lol

He also explained the assumptions previous scholars were holding because no one wanted to be the one to draw attention to themselves (because christians will ad-hom you out of the country)

The methodology employed by the concensus is not a work of christians trying to cover stuff up. Plenty of non-christians work in the field and do just fine. Keep complaining about ad hominems when you yourself play the evil christian conspiracy card to defend your dear doctor who himself acts like an edgy 13-year old on his blog.

To do an honest Jesus study you can't work for a university because the Christians will make your life miserable.
Thomas Thompsons work is now peer reviewed and Moses and the Patriarchs are considered literary myths. But when his work first came out he had to move to Canada to work. It took a few generations for Christians to calm down and take a look at his work.

Plenty of leading scholars work at universities and aren't being systematically taken down. Is this the kind of excuse Carrier gave you?

Emotions run high even in scholarship because many universities are funded by people who are very religious.

Carrier's book was literally published by a Christian publisher.

His work stands and will eventually become a field standard. The position on Jesus will likely eventually become a mythicist position.

In your dreams. As for reality , mythicism is taken by historians about as seriously as YEC is by an evolutionary biologist.

If you personally want to find issues with his personal life or career life so that you can poo-poo him away, or just are not ready to face what scholarship is finding out then go for it.

Just like Carrier, you prefer to throw shades at the opposition's motives without knowing anything about them. You learned from the best I guess.

But he clearly smashed Licona and no one has found any real flaws in his work.

Only thing he smashed is a chance of having a respectable career by prefering to do petty counter-apologetics in place of actual history. Have a good day.

 

[Dawnofhope]

The death and resurrection of Jesus in roughly 28 or 29 CE assertedby the Bible (many times) and by almost every living Christian. Yet there is not only no evidence that said resurrection ever occurred, but there is essentially no way to prove that somebody that died and came back to life over 2000 hrs ago.

That’s all true, but why does it really matter? It’s just a belief that works well for some people and not at all for others. You can not prove a physical resurrection. Any attempt to try will almost never convince anyone who didn’t believe to begin with.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

What do you know about death and the body after crucifixion?

You're asking an RN what she knows about death, something she's witnessed several times (a year)?

When a person died from crucifixion it can result in death in two ways. Each way would cause a build up of blood and water in the pericardial sack, which when the spear was put in would rupture and the hence the flow of blood and water from a dead person. I see a lot of unreasoned arguments just a personal statement of what you decided to believe. That is fine but you cannot make a statement if you do not really put the facts to the test.

But relieving the pressure could help Jesus recover. The soldier ironically saved the life of the person he was trying to kill more dead.

From the NIH

You cannot prove he was dead. The ancients lacked sufficient knowledge. People have been mistakenly buried for a long time, up to at least the 19th century.

Don't tell me you know he was dead when none of the authors were around to witness if they even checked for a pulse.

An understanding and a heart that wants to know the truth.

I am very interested in medical miracle stories, as a nurse. I find that, like the ones on TV, they involve vague or unproven maladies with no medical follow up shown. Nursing motto: If it wasn't documented, it wasn't done.

 

[joelr]

By rock solid you mean a fringe position not taken seriously by 99% of scholars working in the field.

By rock solid I mean he's won every debate with scholars and critics so far have only managed to ad-hom or use the tired argument to authority like you're using here.
It's taken seriously now.

No, someone who is willing to stand behind immature and vitriolic writing in which virtually all of contemporary scholars (far more experienced and qualified than Carrier) are painted as a band of liars and incompetent buffoons while at the same time begging for attention of said scholars is a joke.

That's about as wrong as it gets. Carrier has a blog where he praises many scholars.
He does call some people liars like Bart Ehrman but he has an entire essay on exactly why Ehrman is a liar. He backs it all up and you can check the biblical sources and see that Ehrman is actually a liar. Despite back and forth writings, Ehrman has not responded to this.
So regardless of your nonsensical exaggerations, as it stands Carrier is correct.

Like every other scholar in the field. Color me impressed.

Show me a published peer reviewed Jesus historicity study done by a Phd that comes close to 700 pages done by "every other scholar in the field".

Sure he does lol

Too easy. Dying-and-Rising Gods: It's Pagan, Guys. Get Over It. • Richard Carrier
here is a simple blog post by Carrier, why don't you count the ( ).
His book is even more highly sourced.

The methodology employed by the concensus is not a work of christians trying to cover stuff up. Plenty of non-christians work in the field and do just fine. Keep complaining about ad hominems when you yourself play the evil christian conspiracy card to defend your dear doctor who himself acts like an edgy 13-year old on his blog.

I don't care how he acts, just bringing it up shows you are threatened by his work.
Non-christians scholars all agree on historicity but not divinity. But changing status-quo is not easy. This is a known thing. Thomas Thompson provided work that proved Moses and the Patriarchs were mythological characters. He was run out of scholarship and had to work in Canada.
Today his work is accepted as current scholarship. Christians are not engaged in a cover up, christian scholars just find silly ways to delude themselves as is evident in all of the debates Carrier did with scholars. Even the scholar who agreed with the field that Jesus was just a man (but was real) didn't fare that well against Carrier.
He has proven that 3 to 1 odds for mythicism are accurate.

Plenty of leading scholars work at universities and aren't being systematically taken down. Is this the kind of excuse Carrier gave you?

All scholars in all fields encounter huge resistance when introducing new data. Carrier shows that many assumptions scholars held fell apart when examined. This is how knowledge moves forward.
People assume certain facts are true because they assume someone else verified them.
It's often a house of cards. This happens to be one of those cases.

Carrier's book was literally published by a Christian publisher.

Ok.

In your dreams. As for reality , mythicism is taken by historians about as seriously as YEC is by an evolutionary biologist.

I don't care if the field considers Jesus a myth or a man. But Carrier has shown it most likely he was myth.
Robert Price admitted D.M. Murdocks work on mythicism was probable.

this panel of experts all agree (including a pastor) we cannot say for sure Jesus existed
they cover all extra-biblical mentions as well.

Just like Carrier, you prefer to throw shades at the opposition's motives without knowing anything about them. You learned from the best I guess.

Should I take him out to dinner before I comment on his ad-hom of Carrier?

Only thing he smashed is a chance of having a respectable career by prefering to do petty counter-apologetics in place of actual history. Have a good day.

I don't care about his career but you clearly are just speaking out of frustration or anger.
"Wrong" doesn't even get at what's going on here. I've sat through all of his debates and his history is always equal to or better than his opponent.
The non-scholars he's debated like Pastor Malone (?) was just demolished to the point where he had to say "Obviously I'm not a historian like you..."
Besides selling books I know he just spoke at Mythcon. He's there. He made it. Saying he doesn't do "actual history" makes you look butthurt. Because you can't back that up.

 

[Jollybear]

What are u talking about? I never said anything about martyrdom in regards to Jim jones???

David Koresh was a nut job who believed his own lies. But the general public knew he was worng. Because
1. He wasn’t a messiah
2. He was a sexual predator
3. And he didn’t Resurrect from the dead and appear in Physical presence in Palestine/Israel

I’m not comparing Paul or the apostles to Jim jones and David Koresh. I’m just simply answer your questions on who would die for a lie

Ok, great, your not comparing paul with jim and David. Subductionzone is though.

And i already know people die for lies. Thanks for preaching to the quire.

 

[Jollybear]

No, I did not assume. That is another word that theists should not use. They do not seem to understand it. I gave reasons in earlier posts. If you cannot follow the conversation, and that seems to be a problem since you keep repeating this "lie" error I don't think that you will ever be able to understand how the Bible fails. But then that is what cognitive dissonance does. It is a defensive action taken by a person's mind so that they can avoid learning why they are wrong.

Let me ask you this: is it remotely possible paul is right that Jesus rose?

I didnt ask you if he rose, i just asked is it possible?

 

[Jollybear]

I guess we need to define by what is meant by "a lie". We all know that about Koresh, what is unknown is how far off the deep end he was. Paul may have known that his claims, such as the Road to Damascus story, were false. Or he may really have believed that. I have continually tried to explain that Paul may not have known to no avail.

Why would paul tell truth about his "halucinations" but lie about going to demascus?

 

[Jollybear]

If i or anybody else misrepresented what you said point it out to me and others. Don’t just throw out wild accusations without any explanation or proof.

You said

"But dying for what you KNOW is a lie is unheard of in any time in all of history, it only supposidly happened one time and thats with the apostles".

Form my point of view, it look like your saying dying for a lie happen only once in history and it was the apostles who died for a lie. Am i worng?

You left out the word "know" there.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let me ask you this: is it remotely possible paul is right that Jesus rose?

I didnt ask you if he rose, i just asked is it possible?

Very remotely, yes.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why would paul tell truth about his "halucinations" but lie about going to demascus?

Hard to say. You might want to ask an expert on the mentally ill. All I can say that his story does not appear to hold water, and that is even ignoring the God magic part.

 

[Jollybear]

Who would ever imply that the Apostles were dying for something they know was a lie?

Ok, so, you agree they did not know it was a lie. Good. So then, how do you explain them claiming to be witnesses to the resurrection?

Besides the fact that the gospels are just stories and not proof of anyone dying, I'm sure people died for Christianity and also thought it was true.

Ok, so, the witnesses dying, how do you explain that?

2000 years ago believing in the supernatural was a way of life.

Not by everyone. Just like today, not by everyone.

Those ufo cult people actually believed there was a ufo waiting for them behind Saturn.

Ah, witnesses, witnesses.

Suicide bombers believe they are going to heaven and getting 72 virgins.

Ahhhhhh, witnesses, witnesses. Lol

There were many messianic dying-rising savior gods before Jesus and people will always die for their cult.

I looked into those dying and rising savior gods and there vague at most and even the best examples are not any comparison. You cant just read a websites reconstruction or explaining it. You gotta look at the data.

There were 12 apostles in earlier savior cults as well. In there scripture some of the apostles probably die as well.

Like i said, THE DATA. You got data for that? I dont just want a website saying it, unless the website quotes raw data references.

I don't really get your point?

Point, the apostles claim to witness the resurrection. Then they get persecuted for it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok, so, you agree they did not know it was a lie. Good. So then, how do you explain them claiming to be witnesses to the resurrection?



Ok, so, the witnesses dying, how do you explain that?



Not by everyone. Just like today, not by everyone.



Ah, witnesses, witnesses.



Ahhhhhh, witnesses, witnesses. Lol



I looked into those dying and rising savior gods and there vague at most and even the best examples are not any comparison. You cant just read a websites reconstruction or explaining it. You gotta look at the data.



Like i said, THE DATA. You got data for that? I dont just want a website saying it, unless the website quotes raw data references.



Point, the apostles claim to witness the resurrection. Then they get persecuted for it.

Where did the apostles ever make their beliefs clear? You only supplied II Peter as a source and I went over in more detail how you misrepresented the article that I linked on it in your absence. He does not appear to be the author of it.

They may have followed Jesus for his philosophy. There may have been no miracles. Without any sort of reliable witnesses or evidence why believe the stories of the Bible?

 

[Jollybear]

Hard to say. You might want to ask an expert on the mentally ill. All I can say that his story does not appear to hold water, and that is even ignoring the God magic part.

Why would he make it up? What would be the motive?

 

[Jollybear]

Where did the apostles ever make their beliefs clear? You only supplied II Peter as a source and I went over in more detail how you misrepresented the article that I linked on it in your absence. He does not appear to be the author of it.

They may have followed Jesus for his philosophy. There may have been no miracles. Without any sort of reliable witnesses or evidence why believe the stories of the Bible?

Well, the article you gave me also shows the different views of scholars. Like some say peter had someone write it for him.

But, someone obviously wrote it who claimed to be a witness.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why would he make it up? What would be the motive?

For the same reason other religious zealots made up their stories. It is a pathway to power. It allows people to deal with their personal demons. There are quite a few reasons, most of which would not appeal to you or me.