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

[Neb]

Do you read your own posts? They don't think of him as a god. Why would you bold "do" but not the "not" part?

here is another quote-unquote "A quotation mark before and after a word means that it is a verbatim recitation." meaning I did NOT bold the "do" but the one who wrote it. Here is the link do buddhist worship a god - Google Search

 

[CG Didymus]

I do not live in the past or the future, only in the present. I learned that from a good Buddhist friend. As such, I do not care what Jews did or what Christians did... This is a new Day of God. I am fortunate that I was never any other religion before I became a Baha’i so I was not influenced by the older religions. I did not even know anything g about them until about five years ago when I came to forums.

Regarding the older religions, Baha’u’llah put it this way:

“Please God thou wilt turn thine eyes towards the Most Great Revelation, and entirely disregard these conflicting tales and traditions.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 174-175

“This is the Day when the loved ones of God should keep their eyes directed towards His Manifestation, and fasten them upon whatsoever that Manifestation may be pleased to reveal. Certain traditions of bygone ages rest on no foundations whatever, while the notions entertained by past generations, and which they have recorded in their books, have, for the most part, been influenced by the desires of a corrupt inclination. Thou dost witness how most of the commentaries and interpretations of the words of God, now current amongst men, are devoid of truth. Their falsity hath, in some cases, been exposed when the intervening veils were rent asunder. They themselves have acknowledged their failure in apprehending the meaning of any of the words of God.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 171-172

If one judges the Baha’i Faith by the Baha’is then they will be disappointed. I am not saying the Baha’is are bad, only that they are not perfect, and the standards are so high... So I never look to the Baha’is but rather to what Baha’u’llah wrote, as well as to what Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi wrote. Somewhere Shoghi Effendi wrote that this is an infant Faith and it will have many growing pains before it becomes firmly established. All we can do is our best.

I have been a Baha’i since 1970 but I dropped out for the most part until about five years ago. I am still not active in the Baha’i community, for personal reasons, but I have spent all my free time on forums for the last five years. If I thought I could be useful I would probably be active but because of my personality I do not see how I could be of much use, and that is also one reason I had dropped out for so long, although there were other reasons. Another reason is that I was going through recovery from my childhood issues for about 20 years, and I was in college for more than 15 years, most of which time I also worked full time.

I became a Baha’i only two weeks after I heard about it so it was kind of impulsive, but I have never questioned that Baha’u’llah was a Manifestation of God so I remained a Baha’i, even though there were some times I wanted to turn in my card because I did not feel worthy... There was only one time I questioned Baha’u’llah, when I misunderstood the Tablet of the Maiden a few years ago, but some Baha’is in Planet Baha’i helped me with that. I have issues around sex and the fact that Muhammad and Baha’u’llah and so many wives gives me cause for concern, even though I know it is a cultural thing. Suffice to say that I cannot deal with hypocrisy and if you know what Baha’u’llah wrote about desires of the flesh that was pretty straightforward. I have never broken any Baha’i Laws but I got married three weeks after I met my husband and we were both virgins when we married, at ages 32 and 42. I do not expect that many people are able to adhere that strictly but it is none of my business. There are much worse things such as hate, anger, jealousy, envy, judgmentalness. I have suffered from those but I have improved a lot although it is a constant struggle.

Character is just so important. So if people do not tend to their issues if they had them, they are not much help to the Faith. I knew that which is why I put first things first and was in counseling and 12 step programs and in homeopathic treatment for so long.

What the Guardian wrote I sincerely believe:

“Not by the force of numbers, not by the mere exposition of a set of new and noble principles, not by an organized campaign of teaching—no matter how worldwide and elaborate in its character—not even by the staunchness of our faith or the exaltation of our enthusiasm, can we ultimately hope to vindicate in the eyes of a critical and sceptical age the supreme claim of the Abhá Revelation. One thing and only one thing will unfailingly and alone secure the undoubted triumph of this sacred Cause, namely, the extent to which our own inner life and private character mirror forth in their manifold aspects the splendor of those eternal principles proclaimed by Bahá’u’lláh.” Bahá’í Administration, p. 66

I was active for a while in the beginning and a little bit in some communities I lived in. I moved all over the pace during my college years so I was anything but stable. I have lived in Washington State for about 30 years but I have not been active in the Baha'i community on a regular basis and for most years not at all. So I do not really know what the Baha’is are doing, although I know some of them are very active in our area. I admit I have been disheartened by the lack of entry by troops but now that I have been on forums posting to people for five years I understand why that has not transpired. There are just too many people mired in their older religious traditions and that is the primary reason. The other reason is crass materialism; in America people worship material things and activities and desires of the flesh. That is what they live for, so why would they want a religion like Baha’i that tells them they have to sacrifice for God, especially when they can be a Christian and eat drink and be merry and still be forgiven and saved and go to heaven? Most people are just not that noble, so it is just a few souls who carry the load as you have no doubt seen... Of course I do not know why inactive Baha’is are inactive and I do not even like that word. They are still Baha’is and there are reasons they do not participate in activities.

I will close with this: My major problems have never been with the Baha’i Faith or Baha’u’llah, they have been with God. Most of my life has been suffering and I have blamed God for many years. I do not blame God anymore but I am still not that fond of God. There are many days when I wish God did not even exist, but I know He does so I just try to change my attitude. The way I feel, why people ask me, do I promote God or Baha’i? Because I know I am wrong about God and because it is the right thing to do.

I can relate to blaming God. Like why create harmful bacteria and viruses that cause diseases that kill somewhat randomly. I was in S. California in the early 70's, but roamed around quite a bit. I went with Baha'is to Lapwai, Idaho and then to Neah Bay, Washington for "teaching" projects at the Indian Reservations. I also had Baha'i friends in Nanaimo on Vancouver Island and spent some time with them.

I had no reason to doubt the Baha'is until I went back to S. California and a friend had "found" Jesus. I went with him to Bible studies and, for the first time, read and heard what the Bible and NT said. I tried to be a good Christian, but couldn't do it. I later found out that all my "good" Christian friends were not just "lusting", something already a sin, but were doing the deed. So I put religion on the back burner for a while.

One profound thing I discovered during this time was when I went to a Jewish Center. I said that Christianity, Islam and the Baha'i Faith all say they evolved or progressed from them, yet so many Jews remain steady in their own beliefs. After asking why that was, and a little discussion, he showed me a few booklets on why they don't accept Jesus as the Messiah. I still have those booklets. What I learned was something that Christians say about Baha'is, Jesus didn't fulfill the prophecies. From their pov I could clearly see what they were talking about. As with Christians, I can see why they don't accept the Baha'i Faith.

You, Tony, Adrian and the others try and give explanations and verses that prove otherwise, but there is too much "symbolic" interpretations going on, too many verses taken out of context, and too much rejection of the basic teachings of Christianity for me to believe this is all part of some divine plan. Like I've said, it is not the traditions and misinterpretation of Christians that is the problem. That only adds to the problem. The problem began with the NT. Things said and implied in the NT led Christians to go in the direction they went. And, if the Baha'i Faith is correct, that direction was wrong, from the beginning.

There is no reason for me to doubt Christians thought that Jesus came back to life. The NT says he showed himself to be alive with "many" proofs. That's why, if he didn't come back to life, then those Christian writers are to blame. In those times, I can easily see how and why they would think they could get away with the claim. Who were the scientists of those days that would say that rising from the dead and ascending into the sky are impossible. But, there was plenty of religions and religious people that had stories of similar things. So the only "proof" for the resurrection is in the hearts of the people that believe the NT is the Word of God. If it didn't happen, then I agree with you, they are deluded. And even Paul in the NT said that.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

And, if the Baha'i Faith is correct, that direction was wrong, from the beginning

That is a progressive thought. If all the Messengers are from God, then we get it wrong often, every time in fact as all the Messengers all faced rejection.

All we have to do is admit that and learn from it. It takes maturity before we can admit we made a mistake, as a child we always like to be right.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

I can relate to blaming God. Like why create harmful bacteria and viruses that cause diseases that kill somewhat randomly. I was in S. California in the early 70's, but roamed around quite a bit. I went with Baha'is to Lapwai, Idaho and then to Neah Bay, Washington for "teaching" projects at the Indian Reservations. I also had Baha'i friends in Nanaimo on Vancouver Island and spent some time with them.

I really have a problem with all the suffering in the world, including my own. Abdu’l-Baha wrote that this world is a storehouse of suffering but it is not as bad for some people as for others and some people do not even seem to suffer much at all. The unequal distribution of suffering bothers me more than anything else. Sure, according to Baha’i we are supposed to be better off for our suffering, particularly in the afterlife, lots of good that does us till we get there. However, I have to admit I am a lot stronger and more spiritual because of all my suffering, so that validates what the Baha’i Faith teaches.

You have lived in some of the same places I have. I attended my first two years of college in Santa Barbara. During Christmas vacation 1970 of my first year of college I went to visit my older brother in Bellingham, WA and he had been a Baha’i for about two years. He had all the books that had been published in English and I read most of them, and two weeks later I declared. I went to grad school in Moscow Idaho in 1975-1977 and I lived in Coeur d’ Alene for about a year after that, then I moved to Salt Lake City, then to Redding, CA, and then to the Olympia, WA area, where I have been since 1988.

So I am very familiar with all your stomping grounds and I might even know some of the Baha’is you went teaching with. My mother and brother lived in Port Angeles, WA for about 20 years, so I visited there often and I have also been to Nanaimo on vacation… It sure is a small world.

I had no reason to doubt the Baha'is until I went back to S. California and a friend had "found" Jesus. I went with him to Bible studies and, for the first time, read and heard what the Bible and NT said. I tried to be a good Christian, but couldn't do it. I later found out that all my "good" Christian friends were not just "lusting", something already a sin, but were doing the deed. So I put religion on the back burner for a while.

So when you went to Bible studies you became convinced the NT was true? And then when you realized that your friends were not living up to the standard Jesus taught you were disappointed and put religion on the back burner for a while? I tend to be very outspoken about sexual matters because I consider it a big problem. I am a person with a lot of restraint and morals, so it was never a problem for me until after I got married and then I proceeded to make up for lost time. Had I read the fine print in Gleanings I might have thought twice. I do not think Baha’is understand the high standard to which we are called, even if we are married. Being married does not give us an excuse to live for the flesh. I know full well where that leads so I am grateful I am no longer in its grip. Suffice to say that I finally discovered what Baha’u’llah and Jesus said, that the heart cannot be divided between God and selfish desires. At a certain point we have to choose or else we are only nominal believers, even hypocrites.

I put Baha’i on the back burner for decades for personal reasons, some of which nobody knows about except my husband. Beginning at about age 31 I went for help and was in recovery for my childhood issues for about 15 years; counseling, 12 step programs and homeopathic treatment. During those years that and college was my focus so I did not have time for Baha’i activities and was not interested. It is not as much that I felt unworthy as that I was not interested because I am not a social butterfly. I still believed in Baha’u’llah and the way I planned to serve was to be a counselor and homeopath, but that did not work out owing to things that interfered.

Then I lost my job of many years in 2002 (I still had a job but I was demoted into another field owing to state budget cuts) and that was very traumatic, so all I did was look for jobs for eight years, until I finally got the job I have now, the best job I have ever had and will retire from. I was pretty angry at God all those years, for that and other reasons. Then I went through my real estate phase from 2008 – 2012, and having three houses and two with tenants took most of my time, that and the double digit cats we had, in addition to working full time.

It was not until January 2013 that I stumbled upon the Planet Baha’i forum and that started a whole new phase of my life. I realized I could see and socialize with Baha’is without having to go to Feasts and other activities sand I also learned a lot from those Baha’is. I then branched off onto some other forums, primarily for teaching purposes but also to socialize. I also started my own forum which was active for about a year, before I got really active on a believer/nonbeliever forum and did not have the time.

The more I learned about Baha’i from reading and talking to the Baha’is on PB, the more I knew it was the Truth from God, and that hit me alike a ton of bricks once I realized what Baha’u’llah had written, since I had not seriously read His Writings before, nor had I understood them. Suffice to say, my entire life now revolves around God and Baha’i, and my husband who is also a Baha’i (since 1964) takes care of the cats and other stuff around the house, so I can be on the computer.

One profound thing I discovered during this time was when I went to a Jewish Center. I said that Christianity, Islam and the Baha'i Faith all say they evolved or progressed from them, yet so many Jews remain steady in their own beliefs. After asking why that was, and a little discussion, he showed me a few booklets on why they don't accept Jesus as the Messiah. I still have those booklets. What I learned was something that Christians say about Baha'is, Jesus didn't fulfill the prophecies. From their pov I could clearly see what they were talking about. As with Christians, I can see why they don't accept the Baha'i Faith.

On the other forums I have posted on, there are a few Jewish posters. One is a very progressive Jew and she is agnostic and the other two are elderly men and theyare orthodox Jews. So I have learned a lot about Judaism from them. I know why they did not accept Jesus as the Messiah, because He did not fulfill most of the Torah/Tanakh prophecies, and they do not believe there were ever going to be any more prophets after Malachi so Jesus could not be a prophet either. Also, they believe the NT is just a made up storybook and there is a lot of truth to that. Abdu’l-Baha said that the Torah is more authentic than the NT and it seems that way to me, although it is still very difficult to interpret, since there are many possible meanings.

The Jews do not have a legitimate case for rejecting Baha’u’llah just because everything in their prophecies has not been fulfilled yet. Some of the prophecies were to be fulfilled when the Messiah came and during His lifetime and others were to be fulfilled during the Messianic Age, which is going to extend far into the future. So that is why they have not all been fulfilled yet.

The Jews do exactly the same thing as the Christians do; they have specific interpretations of their scriptures that are very narrow and nothing else will do. This is just so obvious, from an outsider observing them and what they post. On the forum I still post on, the Jews and Christians have been arguing for decades. They take the same scriptures and disagree about the meanings. It gets to the point of insults often and since there are no rules enforced there it gets ugly.

(Continued on next post)

 

[Trailblazer]

You, Tony, Adrian and the others try and give explanations and verses that prove otherwise, but there is too much "symbolic" interpretations going on, too many verses taken out of context, and too much rejection of the basic teachings of Christianity for me to believe this is all part of some divine plan. Like I've said, it is not the traditions and misinterpretation of Christians that is the problem. That only adds tothe problem. The problem began with the NT. Things said and implied in the NT led Christians to go in the direction they went. And, if the Baha'i Faith is correct, that direction was wrong, from the beginning.

The Baha’i Faith does not reject ANY of the teachings of Jesus, we only reject the doctrines of the Church because we believe they are false, and they were derived from misinterpretation of the Bible verses. The best way for you to understand what happened to Christianity would be for you to read Christ and Baha'u'llah and The Heart of the Gospel. The author, George Townshend, was a dignitary of the Anglican Church in Ireland before he resigned his Orders after forty years to proclaim his conviction that Christ has come again to an unheeding world in the person of Baha’u’llah.

There is no reason for me to doubt Christians thought that Jesus came back to life. The NT says he showed himself to be alive with "many" proofs. That's why, if he didn't come back to life, then those Christian writers are to blame. In those times, I can easily see how and why they would think they could get away with the claim. Who were the scientists of those days that would say that rising from the dead and ascending into the sky are impossible. But, there was plenty of religions and religious people that had stories of similar things. So the only "proof" for the resurrection is in the hearts of the people that believe the NT is the Word of God. If it didn't happen, then I agree with you, they are deluded. And even Paul in the NT said that.

I think you pretty much have this figured out. So, if those stories in the NT depict events that never happened and Christians of today are still waiting for Jesus to return because of them, don’t you consider that rather sad? Besides that, I consider it very arrogant if they continue to hang onto their beliefs when there is actual evidence that the prophecies have been fulfilled and there are other interpretations of the Bible that makes sense, besides the literal interpretation. But they have a lot of emotion invested in these beliefs so I think much of this is psychological, not intellectual. They have to believe in the resurrection and the ascension because they are attached to the same man Jesus who is depicted in the NT, and they are attached to the idea of Jesus returning, although Christians do not agree on what will happen when He returns.

For about 3 ½ years I have been posting to a Christian who believes in the NT as written, but he has been willing to discuss the Baha’i beliefs, which is rare for a Christian. I saw him on a progressive Christian forum where he had been banned for being too fundamentalist and I invited him to my forum. After that he went to various forums I was on and now he is on the only other forum I still post on. He is very nice and we have become friends, no hard feelings even though we disagree. He is that way with everyone, not arrogant, except about his beliefs. It is too bad I cannot get him to come here but he prefers a smaller group and familiar people. I sure wish you could talk to this Christian since you are not a Baha’i or a Christian, so he might listen to your perspective on the resurrection and the ascension.

 

[Milton Platt]

Many Christians believe Jesus was crucified and literally rose from the dead. An empty tomb and the appearance of Jesus before many as recorded in the gospels are cited as irrefutable proofs by conservative Christians.

Dr Bart Ehrhart, Christian and biblical scholar has argued:

'Even if we want to believe in the resurrection of Jesus, that belief is a theological belief. You can’t prove the resurrection. It’s not susceptible to historical evidence. It’s faith. Believers believe it and take it on faith, and history cannot prove it.'

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

The resurrection as part of an allegorical narrative assists us understand the eternal nature of the soul and the power of Christ's Teachings to bestow new spiritual upon those who follow Him.

So did Christ really rise from the dead and what's the evidence He did? Is there evidence to support He didn't?

With all due respect to my Christian brothers and sisters, why is Christ's Resurrection so fundamental to Christian belief?

I think that an utter lack of evidence that he did rise from the grave is the telling thing. It is remarkable that someone rose from the grave and virtually nobody took notice outside the Bible stories.

 

[CG Didymus]

I think that an utter lack of evidence that he did rise from the grave is the telling thing. It is remarkable that someone rose from the grave and virtually nobody took notice outside the Bible stories.

The big plus on the Christian argument is the empty tomb. How did the Jews and Romans let the body disappear if it is a hoax? If it is a hoax, how could those that new, keep a straight face?

Strangely, Baha'is say Jesus is dead and buried, and the resurrection stories aren't false, but true? But only symbolically. That still sounds like a hoax to me... If that is what happened.

 

[Milton Platt]

The big plus on the Christian argument is the empty tomb. How did the Jews and Romans let the body disappear if it is a hoax? If it is a hoax, how could those that new, keep a straight face?

Strangely, Baha'is say Jesus is dead and buried, and the resurrection stories aren't false, but true? But only symbolically. That still sounds like a hoax to me... If that is what happened.

There is nothing to suggest there was ever an empty tomb except the anonymous stories in the Bible.

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

There is nothing to suggest there was ever an empty tomb except the anonymous stories in the Bible.

If one was going to make up a story about resurrection, why make one up where nobody sees the actual resurrection or even sees the risen Jesus, who BTW has conveniently left town.Yet this is exactly what the Gospel of Mark says. Mark includes a number of stories that sound like they came from long before he wrote, reflecting an environment that ceased to exist about 30 years before with the Caligula incident. .Some of the stories make no sense if invented by Mark as for example the argument about the hand-washing ritual. A Christian audience would be totally lost on what that was about. But as a real argument between a strong supporter of the Written Torah who opposes the Oral Torah, and the major proponents of the Oral Torah, the Pharisees, it ring true. A totally non-Christian episode, strongly suggesting a non-Christian origin. The empty tomb story makes sense if it were something passed on from four decades earlier and reflected an actual event, i.e., an unexpectedly missing body. And so a legend is born. Mark's empty tomb account sounds like one of the more likely to be true stories.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The big plus on the Christian argument is the empty tomb. How did the Jews and Romans let the body disappear if it is a hoax? If it is a hoax, how could those that new, keep a straight face?

Strangely, Baha'is say Jesus is dead and buried, and the resurrection stories aren't false, but true? But only symbolically. That still sounds like a hoax to me... If that is what happened.

Ask the Muslims of the time of the Bab, as to what happened to the body of the Bab. They did not know either.

I remember telling you at one time only one person new where the remains had been hidden. Baha'u'llah was the one that sent people to recover the remains which are now buried on Mt Carmel.

If that one person had died, no one would have known where the remains had been hidden for safe keeping. You have to consider the authorities of the time would do anything to obliterate any trace of the New Faith.

That the fate of the remains of Jesus became unknown, was an event of the times and in no way changes that Christ lives and did not die. "It is intriguing to note that Bahá'í pilgrims who asked 'Abdu'l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi about Jesus's body say that both men stated that "the disciples hid the body of Christ by burying it under the wall of Jerusalem, and that it is now under the Church of the Holy Sepulchre." The Universal House of Justice adds that there is "nothing in the Writings of the Faith, however, explicitly confirming these statements."

You may wish to read what the Research Department issued to the Universal House of Justice on the Matter of the Resurrection - Resurrection and Return of Jesus

"At the time of Jesus the ideas of the people about the next life were very vague, whether they were Jews or pagans. Even though they may have thought of the next world as a physical location to which the spirit went, they conceived of the life there as a shadowy, unreal, pale reflection of reality. Jesus was able to teach them that the next life is as real as, indeed even more "real" than, this life; it is not surprising, therefore, that Christian tradition over the centuries should have "concretized" what were meant to be spiritual teachings.

Nowadays, when we have a clearer understanding of the nature of the physical universe, the idea of a physical body descending to the heart of the earth, or ascending beyond the stratosphere (except in a spaceship) is a ridiculous impossibility.The Bahá’í teachings make it clear, however, that even though we cannot accept these accounts as literally true, this does not lessen the truth or importance of the spiritual realities that they convey."


Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The big plus on the Christian argument is the empty tomb. How did the Jews and Romans let the body disappear if it is a hoax? If it is a hoax, how could those that new, keep a straight face?

Strangely, Baha'is say Jesus is dead and buried, and the resurrection stories aren't false, but true? But only symbolically. That still sounds like a hoax to me... If that is what happened.

CG - I had not noticed this advice before, this is important information as it changes my frame of reference significantly. It means we are still in the middle of the fulfillment of some of these Prophecies.

"A letter dated 29 November 1937 written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer identifies the fulfillment of Christ's prophecy of His return of the coming of the Kingdom of the Father with the worldwide realization of the sovereignty of Bahá'u’lláh:

Now as regards the signs that would herald the advent of the new Manifestation; The Guardian wishes you to read over very carefully Bahá'u’lláh's explanation as recorded in the Íqán". There it is made clear that what is meant by the appearance of the Son of God after the calamitous events preceding His coming is the revelation of His full glory and its recognition and acceptance by the peoples of the world, and not His physical appearance. For Bahá'u’lláh, Whose advent marks the return of the Son in the glory of the Father, has already appeared, and the signs predicted in the Gospel have not yet fully been realized. Their complete fulfillment, however, would mark the beginning of the recognition of His full station by the peoples of the world. Then and only then will His appearance be made completely manifest."

Regards Tony

 

[Milton Platt]

If one was going to make up a story about resurrection, why make one up where nobody sees the actual resurrection or even sees the risen Jesus, who BTW has conveniently left town.Yet this is exactly what the Gospel of Mark says. Mark includes a number of stories that sound like they came from long before he wrote, reflecting an environment that ceased to exist about 30 years before with the Caligula incident. .Some of the stories make no sense if invented by Mark as for example the argument about the hand-washing ritual. A Christian audience would be totally lost on what that was about. But as a real argument between a strong supporter of the Written Torah who opposes the Oral Torah, and the major proponents of the Oral Torah, the Pharisees, it ring true. A totally non-Christian episode, strongly suggesting a non-Christian origin. The empty tomb story makes sense if it were something passed on from four decades earlier and reflected an actual event, i.e., an unexpectedly missing body. And so a legend is born. Mark's empty tomb account sounds like one of the more likely to be true stories.

It was easier to make up a story where nobody saw the person, because there was no person to see. It is much more difficult to produce a person who walks around after being dead several days. As to an empty tomb, there is no way to verify the story is true. And if you grant the empty tomb, there is no way to verify how it became empty.
There was mention of Jewish rituals because the people writing the stories were Jewish, as were the many of the readers.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I think that an utter lack of evidence that he did rise from the grave is the telling thing. It is remarkable that someone rose from the grave and virtually nobody took notice outside the Bible stories.

On the other hand, maybe it wasn't news anyway since there were few ways to confirm death other than watching the body rot. I'm thinking that's why tombs were used a lot: ever heard of a resurrected person digging out of a grave? They are almost always conveniently placed in a place with an oxygen supply. I think all these resurrection miracles are misdiagnoses of death. We have to put up this stuff now, and we have many ways of telling when a person's not coming back. Also, famous resurrected people are never beheaded or something major. The cause of "death" is always vague. Jesus can go around town and telling people to wake up and they do ... but only certain people, as we see John the Baptist never gets help, does he? I wonder why?

How did the Jews and Romans let the body disappear if it is a hoax?

Jesus supposedly healed a Roman centurion's servant. I can see a scenario where the grateful centurion had a hand in it.

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

It was easier to make up a story where nobody saw the person, because there was no person to see. It is much more difficult to produce a person who walks around after being dead several days. As to an empty tomb, there is no way to verify the story is true. And if you grant the empty tomb, there is no way to verify how it became empty.
There was mention of Jewish rituals because the people writing the stories were Jewish, as were the many of the readers.

Matthew and Luke had no problem with making up post-resurrection stories. '

Matthew was all about patching up the problems he saw in Mark. The young man saying that Jesus got up and left town becomes a dramatic angel flying down from heaven who personally rolls back the stone. The angel the delivers the same 'go to Galilee' message to the women as in Mark. But guess what? Jesus has not yet gone to Galilee. He meets the women near the tomb and repeats the ‘go to Galilee’ message. So the disciples go to Galilee and see Jesus themselves.

Mark’s empty tomb and no-Jesus sighting story raises the specter of an all too obvious answer, grave robbery. Matthew tells an elaborate story about guards on the tomb to prevent exactly that, but who witness the dramatic angel revealing … an empty tomb. They get bribed to tell a grave robbery story if the governor ever found out, instead of what they saw. And the story they would not tell was what? An angel flying down from heaven rolled back the stone. Like they would ever tell that story.

An important element here is that the ‘cover story’ of grave robbery was, as Matthew tells us, being told ‘by the Jews’. If that were not actually the case, Matthew would not bring it up. It sounds as if something like Mark’s story – empty tomb, nobody sees Jesus – might just have been real. Although this is of course speculative, it would make a neat explanation for how the resurrection story got started in the first place.

Luke has his own version that differs from Matthew’s in very important aspects. But that would take us into another topic. Suffice it to say that Luke’s account comes across as intentionally contradicting Matthew. As does much of Luke’s Gospel. But that is definitely a different topic.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I think that an utter lack of evidence that he did rise from the grave is the telling thing. It is remarkable that someone rose from the grave and virtually nobody took notice outside the Bible stories.

The resurrection narrative includes an ascension through the stratosphere into outer space (heaven).

We know that outer spce is emptiness and there is no physical heaven located there.

The sacred scriptures of the great world religions are filled with allegory, metaphor, and symboism.

To take the story of the resurrection literally is to miss the more profound meaning behind the story.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Strangely, Baha'is say Jesus is dead and buried, and the resurrection stories aren't false, but true? But only symbolically. That still sounds like a hoax to me... If that is what happened.

The Baha'is can't say definitively what happened to the physical body of Christ other than it was not resurrected and did not ascend to heaven,

Remember that flesh can not inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 15:50)

The big plus on the Christian argument is the empty tomb. How did the Jews and Romans let the body disappear if it is a hoax? If it is a hoax, how could those that new, keep a straight face?

An empty tomb is not a proof of a resurrection.

 

[CG Didymus]

The Baha'is can't say definitively what happened to the physical body of Christ other than it was not resurrected and did not ascend to heaven,

Remember that flesh can not inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 15:50)



An empty tomb is not a proof of a resurrection.

Who other than Christians say the tomb was empty? Who other than Christians say Jesus was resurrected? And they say they saw him and touched the wounds and saw that he was flesh and bone. This is not a symbolic story. It could be a fabrication but not something meant to be symbolic. Therefore, the Baha'i explanation doesn't make sense to me.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Who other than Christians say the tomb was empty? Who other than Christians say Jesus was resurrected?

Baha'is. Thus all people of all World Faiths, that have accepted this explanation of Baha'u'llah also say this.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

Baha'is. Thus all people of all World Faiths, that have accepted this explanation of Baha'u'llah also say this.

Regards Tony

I think I said something about the Baha'i "symbolic" explanation. Why did you not want to include that when you quoted me? And if Baha'is believe the original tomb was empty, is only because Baha'is believe the body was taken and buried elsewhere. You do not believe in the Christian resurrection story as told in the gospels.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You do not believe in the Christian resurrection story as told in the gospels.

Of course a Baha'i does. Do you beleive a dead man buried a dead man?

Regards Tony