Resurrection of Christ - What's the evidence for and against a literal resurrection

[siti]

I have clearly established the weakness of the preterist position.

No you haven't, you have not cited a single verse of scripture that is unequivocally referring to any event that cannot be interpreted as having happened in the 1st century. In regard to the resurrection (to keep on topic) - you referred to a comment by Paul in his second letter to Timothy where he indicates that "the resurrection" had not yet happened - but we all know that this letter was written before the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD - so even if the preterist interpretation (which really refers to the Book of Revelation, but by extension other Bible "prophecies" that are interpreted as features of the "last days") is true, that statement by Paul would have been true when it was written anyway - and therefore irrelevant to the discussion.

Any scholar or student of the bible reads some scripture literally and some allegorically.

Yes but they do not usually interpret the same passage of scripture literally one minute and allegorically the next - as you have done with the Olivet discourse.

There's no problem establishing Baha'u'llah as the returned Messiah other than being completely off the topic of this thread. Why not start a thread to investigate Baha'u'llah's Messianic claims if that's what you wish to talk about.

It is entirely relevant because the entire reason the Baha'i faith needs to deny the physical resurrection and subsequent ascension of Jesus with the accompanying outpouring of Holy Spirit and the establishment of the Christian Church as the culmination of the "cause of Christ" is to permit a much later spiritual interpretation with Baha'u'llah as the Messiah returning to complete Christ's mission. So please let's not deflect any more and honestly appraise the whole idea that is being promoted.

I've answered all your questions

No you haven't. You have not, for example, answered the question about how Paul's denial that the resurrection had already happened by the middle of the 1st century proves that it still had not happened some 1800 years later...you have not answered how Jesus' numerous references to "this generation" in passages that are very clearly addressing his 1st century audience specifically can be reconciled with an obviously analogous "this generation" that would not appear for almost 2000 years...and in any case you quoted me out of context because I actually said that you have not answered any of the questions without trying to have it both ways - literal and allegorical, preterist and futurist - at the same time - which is exactly what you are doing.

For example, you insist that the resurrection is symbolic - which means it could be (have been) at any time - and at the same time you insist that the restoration of the Jews to Israel is to have a literal fulfillment - despite heaps of Biblical references to "the Jerusalem above" etc. that make it clear that this was, in the interpretation of many Bible writers at least, definitely symbolic. You surely can't deny that a symbolic, spiritual "resurrection" and the symbolic "restoration" of a spiritual "nation" of true worshipers of God are linked? Isn't the most likely interpretation of all this - if we take the Bible as a "whole" - that they are actually talking about the same thing from two different viewpoints - the "resurrection" if we are looking at the raising of the spirituality of individuals and the "restoration" if we are looking at the spiritual elevation of a collective group of people? And is it not really rather obvious that the Bible writers intended this restoration - this symbolic resurrection to spiritual life - this conversion from Pharisaic legalism to the "glorious liberty of the children of God" (Romans 8:21) - to be understood to be, at the very least, well under way, before they purportedly finished their writings in the 1st century and to expect its culmination to be something that would "shortly come to pass"? (Revelation 1:1).

Is there any convincing scripture in the entire New Testament that suggests (as "Daniel" had a couple of centuries or so earlier) that "yet the vision is for many days"? In fact is it not rather the case that the writers of the NT had Jesus refer to "Daniel's" prophecies precisely because they were convinced that the "latter days" of "Daniel" had, in fact, already arrived (Daniel 10:14) and that the promised "Kingdom of God" was, as they had also had Jesus claim, already "at hand" (Mark 1:15).

 

[siti]

Logically speaking, there would be no reason for the prophets in the OT to fabricate anything whereas there are reasons why the gospel writers might.

So they might, for example, have invented the stuff about Jesus fulfilling the OT prophecies altogether? And Jesus might never actually have made reference to Daniel's prophecies at all. So there might actually have been no "last days" for the Jewish system in the 1st century, no Christ, no resurrection - physical, literal or symbolic? Daniel's prophecies might have been exclusively referring to the restoration of Israel after the Babylonian exile - the beginning, rather than the end, of the second temple period and nothing whatsoever to do with the 1st century, the Romans, Jesus, Christianity, Islam or Baha'u'llah? And since it was clearly written well into the second temple period, it was not prophecy at all but rather just another example of fanciful religious literature in the, then vogue, apocalyptic style. Logically speaking, that makes Judaism the most obvious choice doesn't it? Christianity, Islam, Babism and Baha'i-ism all, more or less, accept the literal, physical reality (including - in Christianity - his resurrection) of a character about whom we know absolutely nothing for certain and who might very well have been nothing more than a made up character in a made up story - don't they?

 

[Trailblazer]

So they might, for example, have invented the stuff about Jesus fulfilling the OT prophecies altogether? And Jesus might never actually have made reference to Daniel's prophecies at all. So there might actually have been no "last days" for the Jewish system in the 1st century, no Christ, no resurrection - physical, literal or symbolic? Daniel's prophecies might have been exclusively referring to the restoration of Israel after the Babylonian exile - the beginning, rather than the end, of the second temple period and nothing whatsoever to do with the 1st century, the Romans, Jesus, Christianity, Islam or Baha'u'llah? And since it was clearly written well into the second temple period, it was not prophecy at all but rather just another example of fanciful religious literature in the, then vogue, apocalyptic style.

Might, might, might..... How can any one interpretation of scripture be relied upon to determine the true meaning? There is no clear meaning to scriptures, there are many possible meanings... Only the Representative of God and His appointed interpreters can comprehend the true meaning...

“Know assuredly that just as thou firmly believest that the Word of God, exalted be His glory, endurethfor ever, thou must, likewise, believe with undoubting faith that its meaning can never be exhausted. They who are its appointed interpreters, they whose hearts are the repositories of its secrets, are, however, the only ones who can comprehend its manifold wisdom. Whoso, while reading the Sacred Scriptures, is tempted to choose therefrom whatever may suit him with which to challenge the authority of the Representative of God among men, is, indeed, as one dead, though to outward seeming he may walk and converse with his neighbors, and share with them their food and their drink.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 175-176

Logically speaking, that makes Judaism the most obvious choice doesn't it? Christianity, Islam, Babism and Baha'i-ism all, more or less, accept the literal, physical reality (including - in Christianity - his resurrection) of a character about whom we know absolutely nothing for certain and who might very well have been nothing more than a made up character in a made up story - don't they?

That is what Jews think, that they alone have the Truth from God, that they are the chosen people, but aside from the problem of interpreting scriptures noted above, there is one slight little problem that Jews have, actually four little problems:

1. Jesus
2. Muhammad
3. the Bab
4. Baha'u'llah

Thus it is impossible that Jews are right when they say Moses was the last and final prophet, because there is no way to explain away Jesus and Muhammad and their scriptures and the profound effects they had upon civilization, even if they can deny the Bab and Baha'u'llah since we are too new to have had that ind of impact yet. And the fact that Jews believe Moses was the last prophet means that their interpretation of the Torah is incorrect.

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

Thus it is impossible that Jews are right when they say Moses was the last and final prophet, because there is no way to explain away Jesus and Muhammad and their scriptures and the profound effects they had upon civilization, even if they can deny the Bab and Baha'u'llah since we are too new to have had that ind of impact yet. And the fact that Jews believe Moses was the last prophet means that their interpretation of the Torah is incorrect.

The Jews do not say that Moses was the Final Prophet. While he was a prophet, his main role is as the Lawgiver, who received the laws of the Torah from God and gave them to the Jews. In the Tanakh there are three major and 12 minor prophets all of whom came after Moses. There were also so-called oral prophets who never wrote any books. More non-Jewish prophets? So what, they have nothing to do with Judaism.

And you forgot Joseph Smith and his successors. Also that guy who hangs around Grand Central Terminal and sometimes gets run off by the cops for blocking traffic.

 

[siti]

Geez @Trailblazer - you really do take the biscuit for double-speak - even among your fellow Baha'is:

How can any one interpretation of scripture be relied upon to determine the true meaning?

They who are its appointed interpreters, they whose hearts are the repositories of its secrets, are, however, the only ones who can comprehend its manifold wisdom.

Strike three my friend - I believe that means you're out!

 

[RabbiO]

Thus it is impossible that Jews are right when they say Moses was the last and final prophet, because there is no way to explain away Jesus and Muhammad and their scriptures and the profound effects they had upon civilization, even if they can deny the Bab and Baha'u'llah since we are too new to have had that ind of impact yet. And the fact that Jews believe Moses was the last prophet means that their interpretation of the Torah is incorrect.

Jews believe that Moses was the last and final prophet?

Really? Funny, that's not what I learned in rabbinical school.

 

[Trailblazer]

The Jews do not say that Moses was the Final Prophet. While he was a prophet, his main role is as the Lawgiver, who received the laws of the Torah from God and gave them to the Jews. In the Tanakh there are three major and 12 minor prophets all of whom came after Moses. There were also so-called oral prophets who never wrote any books. More non-Jewish prophets? So what, they have nothing to do with Judaism.

You are correct, Jews believe there are other prophets in the Tanakh, but there is one prophet they believe was the last; as I recall his name was Malachi. So that still precludes Jesus, Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah as being legitimate Prophets.

And you forgot Joseph Smith and his successors. Also that guy who hangs around Grand Central Terminal and sometimes gets run off by the cops for blocking traffic.

I do not believe Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God but rather he was a seer. As for any other guy on the street, the way to know if someone is a Prophet "by their fruits" as Jesus said....

"What then is the mission of the divine prophets? Their mission is the education and advancement of the world of humanity. They are the real teachers and educators, the universal instructors of mankind. If we wish to discover whether any one of these great souls or messengers was in reality a prophet of God we must investigate the facts surrounding His life and history; and the first point of our investigation will be the education He bestowed upon mankind. If He has been an educator, if He has really trained a nation or people, causing it to rise from the lowest depths of ignorance to the highest station of knowledge, then we are sure that He was a prophet. This is a plain and clear method of procedure, proof that is irrefutable. We do not need to seek after other proofs.”

Bahá’í World Faith, p. 273

 

[Trailblazer]

Geez @Trailblazer - you really do take the biscuit for double-speak - even among your fellow Baha'is:

Trailblazer said: How can any one interpretation of scripture be relied upon to determine the true meaning?

Trailblazer said: They who are its appointed interpreters, they whose hearts are the repositories of its secrets, are, however, the only ones who can comprehend its manifold wisdom.

Strike three my friend - I believe that means you're out!

That is not double-speak. You took what I said out of context.
That is called cherry-picking.

Trailblazer said: Might, might, might..... How can any one interpretation of scripture be relied upon to determine the true meaning? There is no clear meaning to scriptures, there are many possible meanings... Only the Representative of God and His appointed interpreters can comprehend the true meaning...

What I meant is that humans from various religions can attribute many possible meanings to scriptures, that but only the Representative of God knows the true meaning. The appointed interpreters also know the true meaning because they were “appointed” to interpret what the Representative of God wrote.

That is as clear as the noonday sun in Arizona.

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

You are correct, Jews believe there are other prophets in the Tanakh, but there is one prophet they believe was the last; as I recall his name was Malachi. So that still precludes Jesus, Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah as being legitimate Prophets.

I do not believe Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God but rather he was a seer. As for any other guy on the street, the way to know if someone is a Prophet "by their fruits" as Jesus said....

"What then is the mission of the divine prophets? Their mission is the education and advancement of the world of humanity. They are the real teachers and educators, the universal instructors of mankind. If we wish to discover whether any one of these great souls or messengers was in reality a prophet of God we must investigate the facts surrounding His life and history; and the first point of our investigation will be the education He bestowed upon mankind. If He has been an educator, if He has really trained a nation or people, causing it to rise from the lowest depths of ignorance to the highest station of knowledge, then we are sure that He was a prophet. This is a plain and clear method of procedure, proof that is irrefutable. We do not need to seek after other proofs.”

Bahá’í World Faith, p. 273

Then by your definition perhaps [URL=http://www.chabad.org/therebbe/article_cdo/aid/244372/jewish/The-Rebbe-A-Brief-Biography.htm]Lubavitcher Rebbe Mehachem Schneerson[/URL] was another Jewish Prophet.

Malachi is the last prophet in the Prophets portion of the Tanakh. The Law and the Prophets was established in canonical form before Daniel wrote or he might also be in the Prophets instead of the Writings.

 

[Trailblazer]

Jews believe that Moses was the last and final prophet?

Really? Funny, that's not what I learned in rabbinical school.

Sorry, I meant that Moses was the last Major Prophet, but that is from a Baha'i perspective, because we differentiate Major Prophets like Moses who are the Lawgivers from minor prophets like Solomon, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

43: THE TWO CLASSES OF PROPHETS

I know that Jews believe in other prophets and there were others after Moses.

 

[Trailblazer]

Then by your definition perhaps Lubavitcher Rebbe Mehachem Schneerson was another Jewish Prophet.

Did he educate and advance the world of humanity? Was he a universal instructor of mankind? Did he train a nation or people, causing it to rise from the lowest depths of ignorance to the highest station of knowledge?

Clearly, Moses did that. I do not think any of the other Jewish prophets did all of that.

Malachi is the last prophet in the Prophets portion of the Tanakh. The Law and the Prophets was established in canonical form before Daniel wrote or he might also be in the Prophets instead of the Writings.

Thanks for explaining that. I was never a Jew or a Christian so I hardly know the Bible at all.

 

[siti]

I was never a Jew or a Christian so I hardly know the Bible at all.

And yet you presume to know that both Jewish and Christian interpretations of their own scriptures are wrong!

 

[siti]

That is as clear as the noonday sun in Arizona.

Sounds more like the result of spending too much time in the noonday sun to me.

 

[Trailblazer]

And yet you presume to know that both Jewish and Christian interpretations of their own scriptures are wrong!

No, I do not assume that all their interpretations are wrong. However, I believe that if their interpretations contradict what Baha'u'llah wrote, they are wrong because Baha'u'llah was a Manifestation of God who had the knowledge of God, whereas the Jews and Christians only have their scriptures which were written by men.

In addition, we have the Original Writings of Baha'u'llah which have been authenticated, so we know exactly what He wrote. We do not have any Original Writings of Moses or Jesus. Here are some authoritative Baha'i positions on the Torah and the Bible:

From the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá

Know ye that the Torah is that which was revealed in the Tablets to Moses, may peace be upon Him, or that to which He was bidden. But the stories are historical narratives and were written after Moses, may peace be upon Him.
(From a previously untranslated Tablet)

From Letters Written on Behalf of the Guardian:

...The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings of Bahá'u'lláh.
(28 July 1936 to a National Spiritual Assembly)

...we cannot be sure how much or how little of the four Gospels are accurate and include the words of Christ and His undiluted teachings, all we can be sure of, as Bahá'ís, is that what has been quoted by Bahá'u'lláh and the Master must be absolutely authentic. As many times passages in the Gospel of St. John are quoted we may assume that it is his Gospel and much of it accurate.
(23 January 1944 to an individual believer)

When 'Abdu'l-Bahá states we believe what is in the Bible, He means in substance. Not that we believe every word of it to be taken literally or that every word is the authentic saying of the Prophet.
(11 February 1944 to an individual believer)

We cannot be sure of the authenticity of any of the phrases in the Old or the New Testament. What we can be sure of is when such references or words are cited or quoted in either the Quran or the Bahá'í writings.
(4 July 1947 to an individual believer)

Except for what has been explained by Bahá'u'lláh and 'Abdu'l-Bahá, we have no way of knowing what various symbolic allusions in the Bible mean.
(31 January 1955 to an individual believer)

The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments

 

[Trailblazer]

Sounds more like the result of spending too much time in the noonday sun to me.

Sorry you could not understand it.

 

[siti]

Did he educate and advance the world of humanity? Was he a universal instructor of mankind?

Schneerson initiated Jewish outreach in the post-Holocaust era and believed that world Jewry was seeking to learn more about its heritage. He sought to bring Judaism to Jews wherever they were and was the first person in all of history to try reach every Jewish community and every Jew in the world.[14] British Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks said of Schneerson "that if the Nazis searched out every Jew in hate, the Rebbe wished to search out every Jew in love".[164] He oversaw the building of schools, community centers, and youth camps and created a global network of emissaries, known as Shluchim.

Today there are Shluchim in all of the 50 U.S. States, in over 80 countries and 1,000 cities around the world, totaling more than 3,600 institutions including some 300 in Israel.[165][166] Chabad is very often the only Jewish presence in a given town or city and it has become the face of Jewish Orthodoxy for the Jewish and general world.[167]

Schneerson's model of Jewish outreach has been imitated by all Jewish movements including the Reform, Conservative, Orthodox and Haredi.[10][168] His published works fill more than 200 volumes and are often used as source text for sermons of both Chabad and non-Chabad rabbis.[13] Beyond the Jewish world, Peggy Noonan has written that moral issues would be better addressed by leaders such as Schneerson than by politicians,[169] and since his death, Schneerson has been referred to as the Rebbe for all people.[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menachem_Mendel_Schneerson#Impact
​

According to the same Wikipedia article (not my usual source of definitive information but I don't think this is disputed or controversial) his contribution to education and the "betterment of mankind" has been recognized by every US President since Richard Nixon.

On the raising a nation from the lowest depths of ignorance to the highest station of knowledge, by way of a fair comparison, which nation has this happened to under Baha'u'llah's teaching?

 

[siti]

we know exactly what He wrote.

We know exactly what Siti wrote in this thread - how does that make any difference to anything?

 

[oldbadger]

No, we do not believe in the Trinity the same way that Christians do, but we believe in a Trinity.

This chapter explains what we believe: 27: THE TRINITY

And who wrote that?
Not your Prophet.

 

[oldbadger]

I said: "Of course they wouldn't... They believe that Jesus resurrected and ascended and will return. The only reason they cling to the resurrected Jesus is because they cling to the return of the same Jesus and obviously if the body of Jesus died the same Jesus cannot return... like duh."

That was not an insult... Who would I be insulting?
When I said "like duh" I just meant "that is rather obvious," which is what I should have said had I not been in the mood I was in... We all make mistakes....

I tend to call it as I see it, but that is not rude. It is rather obvious that Christians cling to the return of Jesus but if Jesus had not resurrected bodily that would be impossible... Anyone can do that math.

You might be better off not referring to anybody's miondsets, whether Christians or mine, as '....... like duh'.

You might be better off letting Christians explain what they cling to. Most Christians I know have Faith in Life after Death.

It's going to be a hard sell, trying to convince Christians that your Prophet is Jesus returned. It's a pyramid sell, and you need to convince all Christians about your ideas about the resurrection of Jesus before you can sign many of 'em up. Of course, that's what this thread is about.

 

[Trailblazer]

Schneerson initiated Jewish outreach in the post-Holocaust era and believed that world Jewry was seeking to learn more about its heritage. He sought to bring Judaism to Jews wherever they were and was the first person in all of history to try reach every Jewish community and every Jew in the world.[14] British Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks said of Schneerson "that if the Nazis searched out every Jew in hate, the Rebbe wished to search out every Jew in love".[164] He oversaw the building of schools, community centers, and youth camps and created a global network of emissaries, known as Shluchim.

Today there are Shluchim in all of the 50 U.S. States, in over 80 countries and 1,000 cities around the world, totaling more than 3,600 institutions including some 300 in Israel.[165][166] Chabad is very often the only Jewish presence in a given town or city and it has become the face of Jewish Orthodoxy for the Jewish and general world.[167]

Schneerson's model of Jewish outreach has been imitated by all Jewish movements including the Reform, Conservative, Orthodox and Haredi.[10][168] His published works fill more than 200 volumes and are often used as source text for sermons of both Chabad and non-Chabad rabbis.[13] Beyond the Jewish world, Peggy Noonan has written that moral issues would be better addressed by leaders such as Schneerson than by politicians,[169] and since his death, Schneerson has been referred to as the Rebbe for all people.[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menachem_Mendel_Schneerson#Impact
​

According to the same Wikipedia article (not my usual source of definitive information but I don't think this is disputed or controversial) his contribution to education and the "betterment of mankind" has been recognized by every US President since Richard Nixon.

On the raising a nation from the lowest depths of ignorance to the highest station of knowledge, by way of a fair comparison, which nation has this happened to under Baha'u'llah's teaching?

The highest station of knowledge is knowledge of God. That is what Baha'u'llah brought to us:

“The beginning of all things is the knowledge of God, and the end of all things is strict observance of whatsoever hath been sent down from the empyrean of the Divine Will that pervadeth all that is in the heavens and all that is on the earth.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 5

The Coming of Baha'u'llah has affected people throughout the whole world, not just one nation:

Light to the World

However, it is much too early to see the same effects that Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad have had on the world. It has only been 165 years.