Proving The Resurrection By the "Minimal Facts" Approach

[Kaninchen]

I have quoted or referenced ancient Jewish, Roman and non-biblical sources such as

Yes, Randy, from you we’ve had the usual discovery of mares’ nests whilst in pursuit of red herrings that one would expect (I’m indebted to a famous Christian apologist for that line), together with rehashes of old material and the equivalent of “99.9% of Imams think Mohammed a really good thing.”

From you we have?

I have the advantage over the people on the other board of knowing that repetitive monologue rather than dialogue - which would require you to actually listen to what other people say - is your preferred conversational mode, partly, I expect, because you seem to think that saying the same thing over and over (and more loudly) is how to deal with disagreement.

It is precisely this kind of evidence that does convince skeptics, atheists and Jews to accept Jesus as their savior. Of course, you have to actually think about it, but the testimonies of converts from all backgrounds are available in bookstores and on the web.

Tell me what you imagine “thinking about” something might entail, Randy.

 

[Randy_Carson]

CONCLUSION: JESUS ROSE FROM THE DEAD

In this thread, we have examined five “minimal facts” that are almost universally accepted by New Testament Scholars - believers and skeptics alike.

Fact 1: Jesus died by crucifixion. He was executed by experienced, professional Roman soldiers under the orders of Pontius Pilate and did not survive the crucifixion.

Fact 2: The disciples were transformed by their firm conviction that they had seen Jesus alive after the crucifixion. Many of them suffered greatly and endured martyrdom rather than deny their belief.

Fact 3: Paul, the deadly enemy of the Church, was suddenly converted and became Jesus’ greatest evangelist. Paul endured great hardships, endured much suffering, and became a martyr rather than deny his belief.

Fact 4: James, the skeptical brother who doubted Jesus for years, was suddenly converted and became the leader of Jesus’ followers in Jerusalem. James served the Christian Church valiantly, endured much suffering, and became a martyr rather than deny his belief.

Fact 5: The tomb of Jesus was found empty. And the only theory put forth by anyone for hundreds of years afterward was that initially proposed by his enemies; namely, that the disciples stole the body - a theory which provides independent enemy attestation that the tomb was empty.

Summing up, we see that the gospel narratives are well-supported by non-biblical sources. Jesus was crucified, died and was buried. Subsequently, Jesus’ own followers, his enemy, Paul, and his unbelieving brother, James, all claimed to have seen him, and these appearances transformed them all dramatically and irrevocably. These appearances, coupled with the fact that Jesus’ tomb was found empty, indicate that Jesus’ appearances were physical in nature and not mere hallucinations or visions. As a result, the theory that provides the best explanation of the five facts is the resurrection: Jesus of Nazareth rose from the dead just as he had promised.

“He is risen!” (Mk 16:6)

 

[epostle]

Indeed He is risen! Good job, Randy!

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Kaninchen:

I can sort of understand that it might be useful for things like steadying waverers or getting missing sheep back into the fold but, as a tool for taking on non-believers - not really.

Do not underestimate the power of Randy’s logic. It can do exactly what you mention, and more with the help of the Holy Spirit.

It’s true that there is no “proof” that would eliminate the necessity of Faith. But supposedly the Jews are blessed in Abraham because of his Faith. IOW, it was the singular virtue and charism of the children of Abraham. Now, even we Gentiles are blessed in Abraham because of OUR Faith, like father Abraham. Faith is something we respect as the most important of virtues, not just something for the weak or simple minded. Skepticism can be healthy of course, but as with all things, it can be taken too far.

 

[Coco82]

Good job Randy!! Some don’t need proof but if you do you’ve done a good of establishing it.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Bart Ehrman (Atheist)

"Serious historians of the early Christian movement—all of them—have spent many years preparing to be experts in their field. Just to read the ancient sources requires expertise in a range of ancient languages: Greek, Hebrew, Latin, and often Aramaic, Syriac, and Coptic, not to mention the modern languages of scholarship (for example, German and French). And that is just for starters. Expertise requires years of patiently examining ancient texts and a thorough grounding in the history and culture of Greek and Roman antiquity, the religions of the ancient Mediterranean world, both pagan and Jewish, knowledge of the history of the Christian church and the development of its social life and theology, and, well, lots of other things. It is striking that virtually everyone who has spent all the years needed to attain these qualifications is convinced that Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical figure. Again, this is not a piece of evidence, but if nothing else, it should give one pause. In the field of biology, evolution may be “just” a theory (as some politicians painfully point out), but it is the theory subscribed to, for good reason, by every real scientist in every established university in the Western world.

“Still, as is clear from the avalanche of sometimes outraged postings on all the relevant Internet sites, there is simply no way to convince conspiracy theorists that the evidence of their position is too thin to be convincing and that the evidence for the traditional view is thoroughly persuasive. Anyone who chooses to believe something contrary to evidence that an overwhelming majority of people find overwhelmingly convincing—whether it involves the fact of the Holocaust, the landing on the moon, the assassination of Presidents, or even a presidential place of birth—will not be convinced. Simply will [emphasis original] not be convinced.

“And so…I do not expect to convince anyone in that boat. What I do hope is to convince genuine seekers who really want to know how we know that Jesus did exist, as virtually every scholar of antiquity, of biblical studies, of classics, and of Christian origins in this country and, in the Western world agrees. Many of these scholars have no vested interest in the matter. As it turns out, I myself do not either. I am not a Christian, and I have no interest in promoting a Christian cause or a Christian agenda. I am an agnostic with atheist leanings, and my life and views of the world would be approximately the same whether or not Jesus existed. My beliefs would vary little. The answer to the question of Jesus’ historical existence will not make me more or less happy, content, hopeful, likable, rich, famous, or immortal.

“But as a historian, I think evidence matters. And the past matters. And for anyone to whom both evidence and the past matter, a dispassionate consideration of the case makes it quite plain: Jesus did exist. He may not have been the Jesus that you mother believes in or the Jesus of the stain-glass window or the Jesus of your least favorite televangelist or the Jesus proclaimed by the Vatican, the Southern Baptist Convention, the local megachurch, or the California Gnostic. But he did exist, and we can say a few things with relative certainty about him.” (Ehrman, Bart, Did Jesus Exist?, 5-6.)

+++

“Few of these mythicists are actually scholars trained in ancient history, religion, biblical studies or any cognate field, let alone in the ancient languages generally thought to matter for those who want to say something with any degree of authority about a Jewish teacher who (allegedly) lived in first-century Palestine. There are a couple of exceptions: of the hundreds — thousands? — of mythicists, two (to my knowledge) actually have Ph.D. credentials in relevant fields of study. But even taking these into account, there is not a single mythicist who teaches New Testament or Early Christianity or even Classics at any accredited institution of higher learning in the Western world. And it is no wonder why. These views are so extreme and so unconvincing to 99.99 percent of the real experts that anyone holding them is as likely to get a teaching job in an established department of religion as a six-day creationist is likely to land on in a bona fide department of biology.” (Bart Ehrman quoted in an article published by the Huffington Post)

 

[SonOfMan]

“But as a historian, I think evidence matters. And the past matters. And for anyone to whom both evidence and the past matter, a dispassionate consideration of the case makes it quite plain: Jesus did exist. He may not have been the Jesus that you mother believes in or the Jesus of the stain-glass window or the Jesus of your least favorite televangelist or the Jesus proclaimed by the Vatican, the Southern Baptist Convention, the local megachurch, or the California Gnostic. But he did exist, and we can say a few things with relative certainty about him.” (Ehrman, Bart, Did Jesus Exist?, 5-6.)

In other words, a historical man named Jesus existed, but he was not God.

 

[cwdlaw223]

Why do extraordinary claims (ex. claims of the supernatural) not demand extraordinary standards of proof? Even the law demands different standards of proof depending upon the severity of the subject matter (civil actions - preponderance of the evidence, fraud - clear and convincing evidence, criminal - beyond a reasonable doubt).

Not sure how the burden of proof for a supernatural even such as the physical resurrection of Christ should be under a sufficiency standard. However, I don’t believe that the standard of proof must be so high as to be logically/physically impossible (ex. video footage of the resurrection). Extraordinary proof doesn’t mean mathematical certainty in my mind though. I know it is hard to pin down the standard, but a sufficiency standard seems low given the importance of the subject matter and our life on this earth and the next.

 

[Randy_Carson]

In other words, a historical man named Jesus existed, but he was not God.

One step at a time…

Yes, he existed.

And yes, he claimed to be God. Were his claims true and how would we know?

 

[Randy_Carson]

Why do extraordinary claims (ex. claims of the supernatural) not demand extraordinary standards of proof? Even the law demands different standards of proof depending upon the severity of the subject matter (civil actions - preponderance of the evidence, fraud - clear and convincing evidence, criminal - beyond a reasonable doubt).

Not sure how the burden of proof for a supernatural even such as the physical resurrection of Christ should be under a sufficiency standard. However, I don’t believe that the standard of proof must be so high as to be logically/physically impossible (ex. video footage of the resurrection). Extraordinary proof doesn’t mean mathematical certainty in my mind though. I know it is hard to pin down the standard, but a sufficiency standard seems low given the importance of the subject matter and our life on this earth and the next.

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” – Carl Sagan

"This sounds so commonsensical, doesn’t it? But in fact it is demonstrably false. Probability theorists studying what sort of evidence it would take to establish a highly improbable event came to realize that if you just weigh the improbability of the event against the reliability of the testimony, we’d have to be skeptical of many commonly accepted claims. Rather, what’s crucial is the probability that we should have the evidence we do if the extraordinary event had not occurred. This can easily offset any improbability of the event itself.

“In the case of the resurrection of Jesus, for example, this means that we must also ask, “What is the probability of the facts of the empty tomb, the post-mortem appearances, and the origin of the disciples’ belief in Jesus’ resurrection, if the resurrection had not occurred?” It is highly, highly, highly improbable that we should have that evidence if the resurrection had not occurred.” (William Lane Craig, “Stephen Law on the Non-existence of Jesus of Nazareth”, reasonablefaith.org/stephen-law-on-the-non-existence-of-jesus-of-nazareth.).

So, no, extraordinary claims require sufficient evidence…just like any other kind of claim.

 

[Faith1960]

Fact #5: The Tomb Was Empty

The Jerusalem Factor

Jesus was publically executed in Jerusalem. His post-resurrection appearances and the empty tomb were first proclaimed there rather than in a small village in Galilee. The significance of this is that it would have been impossible for Christianity to get off the ground in Jerusalem if the body was still in the tomb. His enemies would only have to produce the body and put it on public display in order for the hoax to be shattered. There is nothing but silence in the Jewish and Roman writings regarding anyone retrieving the body of Jesus from the tomb. Celsus, the second-century critic of Christianity, would have leapt at the chance to discredit the Church if such a story or rumor was available to him. Anything but an empty tomb would have been a devastating blow to the resurrection account.

Enemy Attestation

The scriptures attest to the empty tomb, but so do Jesus’ enemies, albeit indirectly. The gospels record that the Jews claimed that Jesus’ disciples stole the body—thus admitting that they tomb was empty. This is recorded by multiple independent sources (Mt. 28:12-13, Justin Martyr, Trypho 108, Tertullian, De Spectacullis 30). The theft of the body (and thus the empty tomb) is the only opposing theory offered by Jesus’ enemies.

The Testimony of Women

The gospel message spread by the early Church hangs upon the resurrection of Jesus. As Paul noted,

1 Corinthians 15
13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.

And yet, the gospels are clear that the empty tomb was discovered not by Peter, James and John, the “pillars” of the Church but by Mary Magdalene and one or more other women. Thus, women are the primary or first witnesses of the empty tomb. In our day, this would pose no problem, but for the Jews and the Romans, this fact created enormous problems for the disciples seeking to spread the gospel message because in that culture and era, women had no legal standing whatsoever. In his work, the Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus states plainly:

But let not the testimony of women be admitted, on account of the levity and boldness of their sex, nor let servants be admitted to give testimony on account of the ignobility of their soul; since it is probable that they may not speak the truth, either out of hope of gain, or fear of punishment. (Josephus, Antiquities, 4.8.15)

Both the Talmud and the Roman historian, Suetonius, express similar negativity toward the testimony of women. As a result, the idea that the disciples concocted a fanciful story about Jesus rising from the dead and then placing that story into the mouths of women whose testimony would not be received favorably by the very audiences that the disciples were hoping to persuade is unlikely.

The empty tomb of Jesus is, therefore, well-evidenced for historical certainty. Former Oxford University church historian, William Wand writes, “All the strictly historical evidence we have is in favor of [the empty tomb], and those scholars who reject it ought to recognize that they do so on some other ground than that of scientific history.”

The empty tomb does not, by itself, provide evidence for the resurrection of Jesus because other theories may explain the cause of the empty tomb. However, taken together with the beliefs of the disciples, as well as Paul and James, that they had seen the risen Jesus, the empty tomb provides powerful support in favor of the resurrection.

When you say His disciples saw the risen Jesus, are you taking about the Twelve, or others?

 

[cwdlaw223]

Please define the word sufficient for me in the context of your post. Reasonable suspicion? Probable cause? More probable than not? Clear and convincing? Beyond a reasonable doubt?

The quote above doesn’t indicate why we use different standards in the law (and our own lives) for burdens of proof for matters that differ in degree of the subject matter. As I said, I’m not looking to create an impossible standard of proof, but a mere sufficiency standard seems very low given the burden placed upon a believer if Christ physically rose from the dead. If that happened he would be God and every knee should bow.

 

[epostle]

One step at a time…

Yes, he existed.

And yes, he claimed to be God. Were his claims true and how would we know?

I suggest that Our Lord made Himself believed by three clear techniques (in addition to having fulfilled the prophecies of the Old Testament).[11] First, He proved His Divinity by the unblemished sublimity of His life and teachings. Who knew this man to have any fault? Who ever saw Him weaken or crack under the enormous pressures of a three-year apostolate in which He had no place to “lay His head”?[12]Who had ever heard such teaching, with such precise application to each person’s thought that He was said to read hearts, with such clarity and force that His authority seemed self-evident, with such dizzying heights and startling lack of convention that His doubters first hoped He was mad, but knew at once that He could not be so.[13] In all of this Our Lord operated in a human way, but in a degree which utterly exceeded the merely human capacity, and for this-He was increasingly recognized by those who knew Him well as precisely what He claimed to be.[14] This approach, taken by Christ, may also be profitably taken by the apologist—with results the more effective because these arguments go beyond themselves to a personal attractiveness in Christ which will always assist in the apologetical task. But Christ also had a second approach or method, the method of miracles. Little need be said about this, because every apologist will already have his favorite miracles, and will have no need to read a catalogue here. It suffices to point out that Christ’s miracles were always used not for entertainment or personal profit but to confirm His claims, as when He cured the paralytic to demonstrate His power to forgive his sins, or cured the Centurion’s servant to prove the power of Faith, or multiplied the loaves to teach about the Eucharist, or changed bread and wine into His body and blood to institute the Eucharist.[15] In all, Christ’s miracles certified His teachings, including His teachings about Himself. They may still be used by apologists today.
APOLOGETICS: FORGOTTEN SCIENCE, LOST ART Jeffery Mirus, PH.D.

 

[pocaracas]

The Minimal Facts are:

1. Jesus died by crucifixion
2. Jesus’ disciples believed that He rose and appeared to them
3. Saul, the persecutor of the Church, was suddenly changed
4. James, the skeptical brother of Jesus, was suddenly changed
5. Jesus’ tomb was found to be empty

In subsequent posts, I will present the evidence in support of each of these facts.

Hmmm… where have I seen this, before?

It’s the first time I see it on this forum and Randy told me I could bring my words here.

1. Granted. Many people died by crucifixion. Apparently some preachers did too. Even the Teacher of Righteousness… who I’m not convinced wasn’t the basis for, at least, some of Jesus’ tales.
2. Not granted. Paul’s say-so isn’t evidence of that. Early church fathers are just early bearers of that message. If Jesus was the Teacher, then he had died a few more decades prior and no one alive could contest these early church fathers… Plus, they’d be reigniting a notion they knew had quite a few adherents… people were still waiting for the Teacher to return, too.
   It is a sort of recurring theme in human imagination… it happened a few centuries later, in Portugal, too: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_of_Portugal#Legend_and_legacy… there are people still “poetically” waiting for Sebastian to return.
3. Granted… but don’t many people convert from one religion to another, nowadays? How relevant can this be?
4. Not granted. James, not necessarily Jesus’ sibling, may have converted… Like the above, many people convert between different religions and out of religion… not proof of anything about Jesus, just proof of people’s ability to change religious allegiance.
5. Who knows if that’s a part of a fairy tale, or not… let’s assume not. Ok, so people found a tomb that had been left alone for over a day empty. What then?

(are you going to make me review the whole thread to find where you’ve already addressed these objections?)

 

[Randy_Carson]

1. Granted. Many people died by crucifixion. Apparently some preachers did too. Even the Teacher of Righteousness… who I’m not convinced wasn’t the basis for, at least, some of Jesus’ tales.

Great!, We agree that Jesus died by crucifixion.

1. Not granted. Paul’s say-so isn’t evidence of that. Early church fathers are just early bearers of that message. If Jesus was the Teacher, then he had died a few more decades prior and no one alive could contest these early church fathers… Plus, they’d be reigniting a notion they knew had quite a few adherents… people were still waiting for the Teacher to return, too.
   It is a sort of recurring theme in human imagination… it happened a few centuries later, in Portugal, too: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_of_Portugal#Legend_and_legacy… there are people still “poetically” waiting for Sebastian to return.

Since you do not grant that the disciples believed that Jesus appeared to them after being raised from the dead, is it your opinion that the disciples made up the story of the resurrection?

 

[pocaracas]

Great!, We agree that Jesus died by crucifixion.

It’s always good to have some common ground!

Since you do not grant that the disciples believed that Jesus appeared to them after being raised from the dead, is it your opinion that the disciples made up the story of the resurrection?

Is that a possibility?
Were there even such apostles?
The Teacher had followers… some close… many thought he would come back from the dead… apparently, that one never did.
Maybe that desire just lingered there, until someone made a pretty story around the character… one where he did come back.
The story resonates with people and they write it down.
Pass it on as true, as something that happened a few decades ago…

Then along comes some astrologer who knows when the planets were all aligned, just as the Sun was rising, and going towards (or out of) the virgo (or virgin) constellation… I looked it up and guess what?

i191.photobucket.com/albums/z226/pocaracas/NightSky_1Nov01_zpsacpvkmri.png

That image is how the night sky looked like in Jerusalem, in year 1 of our age, minus the days that had to be left out due to the switch from Julian to Gregorian calendar in the 15th (or was it 16th?) century. (yeah, I think that’s what I did way back when I took this screenshot… but I may be mis-remembering - I don’t have any other explanation for taking November 1st).
The big yellow thing is the sun rising in the Libra constellation.
Right at the left of the sun, there’s a lone bluish thing: that’s Neptune (the guys at this time didn’t know there was a Neptune out there…).
Then you have an upward trail of planets aiming at Virgo’s… errr… skirt:

• Mercury
• Venus
• Mars (the red one)
• Jupiter

Either the heavens aligned to mirror the workings down on Earth (and magic is real), or someone retroactively built a story of cosmic proportions… as was customary in the vicinity… just look at the greek mythology and how it’s all in the stars.

You want to see something crazy? What did the sky look like 33 years later?
i191.photobucket.com/albums/z226/pocaracas/NightSky_23Nov33_zpswdkvnhrr.png
It repeats, this time, minus Jupiter.

How cool is that?

And all I need to invoke here is people. People’s desires, people’s storytelling, people’s inspiration in the stars.
The apostles are not represented in the heavens… they’d be some folk very interested in forwarding the Teacher’s message - after all, it was a message of peace and forgiveness:always a good message to spread, in any age of the world.

Is there any evidence for this? well, we just have the description of the Teacher, as given in the Dead sea scrolls and here’s an interesting quote by one of the first people to analyze them (shareintl.org/archives/M_emergence/mem_bsteacher.htm):
"
In the spring of 1950 Andre Dupont-Sommer, Professor of Semitic Languages and Civilizations at the Sorbonne, presented to the academic community a paper about the Moreh ha-Zedek which caused a sensation.

“Jesus,” he claimed, “appears in many respects as an astonishing reincarnation of the Teacher of Righteousness. Like the latter, he preached penitence, poverty, humility, love of one’s neighbor, chastity… Like him, he was the Elect and the Messiah of God… Like him, he was the object of the hostility of the priests… Like him, he was condemned and put to death. Like him he pronounced judgment on Jerusalem, which was taken and destroyed by the Romans for having put him to death… Like him, he founded a Church whose adherents fervently awaited his glorious return… All these similarities – and here I only touch upon the subject – taken together constitute a very impressive whole.”

It must be emphasized that Dupont-Sommer never suggested the Teacher of Righteousness was Jesus, but called him a prototype.
"

Or, if you prefer a book with a more complete quote, here: books.google.pt/books?id=Lm5U0YSPmBUC&pg=PT130&lpg=PT130&dq=%22everything+in+the+jewish+new+covenant+heralds%22&source=bl&ots=8Ky7dXM72C&sig=vixNFH_o8Cgd2u4vuvGhUjPdx7A&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22everything%20in%20the%20jewish%20new%20covenant%20heralds%22&f=false (I can’t copy text from google books).

So… a prototype… from where an idea can grow, expand, improve…
This is why I’m not convinced that the historical Jesus was not this Teacher. Way too many similarities. Circumstantial evidence suggests that they were the same person… or one as a damn fine copycat of the other… in a time when the first had been mostly forgotten…

(images generated in neave.com/planetarium/ - if it’s wrong, then please point me to a better sky simulator)

 

[Randy_Carson]

It’s always good to have some common ground!

Is that a possibility?
Were there even such apostles?
The Teacher had followers… some close… many thought he would come back from the dead… apparently, that one never did.
Maybe that desire just lingered there, until someone made a pretty story around the character… one where he did come back.
The story resonates with people and they write it down.
Pass it on as true, as something that happened a few decades ago…

Then along comes some astrologer who knows when the planets were all aligned, just as the Sun was rising, and going towards (or out of) the virgo (or virgin) constellation… I looked it up and guess what?

i191.photobucket.com/albums/z226/pocaracas/NightSky_1Nov01_zpsacpvkmri.png

That image is how the night sky looked like in Jerusalem, in year 1 of our age, minus the days that had to be left out due to the switch from Julian to Gregorian calendar in the 15th (or was it 16th?) century. (yeah, I think that’s what I did way back when I took this screenshot… but I may be mis-remembering - I don’t have any other explanation for taking November 1st).
The big yellow thing is the sun rising in the Libra constellation.
Right at the left of the sun, there’s a lone bluish thing: that’s Neptune (the guys at this time didn’t know there was a Neptune out there…).
Then you have an upward trail of planets aiming at Virgo’s… errr… skirt:

• Mercury
• Venus
• Mars (the red one)
• Jupiter

Either the heavens aligned to mirror the workings down on Earth (and magic is real), or someone retroactively built a story of cosmic proportions… as was customary in the vicinity… just look at the greek mythology and how it’s all in the stars.

You want to see something crazy? What did the sky look like 33 years later?
i191.photobucket.com/albums/z226/pocaracas/NightSky_23Nov33_zpswdkvnhrr.png
It repeats, this time, minus Jupiter.

How cool is that?

And all I need to invoke here is people. People’s desires, people’s storytelling, people’s inspiration in the stars.
The apostles are not represented in the heavens… they’d be some folk very interested in forwarding the Teacher’s message - after all, it was a message of peace and forgiveness:always a good message to spread, in any age of the world.

Is there any evidence for this? well, we just have the description of the Teacher, as given in the Dead sea scrolls and here’s an interesting quote by one of the first people to analyze them (shareintl.org/archives/M_emergence/mem_bsteacher.htm):
"
In the spring of 1950 Andre Dupont-Sommer, Professor of Semitic Languages and Civilizations at the Sorbonne, presented to the academic community a paper about the Moreh ha-Zedek which caused a sensation.

“Jesus,” he claimed, “appears in many respects as an astonishing reincarnation of the Teacher of Righteousness. Like the latter, he preached penitence, poverty, humility, love of one’s neighbor, chastity… Like him, he was the Elect and the Messiah of God… Like him, he was the object of the hostility of the priests… Like him, he was condemned and put to death. Like him he pronounced judgment on Jerusalem, which was taken and destroyed by the Romans for having put him to death… Like him, he founded a Church whose adherents fervently awaited his glorious return… All these similarities – and here I only touch upon the subject – taken together constitute a very impressive whole.”

It must be emphasized that Dupont-Sommer never suggested the Teacher of Righteousness was Jesus, but called him a prototype.
"

Or, if you prefer a book with a more complete quote, here: books.google.pt/books?id=Lm5U0YSPmBUC&pg=PT130&lpg=PT130&dq=%22everything+in+the+jewish+new+covenant+heralds%22&source=bl&ots=8Ky7dXM72C&sig=vixNFH_o8Cgd2u4vuvGhUjPdx7A&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22everything%20in%20the%20jewish%20new%20covenant%20heralds%22&f=false (I can’t copy text from google books).

So… a prototype… from where an idea can grow, expand, improve…
This is why I’m not convinced that the historical Jesus was not this Teacher. Way too many similarities. Circumstantial evidence suggests that they were the same person… or one as a damn fine copycat of the other… in a time when the first had been mostly forgotten…

(images generated in neave.com/planetarium/ - if it’s wrong, then please point me to a better sky simulator)

poca-

If you want to discuss the Teacher of Righteousness, you should start your own thread.

THIS thread is about Jesus of Nazareth and whether he rose from the dead.

Can we stay on topic?

 

[pocaracas]

poca-

If you want to discuss the Teacher of Righteousness, you should start your own thread.

THIS thread is about Jesus of Nazareth and whether he rose from the dead.

Can we stay on topic?

It’s all connected. And we’re still in your fact 2.
The Teacher was a figure that was important enough to be immortalized in writing, prior to 50BC. If he was a real person or a fictional one is unknown… but the similarities between him and Jesus are astonishing… even you must agree.

If the Teacher was the historical Jesus, then some of your minimal facts disappear.

If, on the other hand, Jesus was a disciple of the Teacher, who then got his own disciples, then… I don’t know… too many possibilities crop up. One of them would be that the disciples mixed their teacher’s instructions with the desires he had for his own Teacher (resurrection) - and produced (possibly induced by some confusion in the people they were preaching to) the sole Jesus who gathered all these features.

Or the alleged disciples, young in the early first century AD, were already a part of this people who got the two persons mixed up and coalesced into one figure.
On comes some astrology to give Jesus a more recent birth, so as to grant these new disciples the credibility they need, like I hope to have hinted at in my previous post.
They may have believed it… people did honestly believe in the signs from the stars…

Of course, much of this is speculation - I hope I made it clear with the language I used.
What is not speculation is that the Teacher is a factor that must be considered, as he pre-dates the early church’s estimate for Jesus’ lifetime and these two figures have a non-ignorable overlap in teachings and some life’s events beyond their control.

I give you the Teacher as fact 6… well, actually, considering I didn’t grant you some of your facts, it’s fact 4.

Sometimes, I wish we could have an all-inclusive thread where we could discuss all the little bits of available information about these times in history and try to come up with a coherent view of the world, back then.


I’m sorry if this feels like a derail. It’s meant to be some extra information that is informing my non-acceptance of some of your facts.

 

[Randy_Carson]

It’s all connected. And we’re still in your fact 2.
The Teacher was a figure that was important enough to be immortalized in writing, prior to 50BC. If he was a real person or a fictional one is unknown… but the similarities between him and Jesus are astonishing… even you must agree.

If the Teacher was the historical Jesus, then some of your minimal facts disappear.

If, on the other hand, Jesus was a disciple of the Teacher, who then got his own disciples, then… I don’t know… too many possibilities crop up. One of them would be that the disciples mixed their teacher’s instructions with the desires he had for his own Teacher (resurrection) - and produced (possibly induced by some confusion in the people they were preaching to) the sole Jesus who gathered all these features.

Or the alleged disciples, young in the early first century AD, were already a part of this people who got the two persons mixed up and coalesced into one figure.
On comes some astrology to give Jesus a more recent birth, so as to grant these new disciples the credibility they need, like I hope to have hinted at in my previous post.
They may have believed it… people did honestly believe in the signs from the stars…

Of course, much of this is speculation - I hope I made it clear with the language I used.
What is not speculation is that the Teacher is a factor that must be considered, as he pre-dates the early church’s estimate for Jesus’ lifetime and these two figures have a non-ignorable overlap in teachings and some life’s events beyond their control.

I give you the Teacher as fact 6… well, actually, considering I didn’t grant you some of your facts, it’s fact 4.

Sometimes, I wish we could have an all-inclusive thread where we could discuss all the little bits of available information about these times in history and try to come up with a coherent view of the world, back then.


I’m sorry if this feels like a derail. It’s meant to be some extra information that is informing my non-acceptance of some of your facts.

Did the disciples of Jesus believe that he was raised from the dead?

 

[pocaracas]

Did the disciples of Jesus believe that he was raised from the dead?

According to the story, as told by some, yes.

But I’m questioning if these disciples weren’t conflating two tales of two people, mingling hopes and wishes… and producing a collective story where those wishes did come true.
Perhaps… Jesus is the “resurrected” Teacher…?