So here are some real issues here that we have to deal with in regard to the resurrection:
(1) Are the ancient accounts trustworthy, given that we have no first-person accounts but only those written down by others decades after the events they describe?
(2) Are first-person accounts of miracles trustworthy even today, given that millions of people attest to having witnessed miracles performed by their spiritual leaders?
Do you believe the above referenced miracle stories about Sai Baba? If not, why not? What would convince you that they are true/false?
- Not all ancient accounts are trustworthy, no, but given what we know about first-century Judaism and first-century Jews, the New Testament should be remarkably trustworthy. Indeed, setting aside the miraculous claims for a moment, the New Testament is *ridiculously/] accurate regarding such things as customs, rituals, procedures, dress, dates, names, places, etc. Luke, in particular, is breathtakingly accurate:
The Evidence for Jesus (p. 126):
At the end of the last century, the classical scholar and archaeologist, Sir William Ramsay, made a remarkable volte-face. Brought up on the then fashionable view of the Acts of the Apostles as a late and quite unreliable reconstruction of Christian origins, he studied the correspondence of the records in Acts with the complex and fast-changing political scene of Greece and Asia Minor in the first century AD as he knew it from his archaeological studies. To his surprise he found Luke’s record meticulously correct
, using for instance the correct title for each local official at the precise period record, even though these titles changed from time to time so that a later writed could them right only by the use of contemporary records.
On the basis of such detailed studies, Ramsay soon concluded that Luke was in fact a well-informed historian and scrupulously careful historical writer. In the nature of the case Ramsay’s work focused on Acts rather than Luke’s gospel, since it was in Acts Luke wrote of the areas Ramsay knew, but his conclusion vindicates not only the reliability of the apostolic history, but also the claims of Luke the writer to be a responsible historian.
The New Testament (and the Old) has been vindicated time and time again from research and archeology. It was not too long ago that many of the places in the New Testament, like the Garden of Gethsemane, were considered to be figurative, poetic constructs that had no basis in reality. But now, archeology proves that they were and are real. And the goal posts have been moving with each new discovery so that doubters can cling on to their doubt.
What we do know for certain is that the apostles believed they saw the Risen Lord many, many times. Now, what’s left is to explain the origin of that belief. Many explanations have been put forward, none satisfy except that they really did see the Risen Lord. This is a topic that has been written about in many, many books, and I am slowly working my way through them.
- Like I said in another thread, we Catholics recognize that other traditions may have aspects of the truth and may, in turn, receive a share in its benefits. The supernatural in other traditions, then, is not hard for us to accept, provided the evidence. So let’s see the evidence. I think you will find that the nature of the miracles and the quality of evidence are vastly different for their claims than ours.
**What will it take for me to believe in Sai Baba’s “miracles?” How about if Sam Harris witnesses them, documents them, and verifies them? That would be pretty convincing, huh, especially since he has been railing on them from the start?
Incidentally, this is exactly what we see for the truth of Our Lady of Fatima MANY TIMES OVER. Many Sam Harris’ were there for the incredible miracle, and I think that’s downplaying just how vitriolic and violent these particular atheists were. It’s also downplaying how many of them were far more credentialed than Harris - from eye specialists, to cosmologists, to esteemed doctors and university professors, etc. Their written letters on the miracle survive to us, and I have read many of them. Not only that, you have professional Sam Harris journalists who were reporting on the events with mockery and incitement of violence up until now, who were fiercely anti-clerical and anti-religious and atheistic, who had every incentive NOT to report that it happened, but it DID.
I’m actually growing kind of impatient now. The facts are incontrovertible, and I’m almost demanding now that you convert because they’re so indisputable!**
RDaneel:
Sorry, it is merely a legend.
You’re wrong. It could not be a legend, it would have to be a deception if you still want to cling on to your doubt. Given what we know about the history, both options are bunk. It’s because of people like you that I have spent hundreds of dollars on research so I can squash the notion for others who wouldn’t otherwise know that it’s ridiculous. So many Wii games I could have bought.
*
Go, big God! 
