Origins of Resurrection Belief

[Logicman]

Just because Jesus existed doesn't mean that his story happened. The man and the myth can be two different things, just like those Pagan stories.

I was just postulating anyway. Who really knows.

We have multiple, independent sources that confirm the resurrection. You're talking about throwing ALL OF THEM under the bus to try to discredit the resurrection. That doesn't sound logical to me. But thanks for your views.

 

[Doc Doom]

None of them eyewitnesses to the resurrection? That's your spin. The Gospels and Acts confirm the disciples all saw the resurrected Jesus.

Pauls Jesus was a vision, a spirit....The very essence that none of the Gospel writers ever acknowledge any of Pauls writing is telling........Another telling enigma is the fact that the earliest Gospel was not written until 70 AD some 35 to 40 years after the events they portray. And the contradictions are numerous....None of them agree with the last words of Jesus as each give three different accounts. If all three were there surely they all heard the same thing?

Matthew claims Joseph buried Jesus but Acts climb the Jews and their overt rulers did. This is strange in itself especially considering it was the Jews who wanted him dead. Another glaring contradiction is the number of people that came to the tomb...John claims one, Matthew two and Mark three? Since Matthew and Luke copied from Mark how come Matthew only said two? Changed his story up a bit. Did the angel cause an earthquake to roll back the stone? According to Matthew yes, the rest of the Gospel writers were silent on this.

They may all confirm they saw it but the evidence does not point to that especially with the inconsistencies in the stories of each of them....

To summarize, the canonical Gospel of Mark is an anonymous book written outside of Palestine in a Gentile language to a Gentile audience sometime during or after the Jewish-Roman War. The author is hostile to Jews and to the apostles. He does not know Jewish laws or customs. He does not know the geography of Palestine. He does not like Peter. He never makes any claim to have known Peter or to have ever been to Palestine. In 130 CE some guy said he heard from another guy that the author was a secretary of Peter's.

Shredding the Gospels: Contradictions, Errors, Mistakes, Fictions by Diogenes the Cynic

 

[Logicman]

Matthew claims Joseph buried Jesus but Acts climb the Jews and their overt rulers did. This is strange in itself especially considering it was the Jews who wanted him dead. Another glaring contradiction is the number of people that came to the tomb...John claims one, Matthew two and Mark three? Since Matthew and Luke copied from Mark how come Matthew only said two? Changed his story up a bit. Did the angel cause an earthquake to roll back the stone? According to Matthew yes, the rest of the Gospel writers were silent on this.

They may all confirm they saw it but the evidence does not point to that especially with the inconsistencies in the stories of each of them....

Shredding the Gospels: Contradictions, Errors, Mistakes, Fictions by Diogenes the Cynic

You need a lot of help with your theology. So does the author of your link. You people might also invest in the concept of a Timeline to place the supposed contradictions on, at which point they disappear. So nice try.

 

[Northern Light]

We have multiple, independent sources that confirm the resurrection. You're talking about throwing ALL OF THEM under the bus to try to discredit the resurrection. That doesn't sound logical to me. But thanks for your views.

There's no concrete evidence that the resurrection happened, sorry. No disrespect to your beliefs though.

 

[jet57]

Well why don't you hop over there and start one?

Uh, nooooo, your thread is religion not philosophy. It has nothing to do with philosophy. And where's your objective peer reviewed material that validates your source for the resurrection?

 

[jet57]

Pauls Jesus was a vision, a spirit....The very essence that none of the Gospel writers ever acknowledge any of Pauls writing is telling........Another telling enigma is the fact that the earliest Gospel was not written until 70 AD some 35 to 40 years after the events they portray. And the contradictions are numerous....None of them agree with the last words of Jesus as each give three different accounts. If all three were there surely they all heard the same thing?

Matthew claims Joseph buried Jesus but Acts climb the Jews and their overt rulers did. This is strange in itself especially considering it was the Jews who wanted him dead. Another glaring contradiction is the number of people that came to the tomb...John claims one, Matthew two and Mark three? Since Matthew and Luke copied from Mark how come Matthew only said two? Changed his story up a bit. Did the angel cause an earthquake to roll back the stone? According to Matthew yes, the rest of the Gospel writers were silent on this.

They may all confirm they saw it but the evidence does not point to that especially with the inconsistencies in the stories of each of them....



Shredding the Gospels: Contradictions, Errors, Mistakes, Fictions by Diogenes the Cynic

Very well said. This should get an interesting reply.

 

[jet57]

You need a lot of help with your theology. So does the author of your link. You people might also invest in the concept of a Timeline to place the supposed contradictions on, at which point they disappear. So nice try.

No, the source uses the Bible to shred your thesis. You have no credible objective scientific sources that can co-oberate what you're trying to say is true.

Therefore you are discredited.

 

[Doc Doom]

You need a lot of help with your theology. So does the author of your link. You people might also invest in the concept of a Timeline to place the supposed contradictions on, at which point they disappear. So nice try.

Pointing out the contradictions and inconsistencies in the stories calls into question their credibility as actual eyewitnesses......Time lines are irrelevant they do not change the stories, they do not change what was said, who said it and when. You have not addressed any of them you only misdirect and try to turn the question back on me.......Remember its your thread. Its up to you to prove your point which you have not. The contradictions do not disappear, they only disappear when you do not want to see them....Denial and faith does not change the text and what was said and when....Based on what I know none of the NT writers were eyewitnesses to the event.....Could I be wrong? Yep sure could. Mark was some 40 years after the event, Matthew and Luke were even further out......Does that mean they did not witness it? No....But there is enough inconsistencies in the stories to give pause for reasonable doubt.

 

[Doc Doom]

Uh, nooooo, your thread is religion not philosophy. It has nothing to do with philosophy. And where's your objective peer reviewed material that validates your source for the resurrection?

Now that I would like to see.........

 

[Goshin]

What are the factual origins of the disciple's belief that Jesus was resurrected?

Christian scholar Dr. William Lane Craig confirmed that Dr. Gary Habermas, another New Testament scholar, recorded 1400 different scholars (both skeptics and non-skeptics alike) of whom 75% agree the tomb was empty and nearly all agree the original disciples truly believed they had seen Jesus alive / resurrected. 12 Historical Facts - Gary Habermas

The belief by the disciples was (1) sudden; (2) profound; and (3) life-changing.

Christian traditions (i.e. early church sources, Foxe's Book of Martyrs, etc.) show most of the original disciples of Jesus having been martyred for their faith in Jesus.

What is the origin of the disciple's early belief in the resurrection? If you say they copied it from the "Q" source document (a speculative and IMO a thoroughly discredited hypothesis for which there is zero manuscript evidence), then where did Q get the belief from?

If you claim the resurrection was based on mythical deities (Mithra, etc.), then you need to show compelling evidence about WHO SPECIFICALLY COPIED WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, and hopefully why. Just belching out "They copied it from the Osiris story" isn't going to cut it. You have to show some evidence and direct linkage, otherwise all you have is an unfounded hypothesis.

So, how did this belief in the resurrection ORIGINALLY all come about? What's responsible for it? The New Testament says it came about by the actual resurrection of Jesus, and that alone seems to explain the change in the disciple's thinking, beliefs, and actions. The best explanation for that - "Occam's Razor" - is, IMO, the resurrection.

I know He lives, because I talked with Him today.

 

[jet57]

Now that I would like to see.........

Yeah, Logicman will never produce any such evidence; he doesn't have it because it doesn't exist. He's been discredited so many times that it's sad to watch him do this over and over and over again with same result... hmmmm; Einstein said something about that...

What he does is come here to preach and proselytize. He gets away with it in the Religious forum, because counter opinions are not allowed there - for this very reason. But when he steps outside the box he gets gets run over by the train of reality.

 

[Manc Skipper]

The original driver for the belief in resurrection was the ability to make your population endure unutterable suffering with the promise of a wonderous afterlife.

 

[jet57]

I know He lives, because I talked with Him today.

Good, so you should be able to produce objective scientific peer reviewed sources that validate the resurrection really happened.

 

[Goshin]

Good, so you should be able to produce objective scientific peer reviewed sources that validate the resurrection really happened.

No sir.


I seriously doubt any paper would be accepted for peer review by a scientific journal on that basis. Science does not allow for the possibility of miracles.



But even so, I know He lives.

 

[jet57]

No sir.


I seriously doubt any paper would be accepted for peer review by a scientific journal on that basis. Science does not allow for the possibility of miracles.



But even so, I know He lives.

I'm very glad you feel that he lives. I too believe in a higher power. And I'm very glad to see that you admit that objective science disclaims such hyperbolic fallacy as the resurrection. Perhaps when theology and Biblical archaeology can provide hard proof of such an experience in history, then we may proceed to investigate the story. Until then however, those who ask for proof are no less of a good human being than those who say it's true.

 

[Logicman]

Pointing out the contradictions and inconsistencies in the stories calls into question their credibility as actual eyewitnesses......Time lines are irrelevant they do not change the stories, they do not change what was said, who said it and when. You have not addressed any of them you only misdirect and try to turn the question back on me.......Remember its your thread. Its up to you to prove your point which you have not. The contradictions do not disappear, they only disappear when you do not want to see them....Denial and faith does not change the text and what was said and when....Based on what I know none of the NT writers were eyewitnesses to the event.....Could I be wrong? Yep sure could. Mark was some 40 years after the event, Matthew and Luke were even further out......Does that mean they did not witness it? No....But there is enough inconsistencies in the stories to give pause for reasonable doubt.

There must be dozens and dozens of Bible-based / Christian websites that answer and demolish the alleged contradictions you're pushing.

There's also this from a Harvard professor who intensely studied what you're talking about, and he provided the following HARMONY OF THE RESURRECTION ACCOUNTS:

Greenleaf?s Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts

You're also missing the forest for the trees. ALL FOUR GOSPELS AND VARIOUS EPISTLES CONFIRM THE RESURRECTION. So when they do agree on something, you throw it under the bus anyway. Not a very good approach.

Jesus risen in all four Gospels

The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. - Matthew 28:5-6

Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. - Mark 16:6

...but the men said to them, “Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here; he has risen! - Luke 24:5-6

At this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus. 15 He asked her, “Woman, why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?” Thinking he was the gardener, she said, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him.” 16 Jesus said to her, “Mary.” - John 20:14-16

He is risen indeed.

 

[Logicman]

Yeah, Logicman will never produce any such evidence; he doesn't have it because it doesn't exist. He's been discredited so many times that it's sad to watch him do this over and over and over again with same result... hmmmm; Einstein said something about that...

What he does is come here to preach and proselytize. He gets away with it in the Religious forum, because counter opinions are not allowed there - for this very reason. But when he steps outside the box he gets gets run over by the train of reality.

Horse manure.

You're busted. Again.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...ion-belief-post1065789643.html#post1065789643

The evidence buries you.

 

[roguenuke]

Elvis died in August, 1977. There is no question that he died and was buried.

Hundreds of people spotted Elvis after his death, in some cases years after.

The only possible conclusion we can draw is that Elvis is also the Son of God, and he should be worshipped as an equal to Jesus.

Obviously, we will have to revise the Trinity. I vote we call it The Squares.

Edit: Better yet, let's call it the Pyramid Scheme. Elvis at the top of the pyramid, the other three at the bottom.

Maybe I have to sketch it out. Stay tuned.

My own Elvis sighting was the summer of 1998, not long before I went to boot camp, Socastee, SC. He was driving a station wagon as he passed us going the other direction through an intersection. I sear to god looked like Elvis could have looked like at that age without the celebrity status. He would have been in about his 50s at that time I believe, maybe younger.

 

[jet57]

Horse manure.

You're busted. Again.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philo...ion-belief-post1065789643.html#post1065789643

The evidence buries you.

Sorry, but that is objective peer reviewed scientific evidence that you present.

Please go out and find some credible source material.

 

[Doc Doom]

There must be dozens and dozens of Bible-based / Christian websites that answer and demolish the alleged contradictions you're pushing.

There's also this from a Harvard professor who intensely studied what you're talking about, and he provided the following HARMONY OF THE RESURRECTION ACCOUNTS:

Greenleaf?s Harmony of the Resurrection Accounts

You're also missing the forest for the trees. ALL FOUR GOSPELS AND VARIOUS EPISTLES CONFIRM THE RESURRECTION. So when they do agree on something, you throw it under the bus anyway. Not a very good approach.

Jesus risen in all four Gospels

The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. - Matthew 28:5-6

Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. - Mark 16:6

...but the men said to them, “Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here; he has risen! - Luke 24:5-6

At this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus. 15 He asked her, “Woman, why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?” Thinking he was the gardener, she said, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him.” 16 Jesus said to her, “Mary.” - John 20:14-16

He is risen indeed.

Resurrectioned out....Some one else chime in here....Debating walls gets old....Enjoy your fairytales dude.

 

[Logicman]

Resurrectioned out....Some one else chime in here....Debating walls gets old....Enjoy your fairytales dude.

Well, that was a scholarly rebuttal (NOT). I guess that's the best you guys can come up with. No surprise, though.

You haven't done your homework.

 

[rhinefire]

Mary Magdelin is responsible for Christianity as she spread the story she alone saw Jesus walk after his death.

 

[fmw]

You have a hypothesis there, Frank.

And WHY did they want to believe he was physically resurrected?

I'd like posters in this thread to have something more than just hypotheses. I want them to have some meat to their arguments. Do you have any?

You want something more than a hypothesis in dealing with a belief? You want more meat? It was a belief. Make what you will of it.

 

[roughdraft274]

You're also missing the forest for the trees. ALL FOUR GOSPELS AND VARIOUS EPISTLES CONFIRM THE RESURRECTION. So when they do agree on something, you throw it under the bus anyway. Not a very good approach.

Jesus risen in all four Gospels

So you're argument is that if you have 4 people testify that something happened, even if it's something that violates the natural laws of the universe, that it is true? Or most likely true?

 

[Logicman]

You want something more than a hypothesis in dealing with a belief? You want more meat? It was a belief. Make what you will of it.

In Christianity, we have more than just a belief. We have the historical record from multiple, independent sources. You have what, that you're stepping off into eternity with?