The Resurrection of Jesus Christ

[Spartan]

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!

 

[sooda]

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!

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

 

[Spartan]

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

You're not following the rules of this thread. You have to present your arguments and evidence that busts the resurrection.

 

[Subduction Zone]

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!

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.

 

[susanblange]

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!

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.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You're not following the rules of this thread. You have to present your arguments and evidence that busts the resurrection.

You earlier made a remark about a "formal education". If you had a formal education you would recognize where he burden of proof lies.

By your weak standards Islam is true since you cannot "prove that Mohammad did not ride to the Moon on a magical winged horse:.

 

[sooda]

You're not following the rules of this thread. You have to present your arguments and evidence that busts the resurrection.

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

 

[Spartan]

You earlier made a remark about a "formal education". If you had a formal education you would recognize where he burden of proof lies.

By your weak standards Islam is true since you cannot "prove that Mohammad did not ride to the Moon on a magical winged horse:.

Flush.

 

[Spartan]

Earth is called "the land of the living". If Jesus had risen from the dead, he would be alive on earth today.

We're talking about the Bible, Susan, where there is also a heaven. Plus, there's the Spirit of Christ as seen in the epistles.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Flush.

Sorry, you can't "flush" the truth. The fact is that you believe a myth that is so weak you demand others to try to "bust it" instead of finding the actual evidence that supports your beliefs.

Shifting the burden of proof is a tacit admission that one is wrong.

After all you were the one that brought up the "formal education" claim. A person with a formal education understands the burden of proof.

 

[leov]

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!

Resurrection according to St. Paul:
42So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; 43it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45So also it is written, “The first MAN, Adam, BECAME A LIVING SOUL.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. 47The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven. 48As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. 49Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly.

 

[Spartan]

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.

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

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??

 

[Spartan]

Resurrection according to St. Paul:
42So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown a perishable body, it is raised an imperishable body; 43it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45So also it is written, “The first MAN, Adam, BECAME A LIVING SOUL.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. 47The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven. 48As is the earthy, so also are those who are earthy; and as is the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. 49Just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly.

That above is about the resurrection of the dead.

Paul on the Resurrection of Jesus Christ: "Paul starts out in 1 Corinthians 15 by reminding them that Jesus did die and was raised from the dead for the salvation of man. This is the foundation of the gospel. Next Paul states that there were witnesses of the resurrection of Jesus, not only by His disciples but by more than 500 people. Paul wrote 1 Corinthians approximately 20 years after Jesus' death and resurrection. It would be very hard to argue or dispute that many credible witnesses." What Does Paul Say About the Resurrection of Jesus

 

[leov]

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

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??

How all those people above related to:
23“But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. "

 

[Spartan]

Sorry, you can't "flush" the truth. The fact is that you believe a myth that is so weak you demand others to try to "bust it" instead of finding the actual evidence that supports your beliefs.

Shifting the burden of proof is a tacit admission that one is wrong.

After all you were the one that brought up the "formal education" claim. A person with a formal education understands the burden of proof.

Where's your evidence the resurrection is a myth? Back up your rants, sport.

 

[Subduction Zone]

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."

Hardly "extra-biblical". It appears that you do not understand what the term means. He is commenting about the Bible and its myths.

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

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??

And just more of the same. Seriously is this the best that you can do? People commenting about the myths of the Bible is not "extra-biblical" support. That means secular support. Not comments by Kool-Aid drinkers.

And I see that you tried to sneak in a reference to a topic that is not even being debated. No one has proposed that Jesus was not a real person (though there does appear to be more and more support for that concept, but that is for another thread). We are discussing the resurrection myth. This is your thread, you should know that.

I will ask once again, what is the extra-biblical evidence for the resurrection. Relying on writing who get their beliefs from the Bible is not extra-biblical.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Where's your evidence the resurrection is a myth? Back up your rants, sport.

None is needed. Where is your evidence that Paul Bunyan is a myth? If you want "evidence" then the fact that people do not come up from the dead is good enough. Let me remind you, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You can't seem to find anything above the level of extremely weak evidence for your claims.

 

[Spartan]

Hardly "extra-biblical". It appears that you do not understand what the term means. He is commenting about the Bible and its myths.

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

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

 

[leov]

Where's your evidence the resurrection is a myth? Back up your rants, sport.

It an allegory that means transforming from natural -soul nature to higher spiritual nature.

 

[Spartan]

None is needed.

Yeah it is needed. You don't a free pass to run your flea-bitten dogs around the arena without some evidence to back them up.

Let me remind you, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

That's your spin. The preponderance of the evidence is the normal standard. And the weight of the evidence FOR the resurrection far outweighs the nothing you've provided so far.