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

[Trailblazer]

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.

The Father DID send the Holy Spirit to Christians but they completely ignored it.

The Holy Spirit is the Bounty of God which is the Comforter/Spirit of truth because it comforts people and brings them the truth. God sent the Holy Spirit (Bounty of God) to Baha’u’llah and then Baha’u’llah brought the Holy Spirit (Bounty of God) to humanity. That is why Baha’u’llah has been referred to as the Comforter/Spirit if truth.

The Church misled Christians into believing that the Comforter and Spirit of truth are the Holy Spirit that Jesus sent to live inside of them, but any thinking mind can figure out that a spirit living inside of people cannot DO any of the following things that are in John 14, 15 and 16; only a man could do those things:

• Teach you all things
• Call to remembrance what Jesus said
• Testify of Jesus
• Glorify Jesus, receive of Jesus, and shew it unto you
• Guide you into all truth
• Speak what He hears and shew you things to come
• Reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment

Baha’u’llah did all these things and as a result of His revelation the world will be reproved the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment. No spirit living inside of Christians is going to do this. Talk about illogical.

Comforter Spirit of truth referring to Baha’u’llah:

John 14:26 ... he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come....he shall testify of me:

John 16:13-14 ....when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

John 16:8....he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

“Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things. Its evidences, as witnessed in all the peoples of the earth, are now manifest before thee. The deepest wisdom which the sages have uttered, the profoundest learning which any mind hath unfolded, the arts which the ablest hands have produced, the influence exerted by the most potent of rulers, are but manifestations of the quickening power released by His transcendent, His all-pervasive, and resplendent Spirit.

We testify that when He came into the world, He shed the splendor of His glory upon all created things. Through Him the leper recovered from the leprosy of perversity and ignorance. Through Him, the unchaste and wayward were healed. Through His power, born of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the sinner sanctified.

Leprosy may be interpreted as any veil that interveneth between man and the recognition of the Lord, his God. Whoso alloweth himself to be shut out from Him is indeed a leper, who shall not be remembered in the Kingdom of God, the Mighty, the All-Praised. We bear witness that through the power of the Word of God every leper was cleansed, every sickness was healed, every human infirmity was banished. He it is Who purified the world. Blessed is the man who, with a face beaming with light, hath turned towards Him.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 85-86

 

[Trailblazer]

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.

We do not use your Bible as part of our teachings. I already told you that.

We do not need to Justify Baha'u'llah. He justified Himself:

“Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath endowed every soul with the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could He, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder His Cause in their hearts. He will never deal unjustly with any one, neither will He task a soul beyond its power. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106

 

[Trailblazer]

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

I highly doubt you will get any Jews to agree with that, but who are they anyway... They are only the ones that Moses spoke to on Mt Sinai.

 

[Trailblazer]

You agree that Christians just follow the Bible, right?

Yeah, but then how come they do not all agree what it means....

 

[Trailblazer]

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

That is not using the Bible to support anything. The genealogy supports it.

A freelance Baha'i.

Yeah kind of... That is why I am called Trailblazer...

 

[Trailblazer]

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

Thanks so much Tony... This is priceless...

I just added it to my Word document on the genealogy of Baha'u'llah, as it will surely come up again.

 

[oldbadger]

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.

I have repeatedly told you that GMark is Cephas account passed via a partial witness, but tinkered with later.
I have told you that the others only provide isolated anecdotes of interest.

I don't think you believe in any of it. If so, please tell us what you actually believe is real history.

You were shown how Jesus picketed the Temple Courts, it's written there to read in the bible.

I'm on a mobile......

 

[oldbadger]

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.

So........ what?
I just take it as described.

 

[Neb]

Yeah, but then how come they do not all agree what it means....

If you read this carefully you will understand the reason why.
For example, RCC or the roman catholic church, they based their teachings or doctrines from the bible but they adhere to paganism or idols and statues. “Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, nor any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.” - Exodus 20:3-4

Another example is tithing. Many Christian churches use this part of the Law of Moses to collect money from the congregation. They use Malachi 3:8-10 for tithing, but if you read this book, the book of Malachi, God was talking to the priests and the Israelites and not to Gentiles or Christians of today. IOW, Christians cannot just pick this particular Law of Moses and ignore the rest. A lot of churches failed on this one big time.

“For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.” –Galatians 3:10

One cannot pick or choose which of the Law of Moses to follow. If you do pick one and not do the rest of the Law of Moses then one is under the curse of God, or “fallen from grace“.

“Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.” –Galatians 5:4

And Churches who do not believe Christ is God “and the Word was God” –John 1:1. They would change this particular clause with “and the Word was a god” and reasoned that God made or created an "a god" before the beginning. Why would God create an “a god” before the beginning and later on in Exodus 20:3 it says “you shall have no OTHER/HETEROS/DIFFERENT gods before me.” It does not make any sense at all, does it?

And some still follow the Sabbath day or Saturday, like the Mormons [I stand corrected. My apology to Katzpur. I meant SDA], just like the Jews of today.

“In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.” [cf. John 1:3]. –Hebrews 1:1-2”.

Here the author was talking about the NT or the LAST revelation of God to mankind.

Now, if you examine carefully, one of the basic components of any of these cults, their leaders all have some kind of special, exclusive and absolute revelation from God, especially the mormons, jehovah witness, iglesia ni cristo, rcc, islam, and your belief, baha’i faith. All these are post-revelations or post-enlightenments.

The Lord Jesus Christ said “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.” – John 14:6.

None of these cults believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as the only way to the Father because of this “SPECIAL, EXCLUSIVE, and ABSOLUTE, REVELATION” that they have received from God. They all have this concocted, fabricated, formulated revelation from God after the New Testament.

And in addition to these, all these cults do not believe in the Holy Spirit, the third Person in the Trinity, or the ministry of the Holy Spirit on which all True Christians today are under His guidance. “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever;” John 14:16.

 

[Neb]

I highly doubt you will get any Jews to agree with that, but who are they anyway... They are only the ones that Moses spoke to on Mt Sinai.

Is that why Maimonides changed “echad” to “yachid” because he saw the Triune God?

 

[Neb]

We do not use your Bible as part of our teachings. I already told you that.

It is another Comforter with the same Holy Spirit that Jesus brought, since there is only one Holy Spirit (Bounty of God) that is sent at various intervals throughout history.

Here you are referring Baha'u'llah as the other "comforter", right? Where did you get the word "comforter"? From the Bible, right? Perhaps this is what you meant by

Nobody owns God so that means anyone is FREE to interpret the Bible however they want to.

 

[Neb]

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.

Impossible to you but nothing is impossible to God.

 

[Neb]

There is and I know that.

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

What father are you talking about? Read John 8:44

We do not use your Bible as part of our teachings. I already told you that.

I thought you don't use the bible?

 

[Neb]

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

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.

"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 4:16

"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." -1Thessalonians 4:17

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?

 

[Neb]

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.

You could name Mírzá Ḥusayn-`Alí Núrí, a Persian Shi'ite, as "MERCY", and then you would argue that whenever one sees the word "Mercy" in the bible then that's Mírzá Ḥusayn-`Alí Núrí in the bible.

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

I don't understand this. Can you paraphrase this?

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

I have repeatedly told you that GMark is Cephas account passed via a partial witness, but tinkered with later.
I have told you that the others only provide isolated anecdotes of interest.

Your claim is that the man who ran off naked was Mark. Since he was dressed only in nightclothes, it is not reasonable to say he was at the Last Supper. Since he ran off naked it is not reasonable to say he witnessed anything after that. If one wants to say the events of Mark 14 really happened more or less that way, which is not impossible, the obvious witness is Peter, who was there for the Seder and followed along after Jesus when he was arrested. Tradition has it that Mark got his information from Peter. Why is a partial witness needed?

Also, I have shown that whenever Mark refers to clothing he has something of importance to say and that the dual meaning of sindón (burial shroud and night clothing) serves to bracket the entire section from the arrest of Jesus to his burial, when faith is challenged, emphasized by Peter denying Jesus. (Faith is a big theme in Mark, as I have also shown elsewhere.) How credible is it really that there was someone on the Mount of Olives wearing only a nightshirt on that chilly night? (See Mark 14:54 and Mark 14:67) The obvious connection between the young man wearing sleeping attire and Jesus berating the disciples for falling asleep is obvious. The young man is only symbolic of losing faith, without which he has nothing. Notice that the disciples fall asleep three times and Peter denies Jesus three times, and the young man is wearing a nightshirt. In Mark 16:5, the young man (same word used for the young man in Mark 14:51-52) in a long white garment at the empty tomb underlines Mark’s closing theme – have faith that Jesus rose from the dead and the promise of resurrection of the dead will be honored.

As I have said, whatever might really have happened is going to be found in Mark. Where the other Gospels go beyond Mark, there are clear indications that it is invention. Not only does the extra material fit too neatly into obvious agendas, but they fundamentally contradict each other (Luke against Matthew and John against everybody).

I don't think you believe in any of it. If so, please tell us what you actually believe is real history.

I already did that in a prior post.

You were shown how Jesus picketed the Temple Courts, it's written there to read in the bible.

When you get off your mobile phone, quote exact chapter and verse in Mark that contains the word ‘picket’ or anything equivalent.

So........ what?
I just take it as described.

You asked a question. I answered it in detail. What was your point?

 

[Katzpur]

And some still follow the Sabbath day or Saturday, like the Mormons, just like the Jews of today.

Where on earth did you get the idea that Mormons observe a Saturday sabbath?

 

[Neb]

Where on earth did you get the idea that Mormons observe a Saturday sabbath?

My apology. I meant SDA and NOT the Mormons.

 

[Katzpur]

My apology. I meant SDA and NOT the Mormons.

Apology accepted.

 

[oldbadger]

Your claim is that the man who ran off naked was Mark. Since he was dressed only in nightclothes, it is not reasonable to say he was at the Last Supper. Since he ran off naked it is not reasonable to say he witnessed anything after that. If one wants to say the events of Mark 14 really happened more or less that way, which is not impossible, the obvious witness is Peter, who was there for the Seder and followed along after Jesus when he was arrested. Tradition has it that Mark got his information from Peter. Why is a partial witness needed?

Also, I have shown that whenever Mark refers to clothing he has something of importance to say and that the dual meaning of sindón (burial shroud and night clothing) serves to bracket the entire section from the arrest of Jesus to his burial, when faith is challenged, emphasized by Peter denying Jesus. (Faith is a big theme in Mark, as I have also shown elsewhere.) How credible is it really that there was someone on the Mount of Olives wearing only a nightshirt on that chilly night? (See Mark 14:54 and Mark 14:67) The obvious connection between the young man wearing sleeping attire and Jesus berating the disciples for falling asleep is obvious. The young man is only symbolic of losing faith, without which he has nothing. Notice that the disciples fall asleep three times and Peter denies Jesus three times, and the young man is wearing a nightshirt. In Mark 16:5, the young man (same word used for the young man in Mark 14:51-52) in a long white garment at the empty tomb underlines Mark’s closing theme – have faith that Jesus rose from the dead and the promise of resurrection of the dead will be honored.

As I have said, whatever might really have happened is going to be found in Mark. Where the other Gospels go beyond Mark, there are clear indications that it is invention. Not only does the extra material fit too neatly into obvious agendas, but they fundamentally contradict each other (Luke against Matthew and John against everybody).



I already did that in a prior post.



When you get off your mobile phone, quote exact chapter and verse in Mark that contains the word ‘picket’ or anything equivalent.



You asked a question. I answered it in detail. What was your point?

I quoted the description of Jesus picketing the Courts with a verse from zMark.
How Galileans described their clothing and the Greek words chosen are probably very different.

There does not seem to be any foundation of reality to the Jesus story as far as I can perceive..... which would mean that you are a myther. It is all theological myth and contrivance for you.