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

[Neb]

How do you account for the ascension of Christ through the stratosphere and how the early Christian's understanding of these events relies on a cosmology that is now redundant?

Asked and Answered already, remember?

You have this limited info or Q&A that you kept in a box against the literal resurrection of the Lord Jesus and when it runs out you start all over again from the beginning.

 

[Neb]

You sound like you are from the USA....fake news?

Not necessarily from the US. Fake News is all over the world and it’s the new medium in newscasting especially from the social media. People can’t tell the difference between fake and real anymore. Sow a seed of doubt in their minds, like your OP “Resurrection of Christ - What's the evidence for and against a literal resurrection” the weak minded people will question or doubt on their faith.

“And Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do what is done to the fig tree, but even if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou taken up and cast into the sea, it shall be done.” Matthew 21:21

“If ye have faith, and doubt not,” Christians can overcome mountains of errors.

 

[Neb]

The problem is no longer the rumours spreading from the Romans and the Jews. The issue is science and modern Biblical scholarship.

Convincing readers that you have the ability on how you understand what science is all about by means of cutting and pasting websites and at the same time appealing to their emotions with your personal life. You are appealing with ethos and pathos to the readers but you lack the logos or logic where you failed miserably. It seemed people don’t care about logic anymore as fake news are more believable nowadays.

Citing or invoking science, your main argument, with cut and paste from the internet without proper understanding the meaning of it is really the easy way to argue. It would be really nice if you study it first then summarize it from your own perspective, on how you understand science, and not just C&P websites after websites and asked your opponent to explain it to you. Very convenient but intellectually irresponsible.

 

[Neb]

I am not here to support anyone. I speak for myself.

Christianity is not meaningless without Christ's bodily resurrection. The cross sacrifice was necessary and it was done. The bodily resurrection of Jesus is not necessary for anything. Most but not all Christians believe it so they can cling to the belief that Jesus is coming back and they will rise from physical graves, but those are both false beliefs, perpetrated by the church, derived from misinterpretations of the Bible.

You got your opinion and I have verses to prove that the Lord Jesus resurrected.

 

[Neb]

No, Jesus is not going to return so Jesus cannot possibly be the Messiah that is spoken of in the Bible.

Of course the Christian websites say Jesus is the Messiah.

However, there is not one verse where Jesus ever said He would return to this world again and there are verses where Jesus says He won't return. The return of Jesus was fabricated by many misinterpretations of verses.

Asked and Answered already but here is it again.
Nowhere in the Bible did it say that Baha’u’llah will replace the Lord Jesus on His return or 2nd coming. The Lord Jesus will NOT come again in the body form. This is how the 2nd coming of the Lord Jesus will be according to the Bible.

Please read these verses.

1Thessalonians 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first;
1Thessalonians 4:17 then we that are alive, that are left, shall together with them be caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

On Christ 2nd coming, Christians will be “be caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air”.

It did not specifically said that it was Baha’u’llah, who would come for the 2nd time, did it? NO, it did not, meaning there is NO room for you to INSERT Baha’u’llah in these verses, right?

Notice: The Lord will not touch down here on earth until all Christians are all together with the Lord.

The 2nd coming of the Lord Jesus is NOT about dealing with sin anymore, like His first coming where he dealt with sin with finality. “It is finished” -John 19:30.

“so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.” -Hebrews 9:28

Very clear it says: “not to bear sin, but to bring salvation” 1st COMING is about dealing with sin. The 2nd COMING is about salvation and judgment.

Now, what’s gonna happen to those who were left behind?

2Thessalonians 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, touching the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together unto him;

Here, Paul was saying about the 2nd coming of the Lord and the “gathering together” of Christians that was mentioned in 1st Thessalonians 4:17 and in 2nd Thessalonians 2:6

“And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time.”

Who is “restraining” him, or restraining satan?

Now, we go back again to the “COMFORTER” even the “HOLY SPIRIT” that the “FATHER” will give to the disciples when Christs’ earthly ministry ends. First, Christ’s ministry then after the “RESURRECTION” Christ went back to the Father then the “HOLY SPIRIT” was given to those who believe in the Lord Jesus as their guide. All these you can read in the Bible.

IOW, after Christ’s ministry, the Father will send the Holy Spirit to the believers as the 2nd ministry to guide the Christians while here on earth. Once the Christians are taken away by the Lord Jesus on His 2nd COMING immediately the Holy Spirit will be taken away as well because the Holy Spirit’s ministry would be over or there is no one in need of His guidance anymore and judgment will come to those who were left behind.

If you read the following verses it will tell you what’s gonna happen after Christians were taken away.

2Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of lawlessness doth already work: only there is one that restraineth now, until he be taken out of the way.

2Thessalonians 2:8 And then shall be revealed the lawless one, whom the Lord Jesus shall slay with the breath of his mouth, and bring to nought by the manifestation of his coming;

2Thessalonians 2:9 even he, whose coming is according to the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

2Thessalonians 2:10 and with all deceit of unrighteousness for them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

2Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God sendeth them a working of error, that they should believe a lie:

2Thessalonians 2:12 that they all might be judged who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

It’s very clear, according to the Bible, that on the 2nd COMING of the Lord Jesus two things will happen, i.e., Christians and the ministry of the Holy Spirit, the ‘”RESTRAINER”, will be taken away and “shall we ever be with the Lord”, and the other one is JUDGMENT “that they all might be judged who believed not the truth”.

There is no room for Baha’u’llah here.

 

[Neb]

All Christians say that they truly adhere to the Bible so that is a meaningless statement, logically speaking.

Meaning you can't tell the difference or understand what a false-Christianity is and what their leaders were teachings. Just think of it as your religion using the bible as part of your teachings or doctrines so you could justify baha'u'llah as also a prophet of God.

“So anyway, the short answer is that yes, Baha'u'llah was a descendant of David.”

You say “Baha'u'llah was a descendant of David” this error is the more obvious compared to others, i.e., false-Christianity or semi-hybrid Christians which is more subtle in their teachings, i.e., if don't understand what the bible is saying.

 

[Neb]

Doctrines like original sin, the bodily resurrection, the ascension, the Trinity, and Jesus is God incarnate, to name a few.

You know the meaning of Echad in Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah:"
If you do a research on the word “ECHAD” you will find that Moses was a Trinitarian

 

[Neb]

Okay, I can agree with that.

You agree that Christians just follow the Bible, right?

 

[Neb]

Wrong. I do not use the Bible to support anything.

like insisting "Baha'u'llah was a descendant of David.”?

I became a Baha'i 42 years before I ever read one page of the Bible. Baha'is do not need the Bible to support our beliefs because we have a new revelation from Baha'u'llah. It is only when approached by Christians who insist that I need to prove who Baha'u'llah was by using the Bible that I refer to the Bible. I cannot speak for other Baha'is but that is my position.

A freelance Baha'i.

 

[GreenpeaceRECo-operative]

Thank you for your post. I had hoped at least some Christians would respond.



Did you read the transcript of the debate I posted? No problem if you didn't. Here's an excerpt from Dr Bart Ehrman:

To sum up, the sources we have are not as good as we would like. They’re written many decades after the fact by people who were not there to see these things happen, who have inherited stories that have been changed in the process of transmission. These accounts that we have of Jesus’ resurrection are not internally consistent; they’re full of discrepancies, including the account of his death and his resurrection.

Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus? The Craig-Ehrman Debate | Reasonable Faith



I believe historians, regardless of belief or faith, would be in general agreement about the historic existence of Jesus, Buddha, and Muhammad. The existence of the historic Christ is not in question, but His resurrection is. Many of the early followers of the great religions made sacrifices, including my own where thousands were martyred for their faith. This however is not an evidence that any of these great religious teachers literally rose from the dead.



Luke tells an interesting story of bringing Tabatha back from the dead. I have no doubt that Jesus and His Apostles had the power to perform miracles, but is this story to be taken literally? Perhaps it is. The key difference between the story of Tabitha and Peter compared to Jesus, is the eventual ascension of Jesus where He rises into the literal heavens (through the stratosphere) to be with His Father in Heaven. That presents a challenge to logic and reason, wouldn't you think?

In regards Tabitha, do we know that Luke was an actual eye witness to this event, as it is widely acknowldeged he was not an eyewitness to the events in regards Jesus. Do we have any corroborative evidence from other sources?





How many resurrections are we talking about? We have Lazarus as recorded in the gospel of John and Tabitha in Acts. Any others?

Healing and bring people back from the dead while both miracles, are not necessarily related. For example, the capacity to heal is unlikely to be associated with bringing back people from the dead, as many evangelical Christian groups claim healing miracles, but none to have raised someone from the dead....well, not to my knowledge.

Thanks again for posting.

See, I´m an interfaith humanist Christian Unitarian Universalist, and I consider the healing and the resurrection(s) to be on the same spectrum. My starting point is modern society and its strengths. I take Universities, democratic experiments, secularization itself, Science, the Social Sciences, and Social Movements to be central parts. Part of that includes Therapeutic Psychology and Psychosomatic Medicine. All of that stems from University-based culture, and the Universities are based on academic communities, not just their intellectual classifications of disciplines, of course, but it is fundamental to spell out. That kind of intellectual community reflects underlying values which raise a hypothesis, "What permitted that kind of network of scholarly-type of communities to arise?" The University´s history traces back to Christian monks in community back through Roger Bacon and St. Thomas of Aquinas, on back to the first monk St. Anthony the Great, and Jesus and his legacy. That legacy is based on Jesus´ ethics wrapped in the account of his life, which have been interpreted in doctrines. While University-based society has achieved much, it is mostly based on the rough application of Jesus´ ethics in "resurrecting" Greek philosophy to achieve empirical logic.

Those are verifiable truths of Jesus´ legacy. Psychosomatic healing, both in its lab-experimental infancy and broader reports of traditions like Lourdes shrine, Joseph Murphy, Norman Vincent Peale, Christian Science, Louise Hay, Emile Coue, and so on. Christian Science even has accounts of resurrections. Whether Jesus´ himself was fully resurrected, or resuscitated and then went to India, there are various possibilities, empirically. Otherwise, his legacy lives and is resolved in its importance for having made modern Western Civilization possible. Moreover, sustainability provides the modern version of doing good works in social and environmental responsibility and overcoming profiteering business models. Freedom of Religion or Not, of course, as part of that, addresses the principle of "Christian love" applied through government and society. Not the obligatory nature of Nicene Creed doctrine, but the flexibility of a meta-Christian society focused on Jesus´ teachings of love within his life and mission.

 

[GreenpeaceRECo-operative]

I listen to a number of modern psychic sources and my current best opinion is that Jesus was on the borderline between life/death when taken down from the cross. He recovered himself with psychic energies and abilities he learned in the east (Himalaya region). He went with and married Mary Magdalene and lived in southern France. They had five children, two of which died very young.

I´m not convinced by the Southern France story. The Tomb of Mary in Pakistan, and the tomb of the Healer in Kashmir make more sense to me.

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

I am on a mobile and so cannot split your post up.
Just answer this. How many times did Jesus visit the temple in that last week, in gMark?

You had recently been talking about John, so I had John on the brain. In Mark 11:11, Jesus visits the Temple but it is late and he goes back to Bethany. I had forgotten about this visit because nothing happened. I should have remembered this because it is part of Mark’s intertwining of the Temple and the fig tree. The Temple is doomed and will not bear fruit. In the Olivet Discourse in Mark 13, Mark has the destruction of the Temple be the first sign of the end of days and uses the image of the fig tree putting forth leaves in Mark 13:28-29 as a metaphor for recognizing that it is the beginning of the end. But my mind was on John and I forgot all that. Duh…

Matthew and Luke repeat this section of Mark in very similar wording. Interestingly John does not. As I referred to last time. John’s triple visit was during the Tabernacles Festival. John has the moneychanger incident occur in an even earlier visit to Jerusalem. In this way, he removes this as having any immediate bearing on the crucifixion of Jesus. In John Jesus is the master of his own fate. His sacrifice is entirely intentional as can be seen in John 18:1-8 when Jesus has to practically insist on being arrested. Also, John omits all reference to the wasting of the fig tree. In John there is only a small passing reference to the end of days with no timeframe attached. He leaves out the ‘not taste death’ reference that appears in the three Synoptic Gospels as well as the entire Olivet Discourse. John was written around the end of the 1st century when belief in Jesus coming back any day now was no longer credible.

In Mark 11:15, Jesus throws out the buyers and sellers and moneychangers etc. I guess you could call this a demonstration. But where is the picketing you claim?

Mark 11:27-12:13 describes the interactions with ‘chief priests, scribes and elders’. That is, not the priesthood alone, as you claim. The ‘speech against the priesthood’ you mentioned is presumably the Parable of the Wicked Husbandman in Mark 12:1-12. Verse 1 connects directly with Isaiah 5:2. In Isaiah 5:7 “the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel”. The vineyard is Israel. The various servants sent by the owner of the vineyard who are beaten or killed would be the prophets. In the end the owner sends his only son who is also killed. (Sound familiar?) What does Mark say the owner of the vineyard will do? Mark 12:9 ‘he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others’. Jesus is talking about his own death.

Judaism will lose its pre-eminent place as symbolized by the destruction of the Temple in the Olivet Discourse, and others (Gentiles) will inherit the vineyard. The parable is about Judaism as the wicked husbandmen, embodied in the priests, the scribes and the elders, not about the priesthood alone.

Mark wrote his Gospel for the purpose of reviving fading hopes in a quick return of Jesus as Paul expected. Mark used the image of the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD as a means of ‘resetting the clock’, making this the first sign of the end of days happening. The husbandmen parable serves to make this a prior prophecy from Isaiah, making it punishment for the rejection and killing of Jesus. This makes it a deliberate planned act by God foreshadowing the end, rather than a suspicious ‘just so’ story.


Don’t just pick out bits and pieces and try to shoehorn them into your preconceived but scripturally unsupportable ideas. Look at what each writer says, how he says it and discover why he wrote it that way. Look at the big picture, why each Gospel was written, what the several writers each wanted to say.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Not necessarily from the US. Fake News is all over the world and it’s the new medium in newscasting especially from the social media. People can’t tell the difference between fake and real anymore.

The Risen Christ returned in His new name and told the world this;

“In this day the mysteries of this earth are unfolded and visible before the eyes, and the pages of swiftly appearing newspapers are indeed the mirror of the world; they display the doings and actions of the different nations; they both illustrate them and cause them to be heard. Newspapers are as a mirror endowed with hearing, sight and speech; they are a wonderful phenomenon and a great matter. But it behooves the writers and editors thereof to be sanctified from the prejudice of egotism and desire, and to be adorned with the ornament of equity and justice. They must inquire into matters as fully as possible in order that they may be informed of the real facts, and commit the same to writing.”

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

It did not specifically said that it was Baha’u’llah, who would come for the 2nd time, did it? NO, it did not, meaning there is NO room for you to INSERT Baha’u’llah in these verses, right?

The English Translation is the "Glory of God' or the 'Glory of the Lord'.

The Bab means 'Gate'

Thus now when you read the Bible, you will know that Jehovah, or the Lord of Hosts is the Glory of God, Baha'u'llah.

If Christ had not Resurrected, then Christ would not have fulfilled His promise as the Father, the Spirit of Truth.

The guidance promised has been given.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

Christians have the bible to prove the literal resurrection of the Lord Jesus, the Son of God.

The Bible proves absolutely nothing. If it was proof, the literal resurrection would be a FACT, not a belief.

Princeton's WordNet definition:

1. fact (noun)

a piece of information about circumstances that exist or events that have occurred

"first you must collect all the facts of the case"

1. fact (noun)

a statement or assertion of verified information about something that is the case or has happened

"he supported his argument with an impressive array of facts"

1. fact (noun)

an event known to have happened or something known to have existed

"your fears have no basis in fact"; "how much of the story is fact and how much fiction is hard to tell"

1. fact (noun)

a concept whose truth can be proved

"scientific hypotheses are not facts"

What does fact mean?

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

I am on a mobile and so cannot split your post up.
Just answer this. How many times did Jesus visit the temple in that last week, in gMark?

According to the traditional timeline, Jesus arrived in Jerusalem on Sunday Nisan 9 and briefly visited the Temple. And according to that same timeline, the crucifixion took place on Friday, Nisan 15. In Mark 14:19 Jesus says “I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not: but the scriptures must be fulfilled.” This was on Thursday evening after sunset and so already Nisan 15. Jesus must have visited the Temple five times. Sunday late in the day after arriving, Monday. Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus taught every day in the Temple but omit the Sunday visit. John says nothing about visiting the Temple during this week.

 

[Trailblazer]

There is NO genealogy that connects Mírzá Ḥusayn-`Alí Núrí to the line of David and you know that.

There is and I know that.

“But the Comforter, even the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you.” - John 14:26

The Comforter was Baha'u'llah that the Father sent in Jesus' name.

 

[Trailblazer]

Because you hit a solid wall and it really stopped you from twisting the word of God.

I am not the one with the wall.

There is only one Messiah and that is the Lord Jesus. I gave you the link for that. Is Jesus the Messiah?

https://www.gotquestions.org/is-Jesus-the-Messiah.htmlThere is only one Messiah for the latter days and that was Baha'u'llah.

From Sarah and Keturah? Really? Would a person come out from two women? Think about that.

If you looked at the diagram maybe you could figure it out.

 

[Trailblazer]

You got your opinion and I have verses to prove that the Lord Jesus resurrected.

Your verses do not prove a thing. If they did, the bodily resurrection would be a fact.

The Bible cannot be tested or affirmed... That is impossible... Not in any manner shape or form can the bodily resurrection be proven... As such it is just a belief, not a fact.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

There is and I know that.

Yes that is for sure

1559. Bahá’u’lláh was a Descendent of Abraham Through Both Katurah and Sarah—Jesse, Son of Sarah, was the Father of David and Ancestor of Bahá’u’lláh

"Regarding your question concerning the Jesse from whom Bahá’u’lláh is descended: The Master says in 'Some Answered Questions', referring to Isaiah, chapter 11, verses 1 to 10, that these verses apply 'Word for word to Bahá’u’lláh'. He then identifies this Jesse as the father of David in the following words: '…for Joseph was of the descendants of Jesse the father of David…', thus identifying the Jesse of Isaiah, chapter 11, with being the father of David. Bahá’u’lláh is thus the descendant of Jesse, the father of David.

"The Guardian hopes that this will clarify the matter for you. It is a tremendous and fascinating theme, Bahá’u’lláh's connection with the Faith of Judaism, and one which possesses great interest to Jew and Christian alike." (From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, July 11, 1942)

Regards Tony