The Bible NETWork ~ Impacting the World for Christ one post at a time!

Since more than a year I've been studying the central issue of the resurrection. Ringing in my ears always in these studies is Paul's word to the Corinthians (1 Cor 15:17). Gary Habermas, Michael Licona, William Lane Craig are some of the scholars I've been deeply immersed in, trying to get to the crux of the matter and as a result finding arguments I need to conclude that in fact it is a historical event. The other key passage for me has been (1 Peter 3:15).

Now, I'm sure you learned people has done the same in one way or another, at one time or another:
1) Is it important for you to have arguments one could find rational which points to the resurrection?
2) If yes, what are the most convincing arguments for you?
3) Again if yes, how would you argue against alternative explanations, such as the apostles suffering from grief hallucinations, Paul strucked down by a guilt complex or something else (Acts 9:1-9), or what we have is pure legend, embellishment and myth in the New testament?

Hi rimbaud65,
I do not pretend as a learned one but a babe unto Christ for I was still struggling to acquaint Jesus in myself.
Yes, I do believed that he was resurrected from the dead as being witness and testified by the apostles 1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death, but quickened in the Spirit. 1 Cor 15:14-16 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching is in vain, and your faith is in vain also. v.15) Yea, we are found false witness, because we had testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. v.16) For if the dead raised not, then is not Christ raised.

The verse always ringing in your ears 1 Cor 15:17 And if Christ is not raised, your faith is in vain, ye are yet I your sins.

The experience of Paul in Acts 9:1-9 is the answer to what was ringing in your ears, Paul was chosen by God of our fathers, that should know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what hast seen and heard.Acts 22:14-16 and now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Romans 6:3-6 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death. v.4) Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. v.5) For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: v.6) Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not served sin.
For he that is dead is freed in sin.

All scripture are NKJV unless otherwise is indicated.

_________________
How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace, that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation, that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth! Isaiah 52:7

Let me begin then. What if we're to say that nobody can know anything about events so far ago and what we have anyway is just a small number of people who suppose to have seen the risen Jesus. The 500 in 1 Corinthians 15:6 comes with no proof at all.

Why couldn't it be such? The body was moved from the tomb because Kaifas and the others wanted to prevent a place of worship at a known location. The Temple guards took the body and threw it away somewhere. Then afterward the weird thing happened that the disciples started to think that Jesus was raised because of the empty tomb, and then the only thing they came up with was a lie to explain the vacated tomb, i.e. that the disciples stole the body, as reported in Matthew 28:13-15.

As far as the appearances one could argue that James simply was shocked at what happened and couldn't help to contact the apostolic group in Jerusalem afterwards, and quickly became a leader in Jerusalem on the strength of family ties. In grief he hallucinated, as if Jesus was still alive, in a dream or because of sleep depravation or something else. Paul was attacking the Christians but the stoning of Stephen opened his eyes and while going to Damascus he suddenly fell down, stricken by accute guilt and he just imagined Jesus on the road. These hallucinations after all are tied into a few peoples psychology so they can by no means be discarded.

In other words, as the body was missing and couldn't be produced the disciples had a free shot and started to preach about the Resurrection, which launched the Christian movement in Jerusalem.

To avoid misunderstanding here this is not the view I hold, but it might be a take on a naturalistic explanation, which covers all the known facts.

If the temple guard's hid the body, then why didn't they produce the body (or at least claim they stole it) after the disciples started claiming Jesus rose from the dead? This would have quashed their claims immediately.

_________________
Andrew Bernhardt
"Salvation costs me nothing. Discipleship costs me everything."
my homepage / my blog

My last "naturalistic post" here was as I've said just a matter of starting the topic so I don't have all the answers necessarily. As far as the body I think you could argue that the guards, possibly only two or three, simply didn't remember where they had moved it, which it not too far fetched, especially since it's not immediately afterwards either, as you know. A time lapse exist before they started to preach in the Temple and made a reaction necessary.

The other angle "(or at least claim they stole it)" is harder I assume in a theory like this. Maybe there were to embarrassed to admit it and that they still thought they could crush that movement.

You also have John Dominic Crossan's view to consider, i.e. that Jesus was never buried. The Roman soldiers had a duty to keep the crucifixions going and made sure that the body's were disposed off in common graves afterwards.

That's another theory altogether of course, but what proof do we have that Jesus in fact was buried after his crucifixion?

rimbaud wrote:
Let me begin then. What if we're to say that nobody can know anything about events so far ago and what we have anyway is just a small number of people who suppose to have seen the risen Jesus. The 500 in 1 Corinthians 15:6 comes with no proof at all.

Why couldn't it be such? The body was moved from the tomb because Kaifas and the others wanted to prevent a place of worship at a known location. The Temple guards took the body and threw it away somewhere. Then afterward the weird thing happened that the disciples started to think that Jesus was raised because of the empty tomb, and then the only thing they came up with was a lie to explain the vacated tomb, i.e. that the disciples stole the body, as reported in Matthew 28:13-15.

verbatim wrote:
Do you mean that the scripture is not enough to witness what has happen to resurrection of Christ? Are you looking for material presentation of the body of Jesus?
Would you believe written about the make-up story of the elders and chief priest in connivance with the soldiers, paying them with large money to lie and said that his disciples stole him away while we slept? And was rebutted in proceeding verse, Matthew 28:16-19 then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain were Jesus appointed them. v.17) and when he saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. v. 18) And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

rimbaud wrote:
As far as the appearances one could argue that James simply was shocked at what happened and couldn't help to contact the apostolic group in Jerusalem afterwards, and quickly became a leader in Jerusalem on the strength of family ties. In grief he hallucinated, as if Jesus was still alive, in a dream or because of sleep depravation or something else. Paul was attacking the Christians but the stoning of Stephen opened his eyes and while going to Damascus he suddenly fell down, stricken by accute guilt and he just imagined Jesus on the road. These hallucinations after all are tied into a few peoples psychology so they can by no means be discarded.

verbatim wrote:
I had answer this in my last post that Paul experience a miracle when he was call or chosen to be an apostle to the Gentiles Acts 22:14-16 & Ephesians 3:1-6

rimbaud wrote:
In other words, as the body was missing and couldn't be produced the disciples had a free shot and started to preach about the Resurrection, which launched the Christian movement in Jerusalem.

verbatim wrote:
This presumptuous statement against the scripture.

All scripture are NKJV unless otherwise is indicated.



Top

_________________
How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace, that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation, that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth! Isaiah 52:7

That's the idea that it might not be enough just to quote scripture. To anyone who doesn't share your view of scripture, as inspired and trustworthy, it usually doesn't do much. I recommend that you take a look at some of Gary Habermas's lectures and how he works from a "minimal facts approach", which is the facts shared by a great majority of scholars today. These scholars are liberals, conservatives, skeptics, atheists or whatever, but trained scholars.

A famous list of historical facts Habermas has put together is this one, which has almost unanimous support:

1. Jesus died by crucifixion.
2. He was buried.
3. His death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope.
4. The tomb was empty (the most contested).
5. The disciples had experiences which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus (the most important proof).
6. The disciples were transformed from doubters to bold proclaimers.
7. The resurrection was the central message.
8. They preached the message of Jesus’ resurrection in Jerusalem.
9. The Church was born and grew.
10. Orthodox Jews who believed in Christ made Sunday their primary day of worship.
11. James was converted to the faith when he saw the resurrected Jesus (James was a family skeptic).
12. Paul was converted to the faith (Paul was an outsider skeptic).

rimbaud,
Thank you for your recommendation and wise suggestion about the lecture of Gaby Habermas but I cannot replace my trust in Holy Scripture to book base in intelligence and wisdom of man.
Thank you.

I don't really ask you do that either, am I? Suffice is to say that you have answered my question 1 with a no, and that's just fine with me.

Really? You pick up a 100 plus pound dead body and move it somewhere and none of your military unit remembers where you put it? I find that too far fetched.

Wow, they lost their minds in 50 days. Pentecost is 50 days after the passover. They (possibly 2 or 3 Roman Guards) forgot where they carried and hid a body not even 2 months ago? It's a wonder these guys found their way into battle. Specially since the High Priest and Jews would've had their heads if they admitted to such a ruse. Not to mention Herod. Mere production of a body would've sufficed to end Christianity. I'm quite sure the Jewish leadership was quite thorough in their search.

As for the hallucination theory, where has it been documented that about 15 to 20 people all hallucinated the same thing? It has been postulated that the disciples lied. Would you give your life to and suffer death for a lie? It's not like they recieved any benefit for the lie. Quite the opposite! The hallucination point you've raised earlier I find quite laughable. Saul, who was so zealous for Judaism he killed many Christians, was so grief stricken over Stephen that he was converted to Christianity (the very cult he had learned to hate). Then, without any intervention at all, Saul of Tarsus (a notorius Christian persecutor) was easily able to join the very group (who were lying anyway) that he hated. This is not too far fetched???

How does one rationalize the rag-tag group of cowards who ran from the arrest but was so bold 50 days later that they stood against serious persecution. All for a lie or some group hallucination? Interesting that the leaders of Judaism could not find one former follower (other than Judas who was dead) who would oppose such an amazing group event.

Boy, the disciples surely made themselves look like heroes in this embellished story! Not convincing to me.

rimbaud65, I'm glad these are not your arguments but you must admit they are weak at best when the whole picture is considered.

_________________
Blessings,
Randy
Forum Code of Conduct
The Bible NETWork Doctrinal Statement
The Net Bible Online

They are not as weak as some other arguments I've seen, but sure it's not easy to make a very strong case against the Resurrection.

No, I don't think that's possible but a skeptic might argue from another angle and doesn't feel limited by Scripture, 1 Cor 15 for example. He or she could say that only one or two might have had an experience of a risen Jesus, in whichever form it came, say James and Peter. Then afterwards they simply convinced the others of it.

By the way, I enjoyed your post very much and you stated some good points.

But this ignores the accounts we have and ignores the cultural history as well.
First, how easy would it be for your sister to CONVINCE you that your grandfather was raised from the dead without any evidence? Would you believe her or think she went insane? BTW this is what happened to Thomas (John 20:24-29). Yet this one or two did not only convince an individual but a whole group that their former master, who died a gruesome death, is now up and walking around. Further, they were all so convinced that they would risk the same kind of gruesome death to proclaim they were eye-witnesses to something they really didn't see.

Second, in the NT period women were not regularly allowed to serve as witnesses in crucial matters, although they were occasionally used as witnesses in law courts on some matters. So, the fact that women are depicted in all four gospels as the earliest witnesses to the empty tomb is very significant, since their word would've been widely rejected. It seems to me that the discovery of the empty tomb by the women is likely to be true since anyone making up the story would've put the men in the main role.

Third, The disciples proclaimed the message of Jesus' resurrection in Jerusalem. This would've been a ridiculous action if the tomb were not empty. This is the place where the tomb could be easily checked and, were there a body to produce, a body would've easily been produced. The message that Jesus raised from the dead would have been impossible to justify in Jerusalem had it not really happened there. The disciples chose the worst possible location for thier proclamation, were it false.

Fourth, the early, pre-Pauline testimony in 1 Cor 15 states that Jesus died, was buried, raised, and then appeared. It in essence declares that what was placed in the ground reappeared. Not only does this sequence strongly imply an empty tomb but that many (500 according to the Biblical account) people claimed to have seen him post death and burial. We have not one single account historically of an eye-witness to Jesus' resurrection retracting thier claim. Don't you think that would've made the Jerusalem Press so-to-say?

Fifth, if Matthew is correct that the Jewish leaders spread the story that the disciples stole the body (Matt. 28:11-15), as confirmed by Justin Martyr & Tertullian, then we have "enemy" attestation for the empty tomb. Such a claim was never widely accepted, possibly because liars historically do not make good martyrs, and also because this thesis directly contradicts the fact that the disciples really believed that Jesus had appeared to them. Nonetheless the story does admit that the tomb was empty.
(Points 2-5 were taken from G.R. Habermas in an article published in The New Dictionary of Christian Apologetics Edited by Campbell-Jack & McGrath, IVP page 616. With some additions by me to the point of the thread.)

Last, my brother, it comes down to a matter of faith and that coming from the Lord. The chief priests and elders had the evidence before them (Matthew 28:11-12). Yet, with proof provided by the witness of the very guards they themselves sent. They refused to see and believe. I've often wondered at this. Perhaps it was not granted for them to believe (John 1:12-13; John 6:44-45; Philippians 1:29; & James 1:17-18).

_________________
Blessings,
Randy
Forum Code of Conduct
The Bible NETWork Doctrinal Statement
The Net Bible Online

I agree with that. Personally I don't see any reason that the Gospels could have made that up for the exact reasons you mentioned. I've heard Richard Carrier lecture in terms of it was a deliberate point to the readers that women, who were 'the last' in many respects, should now be the first. Something like that, especially in Luke. It seems to me fuzzy.

The Jerusalem factor.

Justin Martyr quotes Jewish documents in Dialogue with Trypho. Jesus is refered to as a deceiver in those documents and is clearly stated to have been crucified.The argument used against Christiany, or one of them, is an accusation that the disciples stole the body, which of course is completely unnecessary if the tomb hadn't been empty.

I'v been interested in apologetics for a long time, but when it comes to 'proof', if someone does not want to believe, he won't believe, and will always try to find some reason or excuse not to.

There is no end-all-argument intellectual proof that shows that Jesus is God in human flesh, that He was crucified and rose again. But then again, that is true of pretty much any historical fact. There are those who deny the Jewish Holocaust. It does matter how much evidence there is for it, they will always find some excuse not to believe.

Finding reasons for non-believers to believe is good, but in the end we're not the ones who convince them - the Holy Spirit that does that.

Ideally there should be no reason for someone who is saved, who is already in Christ, to seek for reasons to believe in the facts of Christ to build up his own faith. A true Christian has the Holy Spirit as an internal witness (John 14:16-17; Romans 8:16; 1 Corinthians 1:21-22; 5:5; Ephesians 1:13-14). If a believer does not have this internal witness, then he should doubt that he is truly saved (Romans 8:9).

Growth for a Christian is not so much believing basic doctrine more, but trusting and obeying Jesus more. Through this, he will see God at work in his life, which strengthens his faith (i.e. not just belief in facts but trust, dependence upon God).

_________________
Andrew Bernhardt
"Salvation costs me nothing. Discipleship costs me everything."
my homepage / my blog