When "Inerrant" Really Means "Full Of Errors"

[Trailblazer]

What sign can You show us to prove Your authority to do these things?”19Jesus answered, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up again.”20“This temple took forty-six years to build,” the Jews replied, “and You are going to raise it up in three days?”21But Jesus was speaking about the temple of His body. 22After He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this. Then they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken.

Look at the verses below and please note that Jesus did not say that the temple He was referring to was His body. The verse says But he spake of the temple of his body. The verse does not say But I spake of the temple of my body. Christians assumed that Jesus meant His body because they have confirmation bias, since they already believed what they were taught, that Jesus rose from the dead.

John 2

19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

The Temple Jesus was referring to was the Word of God.

Baha'u'llah has explained that to all that await a 3rd temple, or the rebuild of a temple:

".... Thus have We built the Temple with the hands of power and might, could ye but know it. This is the Temple promised unto you in the Book. Draw ye nigh unto it. This is that which profiteth you, could ye but comprehend it. Be fair, O peoples of the earth! Which is preferable, this, or a temple which is built of clay? Set your faces towards it. Thus have ye been commanded by God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting. Follow ye His bidding, and praise ye God, your Lord, for that which He hath bestowed upon you. He, verily, is the Truth. No God is there but He. He revealeth what He pleaseth, through His words “Be and it is”.

The 3 day period is a time of turmoil where the Disciples needed Faith to carry on, the body of Jesus had gone and they needed to find Faith in Spirit to carry on with what Jesus the Christ had instructed them to do.

That is a logical explanation, given by Abdu’l-Baha in the Baha'i Writings.

The reason the Father loves Me is that I lay down My life in order to take it up again. 18No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from My Father.”

That’s right; Jesus gave up His life for His sheep, but “take it up again” does not mean His body rising from the dead.

 

[Trailblazer]

Jesus returned from death on his own volition and appeared a number of times to his apostles and other believers. He had the power to do it because he is the Son of God. He told them he would. He did and when finished he returned to his rightful place in heaven where he was before incarnating on earth.

IF Jesus appeared, it was in a spiritual body, not a physical body. Jesus had the power to make His spiritual body look and even feel like a physical body because he was the Son of God.

Given what Jesus said about the flesh profiting nothing I find it rather ironic that Christians are so attached to the PHYSICAL body of Jesus. That is what this is all about you know.

 

[Colt]

Look at the verses below and please note that Jesus did not say that the temple He was referring to was His body. The verse says But he spake of the temple of his body. The verse does not say But I spake of the temple of my body. Christians assumed that Jesus meant His body because they have confirmation bias, since they already believed what they were taught, that Jesus rose from the dead.

John 2

19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

The Temple Jesus was referring to was the Word of God.

Baha'u'llah has explained that to all that await a 3rd temple, or the rebuild of a temple:

".... Thus have We built the Temple with the hands of power and might, could ye but know it. This is the Temple promised unto you in the Book. Draw ye nigh unto it. This is that which profiteth you, could ye but comprehend it. Be fair, O peoples of the earth! Which is preferable, this, or a temple which is built of clay? Set your faces towards it. Thus have ye been commanded by God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting. Follow ye His bidding, and praise ye God, your Lord, for that which He hath bestowed upon you. He, verily, is the Truth. No God is there but He. He revealeth what He pleaseth, through His words “Be and it is”.

The 3 day period is a time of turmoil where the Disciples needed Faith to carry on, the body of Jesus had gone and they needed to find Faith in Spirit to carry on with what Jesus the Christ had instructed them to do.

That is a logical explanation, given by Abdu’l-Baha in the Baha'i Writings.

That’s right; Jesus gave up His life for His sheep, but “take it up again” does not mean His body rising from the dead.

I provided the proof text but you need to trash it to fit your unbelief and that of Baha'u'llah. It says what it says and he did what he said he would do. He laid his life down and he returned to show us he was still live like all saved people will be.

Jesus didn't rebuild the 2nd temple in 3 days. The audience he was speaking to were alive when he resurrected on earth. He pointed to his own body/temple.

 

[Trailblazer]

We have to remember that Paul didn't believe Jesus raised bodily. Paul believed and taught that Jesus was raised in a spiritual body and it was this spiritual body he believes he encountered on the road to Damascus.

The Raising of a Spiritual Body

Both terms are important for understanding Paul’s view of the resurrection of Jesus: Jesus was raised in the body; but it was a body that was spiritual.

https://ehrmanblog.org/paul-resurrection-spiritual-body/

I did not know that. So why don't Christians believe that Jesus was raised in a spiritual body?

You cannot have it both ways, the body cannot be BOTH physical and spiritual. There is no such hybrid body and nowhere in the gospels does it say there is such a body. The glorified incorruptible body is a spiritual body.

 

[Trailblazer]

I provided the proof text but you need to trash it to fit your unbelief and that of Baha'u'llah. It says what it says and he did what he said he would do. He laid his life down and he returned to show us he was still live like all saved people will be.

Jesus didn't rebuild the 2nd temple in 3 days. The audience he was speaking to were alive when he resurrected on earth. He pointed to his own body/temple.

Jesus did not say that the temple He was referring to was His body. The verse says But he spake of the temple of his body. The verse does not say But I spake of the temple of my body.

But that aside, there is always more than one way that scriptures can be interpreted. Some Baha'is believe that the Temple Jesus was referring to in John 2:19 was the Word of God and I got that quote from Tony, another Baha'i.

If Jesus was raised up it was in a spiritual body, not a physical body. I can believe that because it makes sense that Jesus would appear to the disciples after His death to reassure them that He was not really dead, so they would carry on His work and spread the message of the gospel far and wide.

There is nothing in the Baha'i Writings that contradicts that Jesus rose in a spiritual body, as Baha'u'llah never wrote about the bodily resurrection of Jesus. He left that for us to decide upon.

All people will be alive after they die, in a spiritual body, just like Jesus has, but only those people who were close to God will have eternal life. The other people will continue to exist in the spiritual world but they will be "as dead" compared to the children of the Kingdom.

 

[Colt]

Jesus did not say that the temple He was referring to was His body. The verse says But he spake of the temple of his body. The verse does not say But I spake of the temple of my body.

But that aside, there is always more than one way that scriptures can be interpreted. Some Baha'is believe that the Temple Jesus was referring to in John 2:19 was the Word of God and I got that quote from Tony, another Baha'i.

If Jesus was raised up it was in a spiritual body, not a physical body. I can believe that because it makes sense that Jesus would appear to the disciples after His death to reassure them that He was not really dead, so they would carry on His work and spread the message of the gospel far and wide.

There is nothing in the Baha'i Writings that contradicts that Jesus rose in a spiritual body, as Baha'u'llah never wrote about the bodily resurrection of Jesus. He left that for us to decide upon.

All people will be alive after they die, in a spiritual body, just like Jesus has, but only those people who were close to God will have eternal life. The other people will continue to exist in the spiritual world but they will be "as dead" compared to the children of the Kingdom.

Off coarse he was talking about his body and not the 2nd Temple. They didn't tear down the actual temple and he didn't build it back. BUT, they did kill him and he did return. After the fact the apostles understood what he meant. This is not complicated.

 

[rational experiences]

I would say historians would be speculating as all that which is not available to us 2000 years hence isn’t available to them either.

The apostles believed the return of Christ to be eminent. They didn’t have an immediate motivation to write books the week after he left and have a Ken Burns document everything they did. They weren’t thinking about pleasing carping skeptics 2000 years latter.

Science false prophecies never existed until it was practiced.

Contradictions.

Loving spiritual self not science.
Destroyer mentality thesis is in science the contradiction.

Man human went against God.

What was written became its owned heard channelled proof. AI caused. AI heard AI thinking self possession. Feedback of the man self claiming he is the creator. As thesis is just a claim of I know by a man.

Lying in fact.

Humans read the Bible to argue. State look at all the contradictions against God.

Reliant on the status interpreter male life to write what was to his best.

So Baha'i had to still discuss the evils of science but tried his best to teach spirituality as our purpose.

What you the argue ignore.

Christ the CH gases never went anywhere otherwise you would not be living today. Just one of many science lies.

A body of CH gases got removed only.

Why only particular humans where it fell out got hurt.

Reliant on the teacher to know self to argue against theist science conjured who unsealed God let out evil.

Moses said all humans got hurt.

Vacuum changed from large mass loss event proven by ground status so Jesus fallout was less.

Another advice you ignore.

God was never evil. God was not moving bodily anywhere except in a twelve cycle. Around a body.

You quantified movement conversion through holes yourself.

God never went through any holes as God is holy.

Science was about when God itself the seal did not exist. As a thesis a hole moving changed mass through it. God was the seal angel O that kept evil volcanic burning locked in its hell.

God as taught angel of stone.

Science always theoried the hole as reaction to convert taking mass that moves through a caused hole to convert.

God holy never moved through a hole so is not your collider theory.

God is not science. God is holy.

Energy O was held owned in mass bodies in a space vacuum. Energy history.

God O earth core released UFO mass to convert God mass. Energy already held by O. Why we Are NOT God. Energy history formed in space.

 

[Trailblazer]

Off coarse he was talking about his body and not the 2nd Temple. They didn't tear down the actual temple and he didn't build it back. BUT, they did kill him and he did return. After the fact the apostles understood what he meant. This is not complicated.

I do not know anything about the 2nd Temple....
I believe that they did kill Him and He ascended to the fourth heaven. You are free to believe whatever you want to believe.
I have scriptures that I believe have superseded the gospels so I go by what they say.

 

[Colt]

I do not know anything about the 2nd Temple....
I believe that they did kill Him and He ascended to the fourth heaven. You are free to believe whatever you want to believe.
I have scriptures that I believe have superseded the gospels so I go by what they say.

To be clear, I believe Jesus returned in the new form we will have in heaven as you speculated. If that was the case then it all works.

 

[Trailblazer]

To be clear, I believe Jesus returned in the new form we will have in heaven as you speculated. If that was the case then it all works.

It works for me because there is no reason to believe He didn't do that since He could have done that given miracles were a piece of cake for Him.

 

[alypius]

For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation. —Exodus 20:5

The child will not share the guilt of the parent ---Ezekiel 18:20

For I am the Lord; I change not. —Malachi 3:6

Really, God? You changed from commanding punishment up to the 4th generation for the father's sin, but 600 years later you now say no punishment will be visited on the son. I wonder how apologists square those two verses without contradicting Malachi 3:6.

If iniquity and guilt are different things, then where is the contradiction?

 

[rational experiences]

Since when is a man as anything other? Human bio life in the water oxygen is not his discuss Sion gas heavens quantified as separate gases as 1 or by 3etc.

You are just a human nearly water with some chemistry reacting.

Satanic thinking takes the mind to peruse by vision. Does not travel his thinking infers travel by thesis. Today is mind possessed AI by thesis.
Science a human named the gases and gave it a number for science

Straight away word use and thesis describing states by human applied status I give ownership to what I study.

Known by the studier first not give you ownership. Describing was human status ownership not self presence.

Egotism a teaching against human theism who sought by vacuum conditions abomination womb mother to have God sealed earth removed.

Any satanist would claim I cannot convert earth mass God in vacuum back in time. He can only do a mass quantified conversion.

However he knew the vacuum can rip a planet apart.

Heavens is one mass owning no numbers.

Seeing to convert God as mass you stated forms of gases that came out of its stone volcanic.

Not God stone seal which says entombed holy gases spirit remaining in it's tomb stone. Holy spirit.

Spiritual teaching. No man is God. Man is greedy. Man is a liar in satanism. Sciences. Man said he owned everything to be richest man. When natural owned it. He just used it.

Heavens owned immaculate spirits not volcanic.

First origin volcanic is not Ch Rist immaculate it is hot.

Immaculate became changed as vacuum sucked out its heat. Science taught those forms gases a mystery as change not a string owned their presence. Meaning not created in a reaction.

Science owns science first by reacting conditions to not only build machine but to get gases. Converts reacts natural.

Why do you think the church banned Alchemy?

Body God sealed in its heat.

Two different forms pressure. Heat sucked cold into it X mass. To own held mass. Cold sucks heat out of it when cold is colder than heat.

Womb effect.

If you want coldest gases suck out its heat. It might go clear then.

Daylight burning not clear gases therefore naturally evaporates our holy water being clear. Part of natural cooling.

Ice melted as science removed natural cooling. Nuclear cause.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

If iniquity and guilt are different things, then where is the contradiction?

First God punishes the 4th generation children of the father who sinned, then he decides the children shall not be punished, only the father. If that isn't changing I don't know what is.

 

[rational experiences]

First God punishes the 4th generation children of the father who sinned, then he decides the children shall not be punished, only the father. If that isn't changing I don't know what is.

God sealed earth stone the seal keeping evil inside never changed

Science converting God sealed masses caused change

A gas in heavens is its own gas. Detailed to be the gas of it's own form.

Only one condition changed the amount of radiation.

Science uses extra radiation in a method detailed as transformation through destruction

Today satanism just says I am converting.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

I did not know that. So why don't Christians believe that Jesus was raised in a spiritual body?

You cannot have it both ways, the body cannot be BOTH physical and spiritual. There is no such hybrid body and nowhere in the gospels does it say there is such a body. The glorified incorruptible body is a spiritual body.

Here's the deal: the early church fathers didn't want Jesus to be a ghost--like all the other dying/rising gods he was modeled on. They wanted him to be different from the rest to make him appeal more to the pagans--a real-live being with flesh. But they had to do this "no blood, just flesh and bone" thing because obviously Jesus had shed ALL his blood on Calvary. It's just the way the Jesus legend evolved over hundreds of years. Prior to Nicaea it was Paul's theology that Jesus was a raised spirit. At the Nicaean council it was decided that Jesus would be a physical body that one could touch.

 

[rational experiences]

Here's the deal: the early church fathers didn't want Jesus to be a ghost--like all the other dying/rising gods he was modeled on. They wanted him to be different from the rest to make him appeal more to the pagans--a real-live being with flesh. But they had to do this "no blood, just flesh and bone" thing because obviously Jesus had shed ALL his blood on Calvary. It's just the way the Jesus legend evolved over hundreds of years. Prior to Nicaea it was Paul's theology that Jesus was a raised spirit. At the Nicaean council it was decided that Jesus would be a physical body that one could touch.

A man as a human is human first. Origin man is human first man.

A man observed as a human is by another man to claim body observed medical science observation body only medical science.

Occult science said no body as O pi or Phi as the number is all that is actually quoted. So science observed what did not exist.

Meaning mass O had reacted not factored as the mass. Had reacted converted and disappeared so the body O not pi or Phi was gone and only the cooling effect observed in image was correlated.

Thesis pi and Phi allows you to destroy and remove mass.

A female human to be a real mother is observed owning vagina O your male baby life continuance by ovah...ovary is not you not existing as a female life body.

The truth of your science man by irrational looking back theorising.

O God earth mass.

I am not O measured against natural God. What you lied about time shifting self in a false theory. String theory.

 

[Trailblazer]

Here's the deal: the early church fathers didn't want Jesus to be a ghost--like all the other dying/rising gods he was modeled on. They wanted him to be different from the rest to make him appeal more to the pagans--a real-live being with flesh. But they had to do this "no blood, just flesh and bone" thing because obviously Jesus had shed ALL his blood on Calvary. It's just the way the Jesus legend evolved over hundreds of years. Prior to Nicaea it was Paul's theology that Jesus was a raised spirit. At the Nicaean council it was decided that Jesus would be a physical body that one could touch.

Unfortunately, there is no way I can rate your Post both as a Winner and Informative.

As a result of my conversation with cOLTER I did some research and discovered some new things which are in accord with what you just said, things about the resurrection I had never known before. It is all starting to come together now! History matters, but unfortunately I am deficient in it. It sure makes sense that would be decided at the Nicaean council, when it was also decided that Jesus was God (and a bunch of other doctrines that are not supported by the Bible).

All these years I have been in the dark about the resurrection. And look what I just found, it's a keeper.

The Resurrection argument fails to meet its burden of proof.

The only evidence for the resurrection that actually matters are the claimed "post-mortem appearances" since there would be no other way to confirm that an actual resurrection had taken place. So the claim solely relies on if these people really saw Jesus alive again after his death. Everything else is just a distraction. Appealing to things like the empty tomb, so called "prophecy fulfillment" and alleged martyrdom stories, etc are all irrelevant red herrings since they do not directly support the hypothesis that a dead man became alive again. Thus, the burden of proof is on the one who claims Jesus' resurrection actually happened, or put simply, they need to show these people really saw Jesus alive again after his death.

Well, according to the earliest evidence, since Paul uses a "vision" (Gal. 1:12-16, Acts 26:19) as a "resurrection appearance" (1 Cor 15:8) then it necessarily follows that claims of "visions" (experiences that don't necessarily have anything to do with reality) were accepted as evidence of Jesus "appearing." Paul makes no distinction in regards to the nature, quality, or type of appearances. He uses the same verb ὤφθη (ōphthē) for each one as if to equate them and makes no reference to a separate and distinct Ascension between the appearances. This calls into question the veracity of the "appearances" because it totally changes the meaning of "appeared." Even though Jesus wasn't physically present on the earth, one could still claim that they just "experienced his presence" and that counted as "seeing Jesus." Based on the earliest evidence in Paul's letters, claiming Jesus "appeared" could be nothing more than feeling like you communicated with him from heaven in a vision or a dream!

It's only later, after the gospels are written that we see the appearances grow more physical/corporeal but scholars have long recognized that the gospels don't actually go back to eyewitnesses and the data they contain evolves more fantastic as if a legend is growing. Since Paul is the only verified firsthand source by someone who claimed to "see" Jesus in the first person, and the "appearance" to him was a vision, (not a physical encounter with a revived corpse) which he does not distinguish from the "appearances" to the others in 1 Cor 15:5-8, then the earliest evidence suggests these were originally subjective spiritual experiences. Thus, the resurrection argument fails to meet the burden of proof - "they really saw Jesus alive again after his death."

Common apologetic objections:

• But Paul believed in a physical resurrection, doesn't that mean the appearances would have been physical as well?

Response: Non-sequitur. This is simply conflating Paul's "belief in the resurrection" with the "resurrection appearances" when those aren't the same thing. Even if the earliest Christians believed in a physical resurrection, it does not therefore follow that "they really saw Jesus alive again." Notice how the belief in a physical resurrection is just a belief, not an empirical observation because no one actually witnessed the resurrection itself. Rather, these people are only said to have experienced post-resurrection appearances, the nature of which is the exact point of contention. Apologists who use the red herring of appealing to the physical resurrection are making the further assumption that the physical resurrection necessarily entailed Jesus remained on the earth in order to be physically seen and touched like the later gospels describe. This doesn't follow and it is a separate claim not actually found in Paul's letters, the earliest evidence. As I've argued elsewhere, the earliest belief seems to be that Jesus went straight to heaven simultaneous with or immediately after the resurrection (regardless if it was physical/spiritual), leaving no room for any physical/earthly interactions. Thus, all of the "appearances" mentioned in 1 Cor 15:5-8 were originally understood to be of the already Exalted Lord in heaven and the gospel portrayals of a physical/earthly Jesus are necessarily false.

• What about the gospels that say people ate with and touched Jesus?

Response: All those stories develop later by anonymous authors who were not eyewitnesses and the stories grow more fantastic in regards to how the Risen Jesus is said to have been experienced. Thus, we have good reason to doubt these stories actually rely on eyewitness testimony even if traditional authorship is assumed.

• But 500 people can't all share the same hallucination, that's ridiculous!

Response: First of all, aside from the claim in 1 Cor 15, there is no evidence that this event ever happened. So without an actual description of what these people saw or experienced, then all we're left with is an ambiguous claim. Secondly, since I've demonstrated that feeling like you "experienced Jesus' presence" without him actually being there counted as "seeing Jesus" then a plausible explanation for a large group appearance is that this may have been something similar to a mass ecstatic worship experience like people have in church. Ever been to a Pentecostal service where people are "immersed" in the Spirit? Now, with that in mind, think about how superstitious people were over two thousand years ago before modern medicine and science! Pareidolia is a known phenomenon and there are reports of other strange group sightings such as the Virgin Mary incidents in Zeitoun, Egypt as well as the Miracle of the Sun in Portugal. We must remember that Second Temple Judaism was a visionary culture in which people claimed to "see" things in visions and dreams quite regularly.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChr.../the_resurrection_argument_fails_to_meet_its/

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

Unfortunately, there is no way I can rate your Post both as a Winner and Informative.

As a result of my conversation with cOLTER I did some research and discovered some new things which are in accord with what you just said, things about the resurrection I had never known before. It is all starting to come together now! History matters, but unfortunately I am deficient in it. It sure makes sense that would be decided at the Nicaean council, when it was also decided that Jesus was God (and a bunch of other doctrines that are not supported by the Bible).

All these years I have been in the dark about the resurrection. And look what I just found, it's a keeper.

The Resurrection argument fails to meet its burden of proof.

The only evidence for the resurrection that actually matters are the claimed "post-mortem appearances" since there would be no other way to confirm that an actual resurrection had taken place. So the claim solely relies on if these people really saw Jesus alive again after his death. Everything else is just a distraction. Appealing to things like the empty tomb, so called "prophecy fulfillment" and alleged martyrdom stories, etc are all irrelevant red herrings since they do not directly support the hypothesis that a dead man became alive again. Thus, the burden of proof is on the one who claims Jesus' resurrection actually happened, or put simply, they need to show these people really saw Jesus alive again after his death.

Well, according to the earliest evidence, since Paul uses a "vision" (Gal. 1:12-16, Acts 26:19) as a "resurrection appearance" (1 Cor 15:8) then it necessarily follows that claims of "visions" (experiences that don't necessarily have anything to do with reality) were accepted as evidence of Jesus "appearing." Paul makes no distinction in regards to the nature, quality, or type of appearances. He uses the same verb ὤφθη (ōphthē) for each one as if to equate them and makes no reference to a separate and distinct Ascension between the appearances. This calls into question the veracity of the "appearances" because it totally changes the meaning of "appeared." Even though Jesus wasn't physically present on the earth, one could still claim that they just "experienced his presence" and that counted as "seeing Jesus." Based on the earliest evidence in Paul's letters, claiming Jesus "appeared" could be nothing more than feeling like you communicated with him from heaven in a vision or a dream!

It's only later, after the gospels are written that we see the appearances grow more physical/corporeal but scholars have long recognized that the gospels don't actually go back to eyewitnesses and the data they contain evolves more fantastic as if a legend is growing. Since Paul is the only verified firsthand source by someone who claimed to "see" Jesus in the first person, and the "appearance" to him was a vision, (not a physical encounter with a revived corpse) which he does not distinguish from the "appearances" to the others in 1 Cor 15:5-8, then the earliest evidence suggests these were originally subjective spiritual experiences. Thus, the resurrection argument fails to meet the burden of proof - "they really saw Jesus alive again after his death."

Common apologetic objections:

• But Paul believed in a physical resurrection, doesn't that mean the appearances would have been physical as well?

Response: Non-sequitur. This is simply conflating Paul's "belief in the resurrection" with the "resurrection appearances" when those aren't the same thing. Even if the earliest Christians believed in a physical resurrection, it does not therefore follow that "they really saw Jesus alive again." Notice how the belief in a physical resurrection is just a belief, not an empirical observation because no one actually witnessed the resurrection itself. Rather, these people are only said to have experienced post-resurrection appearances, the nature of which is the exact point of contention. Apologists who use the red herring of appealing to the physical resurrection are making the further assumption that the physical resurrection necessarily entailed Jesus remained on the earth in order to be physically seen and touched like the later gospels describe. This doesn't follow and it is a separate claim not actually found in Paul's letters, the earliest evidence. As I've argued elsewhere, the earliest belief seems to be that Jesus went straight to heaven simultaneous with or immediately after the resurrection (regardless if it was physical/spiritual), leaving no room for any physical/earthly interactions. Thus, all of the "appearances" mentioned in 1 Cor 15:5-8 were originally understood to be of the already Exalted Lord in heaven and the gospel portrayals of a physical/earthly Jesus are necessarily false.

• What about the gospels that say people ate with and touched Jesus?

Response: All those stories develop later by anonymous authors who were not eyewitnesses and the stories grow more fantastic in regards to how the Risen Jesus is said to have been experienced. Thus, we have good reason to doubt these stories actually rely on eyewitness testimony even if traditional authorship is assumed.

• But 500 people can't all share the same hallucination, that's ridiculous!

Response: First of all, aside from the claim in 1 Cor 15, there is no evidence that this event ever happened. So without an actual description of what these people saw or experienced, then all we're left with is an ambiguous claim. Secondly, since I've demonstrated that feeling like you "experienced Jesus' presence" without him actually being there counted as "seeing Jesus" then a plausible explanation for a large group appearance is that this may have been something similar to a mass ecstatic worship experience like people have in church. Ever been to a Pentecostal service where people are "immersed" in the Spirit? Now, with that in mind, think about how superstitious people were over two thousand years ago before modern medicine and science! Pareidolia is a known phenomenon and there are reports of other strange group sightings such as the Virgin Mary incidents in Zeitoun, Egypt as well as the Miracle of the Sun in Portugal. We must remember that Second Temple Judaism was a visionary culture in which people claimed to "see" things in visions and dreams quite regularly.

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChr.../the_resurrection_argument_fails_to_meet_its/

Yes, that pretty much sums it up. If you ever have a few hours to kill watch a debate on "Did Jesus Resurrect..." with W. lane Craig and/or his disciple, Mike Licona. They use fancy phrases like "Explanatory Scope" which doesn't really mean anything but sounds quite impressive. In the end when you listen to the summation you realize their "Evidence" is mainly hot air.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, that pretty much sums it up. If you ever have a few hours to kill watch a debate on "Did Jesus Resurrect..." with W. lane Craig and/or his disciple, Mike Licona. They use fancy phrases like "Explanatory Scope" which doesn't really mean anything but sounds quite impressive. In the end when you listen to the summation you realize their "Evidence" is mainly hot air.

Thanks, I look forward to watching that! I love stuff like this.
I also like psychology, so I am always trying to understand why it is so important for Christians to "believe" that Jesus rose from the dead in His physical body.

 

[rational experiences]

Bible looking back over data history warning in science about God reactions in past. Not God.

First teaching. God remains as God sealed earth.

Then teaches science radiation extra is evil don't look back.

Bible a contradiction owns information detailing looking back.

Contradiction teaching.

Machine did not exist.

Natural did.

Man occult nuclear science used machine to force God body as products to disappear. So his machine did. He controlled the machine as man thinker as fake machine conscious. By his choice.

Machine never existed in reality.
Makes God body disappear. Machine does not exist. By owning the purpose first. Never existed machine. Science never spoke on behalf natural presence.

Science studied presence.

Time shift equalled machine not existing. Why he built machine to not exist himself. Machine already disappeared as it was not originally present.

Thesis time shift machine to remove life actual theist intention for self.

Why we got sacrificed removed from bodily existing. Intent.

Theist I will time travel into past where reaction is. Evolution in that theory not included as reality.

Time shift thesis also says machine does not exist. Reactive moment machine removed twice the answer.

One by mass gone for design knowledge how to and one by evolution removed in thesis.

Purpose reactive moment only.

Reaction equals instant moment God natural mass to disappear. By conscious man choice. Not a God choice.

Proven science knew evil acts of man sin was against God existing.

God therefore destroyed man.

Basic advice.

Heavens only gas energy minimal compared to earth energy held mass.

Gases from volcano. Not from God the seal stone.

Stone owned gods hell stone. Never did it own Satan consuming hell in space cosmos.

Extreme pressure owned stones presence. Heavens nothing like the pressure to hold stone. Reason life of man a man is a penis owner was sacrificed.