The Resurrection of Jesus Christ

[TagliatelliMonster]

How do you know they're unverified claims if you haven't read the books?

Well, let's be serious here....
If someone would actually succeed in coming up with valid evidence which would actually directly support supernatural claims of the bible.................................

Not only would it be front page news in literally every magazine, newspaper, science journal,...., but it would be THE scientific discovery of the last millenia.

The discoverer would be more famous then Newton, Darwin, Einstein and Hawking combined.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

As for the resurrection, the Gospels record the resurrection in multiple accounts.

You forgot to mention that all 4 of them actually give a different account of this supposed event. In other words, they disagree on it. The inconsistencies between these stories concerning the circumstance of that supposed events, are actually also fully within expectation of traditional "mythical legend building".

That's multiple, independent confirmations.

Still unable to grasp what "independent" means in this context, I see.

 

[Spartan]

You forgot to mention that all 4 of them actually give a different account of this supposed event. In other words, they disagree on it. The inconsistencies between these stories concerning the circumstance of that supposed events, are actually also fully within expectation of traditional "mythical legend building".

Typical novice rant.

Actually, TM, all four Gospel writers confirm the resurrection. It’s not the resurrection that’s in question in the Gospels, it’s events that have occurred AFTER the resurrection that knee-jerk skeptics question. In addition, those events are not contradictory, they’re complementary. If you put them on a timeline (How many angels were at the tomb? Answer: What time was it when the first one appeared, and then the second?), then most of the alleged contradictions disappear. Then there’s also what Cold Case Detective J. Warner Wallace calls “literary spotlighting.” One skeptic would argue that John’s Gospel only mentions Mary Magdalene at the tomb. That’s who John focused the “spotlight” on initially. But in reality, John was aware of the presence of other women at the tomb because later in the Gospel John wrote, “So she (Mary Magdalene) came running to the Simon and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, ‘They have taken the Lord out of the tomb and WE (“We”) don’t know where they have put him.’” – John 20:2

Finally, if you had done your due diligence of the Gospels, you would have known about Simon Greenleaf’s “Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts."

Greenleaf’s Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts

You're busted.

Still unable to grasp what "independent" means in this context, I see.

Flush.

 

[Spartan]

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

Start your own thread on those and see if anyone cares.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Typical novice rant.

Actually, TM, all four Gospel writers confirm the resurrection. It’s not the resurrection that’s in question in the Gospels, it’s events that have occurred AFTER the resurrection that knee-jerk skeptics question. In addition, those events are not contradictory, they’re complementary. If you put them on a timeline (How many angels were at the tomb? Answer: What time was it when the first one appeared, and then the second?), then most of the alleged contradictions disappear. Then there’s also what Cold Case Detective J. Warner Wallace calls “literary spotlighting.” One skeptic would argue that John’s Gospel only mentions Mary Magdalene at the tomb. That’s who John focused the “spotlight” on initially. But in reality, John was aware of the presence of other women at the tomb because later in the Gospel John wrote, “So she (Mary Magdalene) came running to the Simon and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, ‘They have taken the Lord out of the tomb and WE (“We”) don’t know where they have put him.’” – John 20:2

Finally, if you had done your due diligence of the Gospels, you would have known about Simon Greenleaf’s “Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts."

Greenleaf’s Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts

You're busted.



Flush.

You still don't understand, even when one of your sources point out the fact, that the Gospels are far from independent. And I need to repeat that none of the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses. The Gospel of Luke tells you that right at the start. The all tend to have been written too late for that.

The busting is a figment of your imagination, just like the mythical resurrection.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Start your own thread on those and see if anyone cares.

You missed the point. The evidence for those is on the same order as the evidence for the resurrection.

Just like the Bible none of those have extrabiblical support. Just like the Bible there were no eyewitnesses. And why Christians give so much credence to eyewitnesses is beyond me. In a court of law that is the weakest of allowed evidence. All that you do have is hearsay and that is not allowed in courts of law.

 

[firedragon]

The Resurrection of Jesus Christ is the crux of Christianity. If Christ is not risen from the dead, Christianity dies an immediate death.

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

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.

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

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!

I presume you believe that Joseph buried Jesus inside a tomb. Why do you think that the romans would allow him to be buried in that fashion?

 

[Prestor John]

Then hop out here and do it your way.

I know that the Lord Jesus Christ lives because as I have studied the scriptures and sought Him out the Holy Spirit of God has confirmed this truth to me.

He lives.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I know that the Lord Jesus Christ lives because as I have studied the scriptures and sought Him out the Holy Spirit of God has confirmed this truth to me.

He lives.

And that screams confirmation bias. If you "knew" you could make a reasoned case for his resurrection. I am betting that you merely have belief.

 

[Muffled]

Why don't you just post evidence for the supernatural?

I believe I am evidence of the supernatural.

 

[Muffled]

You just as much as admitted that you are wrong by trying to shift the burden of proof. There is no need to "bust" anything. You must find reliable evidence for your myth to begin with. There is none that has been presented here.

Htchen's razor allows us to dismiss your claims with a handwave.

By the way. what "early extra-biblical writings" support the resurrection myth? I know that there is weak extra-biblical evidence for Jesus. I know of none for the resurrection.

I believe the writings are not mythical but are the Word of God. That is more reliable than historical writings.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Typical novice rant.

Sounds to me like you're the one "ranting".

Actually, TM, all four Gospel writers confirm the resurrection.

No. All 4 claim a resurrection. And all 4 of them claim a different version of it too.

It’s not the resurrection that’s in question in the Gospels, it’s events that have occurred AFTER the resurrection that knee-jerk skeptics question. In addition, those events are not contradictory, they’re complementary.

No, they are contradictory.

Contradictions in the Resurrection Account

I'll add that even if they would match up 110%, no amount of mere words would ever be enough to support an extraordinary claim such as this one.

No amount of mere words could ever be sufficient to rationally accept claims of such an extra-ordinary nature.

Finally, if you had done your due diligence of the Gospels, you would have known about Simon Greenleaf’s “Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts."

Greenleaf’s Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts

You're busted.

I'm "busted" because I don't buy into your faith based religious claims?

Owkay.

Flush.

Whatever makes you sleep at night.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Start your own thread on those and see if anyone cares.

Nice dodge, dodger.

All those request are of the exact same merrit and explanatory value as your OP.
They are exactly analogous and indistinguishable from eachother.

If not being able to "disprove" your unfalsifiable resurection is a good enoug reason to believe it, then the exact same logic applies to each and everyone of the claims on that list.

So I guess that means you believe that mohammed flew to heaven on winged horse, that bigfoot is real, that undetectable graviton pixies regulate gravity, that leprachauns hide post of gold at the end of the rainbow, that thor slayed the frost giants, that the kraken roams the seas,...... etc etc

I can go on for quite a while. Because unfalsifiable claims such as these (and the resurrection) are infinite in number.


Sleep tight.

 

[Muffled]

Earth is called "the land of the living". If Jesus had risen from the dead, he would be alive on earth today. God will reign and rule on earth forever. There will be a resurrection, but it will be spiritual, not physical. The death of the body/soul is permanent and all of us will die.

I believe your logic is false because you assume that all living people are on earth. Jesus ascended and still lives because He has a body that does not die from old age.

I believe this is false; the prophecy is that the resurrection will be physical.

I believe that is only true up to the point of resurrection to the new body.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I know that the Lord Jesus Christ lives because as I have studied the scriptures and sought Him out the Holy Spirit of God has confirmed this truth to me.

He lives.

The ghost that never lies just told me that you are mistaken and kidding yourself.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I believe I am evidence of the supernatural.

So you are trying to support beliefs with more beliefs?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I believe the writings are not mythical but are the Word of God.

Why do you believe that?
What data do you have that makes that more likely then the bible being the mere word of humans?

[/quote]
That is more reliable than historical writings.[/QUOTE]

Because you claim it so?

 

[Muffled]

Much easier to prove that a man can walk on water, don't you think? Or, any sort of proof for anything supernatural.

I believe I have seen a man walk on water. It certainly was supernatural. However it was not a mystical event. The man was wearing pontoons on his feet. Men don't naturally wear pontoons.

 

[Skwim]

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

"Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

The four Gospels contain somewhat different accounts of the Resurrection of Jesus.

There are differing details about how many women go to the tomb—just Mary Magdalene in John, Mary along with others in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. There are different numbers of angels reported at the tomb—one in Matthew and Mark, two in Luke and John. The sequence of whom Jesus appeared to differs somewhat in the various Gospels. Then there’s the question of where Jesus appeared—in Galilee according to Matthew and Mark, or around Jerusalem according to Luke.

What should we do about these (and other) variations—or even discrepancies—between the Resurrection accounts?
.
. . .we need to be aware that while the Gospels testify to historical events, they are filtered through the memories of those who were there and those who recorded these memories in writing, possibly at second hand. The variations of detail about Jesus’s Resurrection are precisely the sort that are typically found in eyewitness accounts of real events, and suggest that there was no collusion between witnesses.[AND the fact that none of the four were written by eyewitnesses *]

This, of course, doesn’t “prove” that the Resurrection really happened; there is simply no way to demonstrate absolutely that a unique historical event occurred. There are just varying degrees of plausibility.

We should also be wary of trying to get behind the written record of the Resurrection to the “truth” of what really happened."
source​

* "The Gospel of Mark probably dates from c. AD 66–70,[12] Matthew and Luke around AD 85–90,[13] and John AD 90–110.[14] Despite the traditional ascriptions all four are anonymous, and none were written by eyewitnesses.[15]"
Source: Wikipedia

12 Perkins, Pheme (1998). "The Synoptic Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles: Telling the Christian Story". In Barton, John (ed.). The Cambridge companion to biblical interpretation. Westminster John Knox Press. ISBN 978-0-521-48593-7.

13 Reddish 2011, pp. 108, 144.

14 Lincoln, Andrew (2005). Gospel According to St John. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1441188229.

15: Reddish, Mitchell (2011). An Introduction to The Gospels. Abingdon Press. ISBN 978-1426750083.
​

And lacking any other substantiating source other than the Bible one has to accept the accounts on faith, which is hardly a sufficient basis to establish the resurrection as fact.

.

 

[sooda]

I believe I have seen a man walk on water. It certainly was supernatural. However it was not a mystical event. The man was wearing pontoons on his feet. Men don't naturally wear pontoons.

You think Jesus was wearing pontoons?