The Resurrection of Jesus Christ

[Spartan]

Jesus is not coming back. Jesus said that His work was finished here and He was no more in the world and He was going to the Father.

What does the Bible say about Jesus' second coming?

 

[Spartan]

Thing is, dear Spartan, the ball is in your corner to show the resurrection took place. We disbelievers have absolutely no responsibility to prove a negative: i.e. the resurrection never took place.

And so far Christians have failed to "prove" the resurrection ever took place.

And FYI

"THE BURDEN OF PROOF

The burden of proof is always on the person making an assertion or proposition. Shifting the burden of proof, a special case of argumentum ad ignorantium, is the fallacy of putting the burden of proof on the person who denies or questions the assertion being made. The source of the fallacy is the assumption that something is true unless proven otherwise.

The person making a negative claim cannot logically prove nonexistence. And here's why: to know that a X does not exist would require a perfect knowledge of all things (omniscience). To attain this knowledge would require simultaneous access to all parts of the world and beyond (omnipresence). Therefore, to be certain of the claim that X does not exist one would have to possess abilities that are non-existent. Obviously, mankind's limited nature precludes these special abilities. The claim that X does not exist is therefore unjustifiable. As logician Mortimer Adler has pointed out, the attempt to prove a universal negative is a self- defeating proposition. These claims are "worldwide existential negatives." They are only a small class of all possible negatives. They cannot be established by direct observation because no single human observer can cover the whole earth at one time in order to declare by personal authority that any “X” doesn't exist."
source

​

.​

All four Gospels confirm the resurrection took place. Sorry you missed it.

 

[Spartan]

There is no reliable history on what happened to the disciples either. Your faith is based upon myth piled on myth.

You haven't done your homework on that either. You can start with Foxe's Book of Martyrs.

 

[JJ50]

The people who believe the Bible to be literally true don't appear to put their brain in gear when reading that book.

 

[sooda]

What kind of Christian are you that does not believe in the miracles of Jesus, if I may ask?

I don't believe in the supernatural... and I think it was unnecessary to gild the Lily.

 

[Spartan]

The people who believe the Bible to be literally true don't appear to put their brain in gear when reading that book.

Strawman. The Bible uses numerous literary devices to portray truths.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You haven't done your homework on that either. You can start with Foxe's Book of Martyrs.

What makes you think that is reliable?

The fact is I have done my homework, you have not. You will buy into any sort of nonsense claim that seems to support your myth. Were there people that died for their beliefs? Yes. Is there any reliable history of how the first disciples died? There does not appear to be any.

You are the one that keeps making wild unsupported claims. The burden of proof is upon you. Not others.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Strawman. The Bible uses numerous literary devices to portray truths.

You don't seem to understand what a strawman is.. Try again.

 

[JJ50]

What makes you think that is reliable?

The fact is I have done my homework, you have not. You will buy into any sort of nonsense claim that seems to support your myth. Were there people that died for their beliefs? Yes. Is there any reliable history of how the first disciples died? There does not appear to be any.

You are the one that keeps making wild unsupported claims. The burden of proof is upon you. Not others.

I agree.

Extreme Muslims are ready to die for their beliefs, which are as nonsensical as those held by extreme Christians

 

[Trailblazer]

How many people right now have the true religion, the Baha'i Faith? All the rest, according to your beliefs, are following religions that have had things added in, along with being misinterpreted, plus, for Baha'is, even the stuff that was true, has become out dated. So what is that? Like in the high 90% range? Of people that are wrong

As I have said in the past, they are right about the spiritual truths that were revealed by the Prophets of their religions but the dogmas and doctrines are not part of that, they are man-made. So to the extent that they beleive in those dogmas and doctrines they are wrong.

If there is a loving God, how logical is it that he would let everyone of his true religions get screwed up? And, if you play the "it's people that messed it up", then how logical is it that an all-knowing God would let his truth get distorted and corrupted by people

If you ask that, then you also have to ask why a loving God would allow suffering in the world which is really what these messed up religions cause, suffering for everyone, would they but know that. This is not about logic, because God si not subject to being logical. God simply allows free will to run its course and eventually people wil wake up and smell the coffee. As you should know from the Bible, God is patient.

He, supposedly, created them. Well then, he created an inferior product and then blames them? And expects them to keep his laws? No, he knows they won't keep his laws. Oh, and since there is no peace, should the Jews reject Baha'u'llah also?

You can bet your bottom dollar on that, that God expects them to keep His laws, and if they don't, they are the ones who will suffer the consequences, not God. God did not create humans as an inferior product, He created humans in His Image, with the potential to reflect His Attributes.

The *reason* there is no peace is because most people have rejected Baha'u'llah.

“The One true God beareth Me witness, and His creatures will testify, that not for a moment did I allow Myself to be hidden from the eyes of men, nor did I consent to shield My person from their injury. Before the face of all men I have arisen, and bidden them fulfil My pleasure. My object is none other than the betterment of the world and the tranquillity of its peoples. The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established.This unity can never be achieved so long as the counsels which the Pen of the Most High hath revealed are suffered to pass unheeded.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 286

The Jews can keep rejecting Baha'u'llah and waiting for their Messiah, but he ain't coming.

 

[Trailblazer]

He just told you where to read. Read it. You can't keep pretending you don't know these things. Read at least the NT. It's either all true. Or, based on some true historical things with a little bit of embellishment. Or, a total fantasy with a lot of embellishment.

It says that Jesus said that he is not a ghost. He said to touch him... that he's not a ghost. That he has flesh and bone... but then he vanishes into thin air. Which makes it darn near impossible to explain. But sure makes it easy to explain it a way. And that's what Baha'is do. Baha'is explain it away. They say the story is "symbolic" But, take the time to read it. It was written as if true and historical. As if Jesus came back to life. If he did, that's is a big deal. If he didn't, then Christians are following a lie. And the disciples and the gospel writers are liars.

It is all stories. I do not have time to waste reading stories.
Now, don't ask me why God allowed these stories to hit the press because I do not know what God does what God does, not unless it was revealed by Baha'u'llah.

Written as if true and historical does not make it true and historical. It is either true and historical or not. But there is nothing that confirms it as such.

Both those options nullify the Baha'i Faith though. You can't have a Jesus that resurrected from the dead.

Nobody can *have* Jesus resurrected from the dead because elemental bodies do not come back to life after three days. This is not *about* the Baha'i Faith, it is about logic and reason and science.

But, you can't have the NT not be true.

Oh yes I can have it that way. It is just a story people told, not a true story.

So I'm sure you will stick with the Baha'i "he rose symbolically" theory.

No, I won't stick with what Abdu'l-Baha said because it is not what the NT says. I say it is just a story people told. They had an agenda but I do not know what that agenda was.

But read it. Use your logical mind. Do you really think the story is only "symbolic"? If you do, then fine.

No, I do not think it is symbolic although there is some truth to what Abdu'l-Baha said because the disciples were indeed reassured after three days.

Go ahead and believe that Jesus is dead and buried and Christians are whacked out for believing such a stupid thing as to believe Jesus came back to life.

That is basically what I think and it is sad, so very sad that so many people make such a big deal about Jesus coming back to life, but Jesus rising from the dead was necessary for their doctrine so Jesus could ascend into the clouds and return again... The problem is, there is nothing in the Bible that says that the elemental body of Jesus ascended into the clouds and there is nothing in the Bible that says Jesus will return in the same body, and that is the saddest thing of all. Jesus said His work was finished here and He was no more in the world. They just cannot face that reality but it is written in plain English.

But don't pretend that you believe in the Bible. Baha'is don't. They believe their version of an interpretation of the Bible... a symbolic one.

I do not believe the Bible is an inerrant document, no. The spiritual truths are true but the stories are fabricated.

 

[Trailblazer]

What does the Bible say about Jesus' second coming?

The Bible says that Jesus is not coming back.

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Christians completely ignore these verses because they do not want to face reality. Jesus never promised to return to earth and Jesus never said He was going to build the kingdom on earth. It is all a fabrication of the Church.

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't believe in the supernatural... and I think it was unnecessary to gild the Lily.

I agree. It was the teachings of Jesus that were necessary, not the miracles.

 

[sooda]

The Bible says that Jesus is not coming back.

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Christians completely ignore these verses because they do not want to face reality. Jesus never promised to return to earth and Jesus never said He was going to build the kingdom on earth. It is all a fabrication of the Church.

Scofield and the Dallas Theological Seminary hijacked Protestantism for political purposes.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Countless times skeptics of Christianity in these fora have been challenged to 'bust' (falsify) the resurrection as it is presented in the New Testament, etc.

And I'm sure that every time that happened, "skeptics" pointed out the blatant attempt to shift the burden of proof.

And the fact that it's logically impossible to falsify the unfalsifiable.

Every time they've been challenged they run from it, or come up with some shallow argument which they never fully defend.

That makes little sense, considering there is nothing there to run from.
Logical fallacies and unreasonable demands aren't things that one needs to run from. Instead, one only needs to point them out.

Or they run to Genesis for cover. At no time that I can recall has anyone ever busted the resurrection, although the skeptics love to present wall-to-wall THEORIES on what might have otherwise occurred. They LOVE their theories and unfounded claims. But so far they have no credible evidence to substantiate those theories.

The resurection itself, is an unfounded claim.
This is why skeptics disbelieve it.

The burden of proof is on the positive claim. In this case, it is the claim that this resurection happened. It's not upto the disbeliever to disprove it. It's upto the believer to support it.

I'm a disbeliever because people who claim the resurection happened, are unable to meet their burden proof.

As The Hitch once so elegantly stated: "what is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence".

If anyone presents an argument that a (the) resurrection violates the laws of nature / physics, then they must present replicated and peer-approved scientific studies demonstrating that God and the supernatural do not and cannot exist.

Nonsense.
It's upto people who claim the supernatural is real, to show that it actually is.
Claims aren't accepted by default until they are proven false. That's not how logic or reason works.

This thread is about the resurrection of Christ as seen in the Bible / Gospels / New Testament and early extra-biblical writings.

Cool. So will you attempt to meet the burden of proof of these claims?
Or is this thread going to be a back and forward of us trying to explain to you how the burden of proof works?

Skeptics are invited to try to falsify it, using scriptural and/or historical arguments, etc. And if they can't bust the resurrection, they should strongly reconsider their contrary opinions on the matter.

Ha, I see. So it's going to be a thread of us trying to explain to you how the burden of proof works. How unsurprising.

I think I'll start with a simple analogy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So here's a claim: an undetectable dragon is following you around everywhere you go.
Now...

Skeptics are invited to try to falsify it, using whatever arguments or evidence they see fit, etc. And if they can't bust this dragon, they should strongly reconsider their contrary opinions on the matter.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

So, let's analyse this. I'm sure you notice that there is something wrong there. So what is wrong there?

Skeptics, let's see your bad-boy arguments, and do please endeavor to come up with some EVIDENCE to back up your arguments, and not just pontificate one theory after another!

Meet your own burden of proof.
You're claiming the resurection happened. What is your evidence for it?
If you have no evidence for it, then I don't have to do anything else but to point out that you can't support your claim. That in itself is enough to disbelieve your claim.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What? You haven't done your homework AGAIN??

Clement, elder of Rome, letter to the Corinthian church (95 AD):

"The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ was sent forth from God. So then Christ is from God, and the Apostles are from Christ. Both therefore came of the will of God in the appointed order. Having therefore received a charge, and having been fully assured through the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and confirmed in the word of God with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth with the glad tidings that the kingdom of God should come. So preaching everywhere in country and town, they appointed their firstfruits, when they had proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons unto them that should believe."

Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, letter to the Trallians (110-115 AD):

"Jesus Christ who was of the race of David, who was the Son of Mary, who was truly born and ate and drank, was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate, was truly crucified and died in the sight of those in heaven and on earth and those under the earth; who moreover was truly raised from the dead, His Father having raised Him, who in the like fashion will so raise us also who believe on Him."

Ignatius, letter to the Smyrneans (110-115 AD):

"He is truly of the race of David according to the flesh, but Son of God by the Divine will and power, truly born of a virgin and baptised by John that all righteousness might be fulfilled by Him, truly nailed up in the flesh for our sakes under Pontius Pilate and Herod the tetrarch (of which fruit are we--that is, of his most blessed passion); that He might set up an ensign unto all ages through His resurrection."

"For I know and believe that He was in the flesh even after the resurrection; and when He came to Peter and his company, He said to them, 'Lay hold and handle me, and see that I am not a demon without body.' And straightway they touched him, and they believed, being joined unto His flesh and His blood. Wherefore also they despised death, nay they were found superior to death. And after His resurrection He ate with them and drank with them."

Ignatius, letter to the Magnesians (110-115 AD):

"Be ye fully persuaded concerning the birth and the passion and the resurrection, which took place in the time of the governorship of Pontius Pilate; for these things were truly and certainly done by Jesus Christ our hope."

Extra-Biblical Historical Evidence of Jesus

/facepalm

None of those are independent or even contemporary.
These are just believers expressing their beliefs. Not independent observers reporting on something with an ounce of objectivity. So essentially, what you have here is not evidence, but just other people like you repeating the claims that are in need of evidence.

How low a bar for evidence can you have, sheesh.....

And where's your evidence that supports your THEORY / CLAIM that the resurrection is a myth??? I asked you people to back up your rants with evidence? So where's the beef??

What rants? What are you talking about?
I don't remember @Subduction Zone making this claim at all.

YOU are the one in this thread making claims. YOU are claiming it happened.
Unlike what you apparantly believe, your claims are not accepted by default until someone can show otherwise.

As predicted, this entire thread is one gigantic attempt at shifting the burden of proof.
This isn't going to go anywhere.

It'll be a back and forward of people trying to talk sense into you and you responding by ignoring all explanations and just repeating your same fallacious errors over and over again.

Instead, you are required to support your claims with valid evidence.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What myth? Where's your evidence the resurrection is a myth?

Where is your evidence that any of the following are myths:
- Thor killing ice giants
- Hercules doing the 12 works
- Mohammed flying to heaven on a winged horse
- Lord Xenu nuking Mars and imprisoning the immortal undetectable Thetans on earth
- bigfoot
- the kraken
- ...

And if you don't like the extra-biblical sources I listed then tough.

You didn't post any extra-biblical sources.
People repeating the claims of the bible, isn't extra-biblical evidence.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If the Gospels are as big a fairy tale as many skeptics think, it should be easy to tear it apart. If it's false, why do so many people claim to have seen him?

For pretty much the same reason scientologists claim to be in touch with their inner Thetan. Or hindu's being in touch with whatever spirituality in their religion. Or muslims, or any other religion you don't believe in either.

Are they all liars?

Some sure are.
Others are just mistaken or delusional.

Prove it

Sure.
About 30% of people in the world are christians. I'll put you in that group, eventhough you really belong to a denomination that will likely be a LOT smaller then that 30%, but it will work just as well.

Atheism is... what? 15-20% Let's go with the upper limit and say it is even 25%

So 75% of people are theists and 30% of theists are christians. That leaves 45% of humans being non-christian theists. You necessarily disagree with all these folks, since they'll be following religions like hinduism, islam, judaism, scientology, etc. People in this last group will, just like you, claim to have had "divine experiences" with their gods.

So.... in numbers:
~2 billion people are christians, claiming christian experiences
~3 billion people are non-christian theists, claiming non-christian theists experiences.

So right out the gates, you necessarily have to assume that these 3 billion people are lying, mistaken or delusional. And that's a BILLION people MORE then those who you will claim to be in YOUR camp.

So, are all these 3 billion people "liars"?

I submit that whatever explanation you can come up with for why these 3 billion people believe and claim religious things vastly different then you, will work just as well to explain your beliefs and claims away.

And why would the disciples - so afraid and hiding after the crucifixion - become so brave and determined to teach on the bodily resurrected Jesus?

Why are muslims suicide bombers so determined that they are willing to blow themselves up?

Christianity really hasn't a monopoly on religious martyrdom, nore does it lend any credence at all to whatever stuff is being believed or whatever belief they use as motivation for their martyrdom.

Why did James - a skeptic of Jesus - become a believer? And Thomas likewise?

Why did Sinead O Connor convert to islam?

Plenty of example of people who got converted to a religion. Why is it interesting?

So, your denials don't fit in very well with the historical Gospels and Acts, etc.

Your denials of Mohammed riding a winged horse doesn't fit well with the historical Quran either.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It's not my methodology. I have the historical accounts. You have denial, and nothing else.

You have a claims in a book.

Just like muslims have claims in a book.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Once again, science has never documented or proven that God and the supernatural do not and cannot exist

Correct.

Science also never documented that Allah and winged horses do not and cannot exist and even less that mohammed did not ride one to heaven.

You are really stuck in this fallacy and you seem determined to double down on it.

Not only are you blatantly shifting the burden of proof, on top of it you are even demanding to disprove a negative.

It's as illogical, unreasonable and dishonest as it gets.

So your claim that it is impossible for someone to come back from the dead is not science-based.

It actually is.