Proving The Resurrection By the "Minimal Facts" Approach

[PRmerger]

40 decades?!!

Yes. Another way to say it is: 400 years.

So until there was a formal canon of the Bible, which didn’t occur for 400 years, are you proposing that there were no Christians?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_Hippo

Knock yourself out:
travel.cnn.com/tokyo/visit/did-jesus-christ-live-and-die-northern-japan-065383

Ohhhh, how I love to play the atheist to the atheist!

Firstly, do you have any first-hand, contemporaneous accounts written by witnesses of Jesus being in Japan?

Do you have anything Jesus wrote saying he was in Japan?

 

[pocaracas]

Oh. Wow.

Let me repost, so you can re-read what the antecedent was for “that”, when I asked “Do humans do that?”

Read the sentence right before I asked “Do humans do that?”

That’s what is the referent.

Actually, since I’m feeling full of bonhomie today I’ll just spell it out for you:

Do humans who are lying withstand terrible pain and torture without recanting, sticking to their story, when simply saying, “Ok! I lied!” will relieve them of this horrific torture they’re being tormented with?

Do humans do that?

Let me see… yes!
Particularly, under torture, YES!

Look what the CIA says about torture (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Intelligence_Committee_report_on_CIA_torture#Findings_listed_in_the_report):
“The CIA’s use of its enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation from detainees.”
“The interrogations of CIA detainees were brutal and far worse than the CIA represented to policymakers and others.”
“CIA detainees were subjected to coercive interrogation techniques that had not been approved by the Department of Justice or had not been authorized by CIA Headquarters.”
“Several prisoners almost died and became completely unresponsive or nearly drowned during waterboarding.”

Oh… and this one is a beauty (thestar.com/news/world/2014/12/09/terror_interrogations_more_brutal_less_effective_than_cia_claimed_report.html):
“In another case, Mohammed was waterboarded because of a CIA analyst’s mistake. The analyst misheard intelligence alleging Al Qaeda was recruiting black Muslims in the U.S. After two days of waterboarding, Mohammed fabricated a story about seeking out black Muslims in Montana, the report says.”

Montana?! Black Muslims in Montana?!

Yes, people lie and may even exaggerate their claims under torture.

Go figure, huh?

If you have nothing to lose… in for a penny, in for a pound! (there’s even a popular saying that conveys this feeling, amazing!)

 

[pocaracas]

Yes. Another way to say it is: 400 years.

So until there was a formal canon of the Bible, which didn’t occur for 400 years, are you proposing that there were no Christians?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_Hippo

I thought you wanted to go for the first few decades after Jesus, when the gospels are typically agreed to have been written (60 ~ 100 AD).
We can agree that, by this time, christians existed and that writings became necessary to convey the correct message in several places at the same time.
For many heresies also abounded…

Ohhhh, how I love to play the atheist to the atheist!

Firstly, do you have any first-hand, contemporaneous accounts written by witnesses of Jesus being in Japan?

Do you have anything Jesus wrote saying he was in Japan?

Lol. You shouldn’t have bothered…
What did I say about this, when I first introduced it?
Here, let me refresh your memory:

But we had Jesus, not the teacher… Jesus, according to a plaque in Japan went travelling and died there. (I know this is a silly story, but it’s still more believable than "rose from the dead)

Can I have some popcorn, too?

 

[Faith1960]

https://imgur.com/jFi4HM3

Is that a picture of you?

 

[Bradski]

But your “minimal facts” are missing at least one other minimal fact: that after the Resurrection the Apostles were willing to die in pretty horrible ways (and most did die in horrible ways) for Christ and Christianity.

I think that Randy didn’t include it because it can be so easily refuted.

In the first instance, there are next to no verifiable accounts of any of the apostles’ deaths. It’s all put down to tradition. Lots of ‘it is said’ and ‘tradition has it’ and ‘there are various reports’ etc. Any serious investigation into the veracity of Christianity would discount these out of hand.

Secondly, even if they were true, it does not mean that what they possibly died for was true. What you are saying is that if someone dies for their belief then that belief must be true. Which is, obviously, nonsensical.

Beliefs cause a lot of people to sacrifice themselves. They immolate themselves. They blow themselves and others up. They fly planes into buildings. We even had a sixteen year old kid in Sydney shoot a cop last week and then had himself killed for his beliefs.

Your argument would be that whatever he believed in that caused him to do that must have had some validity.

 

[Peter_Plato]

I think that Randy didn’t include it because it can be so easily refuted.

In the first instance, there are next to no verifiable accounts of any of the apostles’ deaths. It’s all put down to tradition. Lots of ‘it is said’ and ‘tradition has it’ and ‘there are various reports’ etc. Any serious investigation into the veracity of Christianity would discount these out of hand.

Secondly, even if they were true, it does not mean that what they possibly died for was true. What you are saying is that if someone dies for their belief then that belief must be true. Which is, obviously, nonsensical.

Beliefs cause a lot of people to sacrifice themselves. They immolate themselves. They blow themselves and others up. They fly planes into buildings. We even had a sixteen year old kid in Sydney shoot a cop last week and then had himself killed for his beliefs.

Your argument would be that whatever he believed in that caused him to do that must have had some validity.

Except that we have an account of how the beliefs they were willing to die for originated, that those beliefs were tied to a remarkable person, Jesus Christ, who also died and who made astonishing claims about himself, the truth of whose claims amount to justifiable reasons why anyone would have reasonably allowed themselves to be martyred.

What you need to do is account for why not just the Apostles, but a consistently growing number of early Christians were also willing to be martyred. Seemingly honest, sincere and truthful, psychologically balanced persons who likewise claimed to have encountered the Risen Christ.

These individuals are not psychologically on par with those who immolate themselves or fly planes into buildings. These are individuals who are affected by the person of Christ, a person who is far from the caliber of those you list. Sure, deranged individuals and fanatics fly into buildings or immolate themselves, but sane people who can provide a rational accounting of their beliefs, an accounting quite consistent with profoundly meaningful metaphysics and cosmology do not die for trivialities or nonsense. Neither did they go looking for martyrdom in most cases, it came to them. Another sign that they were not deranged as you would have it.

What you need to do is show that individuals like Peter, Paul, James, Stephen, et al, were simply psychologically disturbed individuals and NOT profoundly moved to witness for profound realities you have difficulty understanding let alone explaining.

 

[Peter_Plato]

hmmm… Power… how do you measure power?
Control over people? control people’s behaviors?
Control people’s thoughts?

I’d say they were rather efficient with that… although, not everyone was under that spell, so they got persecuted…
Did they really get persecuted, at first?
Or was it only after…?

You have to ignore a whole lot to make the above claim. Stephen, the two James and Saul? Do those names mean anything?

Like I said earlier, the story says yes.
Reality… may not be consistent with the story we have today… with the story that was written in the late first century AD.

If the parallel I see has no connection, then it’s one hell of a coincidence!
A coincidence too close, in time and place, for comfort.
Even the first people who examined the dead sea scrolls find it astonishing to the degree that they suggest that the Teacher was a prototype of Jesus, a proto-Jesus!

Assuming the dating of the document – with a margin of error of about 200 years – can be determined accurately to before Christ. It hasn’t been. It may not have been a “proto” anything, merely a repurposing of the story of Christ for their own community.

 

[PRmerger]

Is that a picture of you?

 

[Faith1960]

http://media.tumblr.com/c0569ea4b1d95d1133a9d9c861572681/tumblr_inline_mhf45fEQkh1qz4rgp.gif

Lol

 

[PRmerger]

Let me see… yes!
Particularly, under torture, YES!

Look what the CIA says about torture (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Intelligence_Committee_report_on_CIA_torture#Findings_listed_in_the_report):
“The CIA’s use of its enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation from detainees.”
“The interrogations of CIA detainees were brutal and far worse than the CIA represented to policymakers and others.”
“CIA detainees were subjected to coercive interrogation techniques that had not been approved by the Department of Justice or had not been authorized by CIA Headquarters.”
“Several prisoners almost died and became completely unresponsive or nearly drowned during waterboarding.”

Oh… and this one is a beauty (thestar.com/news/world/2014/12/09/terror_interrogations_more_brutal_less_effective_than_cia_claimed_report.html):
“In another case, Mohammed was waterboarded because of a CIA analyst’s mistake. The analyst misheard intelligence alleging Al Qaeda was recruiting black Muslims in the U.S. After two days of waterboarding, Mohammed fabricated a story about seeking out black Muslims in Montana, the report says.”

Montana?! Black Muslims in Montana?!

Yes, people lie and may even exaggerate their claims under torture.

Go figure, huh?

If you have nothing to lose… in for a penny, in for a pound! (there’s even a popular saying that conveys this feeling, amazing!)

What a lot of words were spent presenting a nonsequitur!

No one is arguing that people don’t lie under torture. They will say anything in order to stop the horror.

What is being posited is that people proclaiming a lie will not recant under torture.

Can you please address the question: do you find it a normal part of human behavior for liars to refuse to recant their lies under horrific torture?

Does it seem reasonable to you that men who lied went to their deaths smiling, singing the praises of God, lighting the ancient world on fire with their glorious deaths?

 

[PRmerger]

We can agree that, by this time, christians existed and that writings became necessary to convey the correct message in several places at the same time.

So, again, where was the body of Christ?

It’s 40 AD, and some fanatic is claiming that Jesus never died.

Why not simply go to the tomb, pull the rock away, and say, “Exhibit A. The body of your messiah”.

 

[PRmerger]

Jesus, according to a plaque in Japan went travelling and died there. (I know this is a silly story, but it’s** still more believable** than "rose from the dead)

What did I say about this, when I first introduced it?
Here, let me refresh your memory:

So it’s more believable to accept that Jesus went travelling to Japan.

Interesting…

Are you someone who believes things on faith only?

A plaque is what you base your “more believable” on?

A plaque.

A plaque.

And then there’s this:

27 books detailing the life, death and resurrection of the Christ

I hope that you can see the cognitive dissonance and amusement that prompts for me to hear an atheist believing something on such little evidence and essentially espousing a faith-filled assertion.

Can I have some popcorn, too?

You can do it yourself, poca. To the right of the post are some things called “smilies”. Click on “more” and then you can find the popcorn smilie.

 

[Bradski]

Except that we have an account of how the beliefs they were willing to die for originated, that those beliefs were tied to a remarkable person, Jesus Christ, who also died and who made astonishing claims about himself, the truth of whose claims amount to justifiable reasons why anyone would have reasonably allowed themselves to be martyred.

His claims don’t have to be true. This is the whole point. As long as people believe them to be true then they will quite possibly go to their deaths proclaiming it to be true. Especially if they believe that by doing so they only need to put up with an infinitesimally small amount of pain compared to an everlasting life.

Whether Jesus was the Son of God or not is not dependent on people believing it to be so.

What you need to do is account for why not just the Apostles, but a consistently growing number of early Christians were also willing to be martyred. Seemingly honest, sincere and truthful, psychologically balanced persons who likewise claimed to have encountered the Risen Christ.

See above. People believing something bears no relationship to whether it is true. Over 70% of the planet, presumably a fair proportion of whom are honest, sincere and truthful and psychologically balanced don’t believe that Jesus is the Son of God. If someone dies for Allah should we grant his beliefs more validity?

Sure, deranged individuals and fanatics fly into buildings or immolate themselves, but sane people who can provide a rational accounting of their beliefs, an accounting quite consistent with profoundly meaningful metaphysics and cosmology do not die for trivialities or nonsense. Neither did they go looking for martyrdom in most cases, it came to them. Another sign that they were not deranged as you would have it.

Why, Peter. You are putting words in my mouth (I’m almost tired of pointing it out). At no time have I said that people who die for their beliefs are deranged. I am not denying the beliefs of martyrs because I feel they must therefore be mentally unbalanced. In fact, quite the opposite. Many sane, intelligent and well balanced people believe the most extraordinary things.

There are an enormous amount of people on this very forum who actually believe that the planet is only a few thousand years old. Maybe some of them would actually prefer to die rather than deny it. Should we give that belief any credibility because of that?

What you need to do is show that individuals like Peter, Paul, James, Stephen, et al, were simply psychologically disturbed individuals and NOT profoundly moved to witness for profound realities you have difficulty understanding let alone explaining.

No I don’t. I have no need to any such thing. If someone wants to use the martyrdom of the Apostles for arguing the veracity of Christianity, then (apart from proving beyond reasonable doubt that they did indeed die for their faith), then that person needs to show why a strongly held belief therefore somehow gives greater credibility to said belief.

‘He REALLY believed it, so therefore it must be true’

Abject nonsense…

 

[pocaracas]

You have to ignore a whole lot to make the above claim. Stephen, the two James and Saul? Do those names mean anything?

Are you telling me that these people were persecuted right off the bat, the instant they started believing in the resurrection of a Christ?
Or was it later?

Chronology is something we humans do poorly, when addressing events from far ago… we mingle them all and think as if everything happened roughly at the same time and under the exact same circumstances.
The writings of old are partially to blame for this… how many tales of the NT begin with a variant of “in those days”?

WWII took 6 years… much changed in the world within 6 years.
How much could have changed within a lifetime in a single region, 2000 years ago?

Assuming the dating of the document – with a margin of error of about 200 years – can be determined accurately to before Christ. It hasn’t been. It may not have been a “proto” anything, merely a repurposing of the story of Christ for their own community.

Oh? it could.
It would be the very earliest story of Christ ever committed to writing, you know?
That would make it the one less contaminated with later wishful thinking.
And, reigning it back to the thread’s subject, it lacks one major component in later christian writings - the resurrection!
Oh, they omitted that on purpose for their community…right? Right?!

But it seems the main document detailing the Teacher’s life story is from the BC time.
(historycart.com/QuestionsOnTheNonBiblicalDeadSeaScrolls.htm)
“”
the Teacher of Righteousness is mentioned prominently in the Habakkuk Pesher (1QpHab) col.1 line 13 p.198; col.2 line 2 p.198; col. 5 line 10 p.199; col.7 line 4 p.200; col.8 line 3 p.200; col.9 lines 9-10 p.201; col.11 line 5 p.201.
“”
In here (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating_the_Dead_Sea_Scrolls) you will find that this particular manuscript is dated to 111 BCE-2 CE.

 

[pocaracas]

So it’s more believable to accept that Jesus went travelling to Japan.

Interesting…

Are you someone who believes things on faith only?

A plaque is what you base your “more believable” on?

A plaque.

A plaque.

And then there’s this:

27 books detailing the life, death and resurrection of the Christ

I hope that you can see the cognitive dissonance and amusement that prompts for me to hear an atheist believing something on such little evidence and essentially espousing a faith-filled assertion.

Did I say I believe in it?
I merely said I find it more believable than magic. Any story that does not include magic is automatically more believable than one that does include magic.
Maybe it has something to do with having “there is no such thing as magic” drilled into my head, as a kid…

On the one hand, we have a traveling person, who ends his days in Japan.
Sort of makes sense, if this person thinks he’s the son of God and wishes to spread the memo to all mankind, Jerusalem and Rome take care of the western side and he should go East to change the minds of those hindus and chinese.

On the other hand, we have a person who dies a gruesome death - no doubt about it, he’s dead Jim. But then, when no one is watching, he wakes up, pushes a huge boulder out of his way and strolls merrily around almost as if nothing had happened, for a few days, until he finally goes off for good. Why didn’t he stick with mankind forever? (it should certainly be within his capabilities) Why is belief still required?

 

[pocaracas]

What a lot of words were spent presenting a nonsequitur!

No one is arguing that people don’t lie under torture. They will say anything in order to stop the horror.

What is being posited is that people proclaiming a lie will not recant under torture.

Can you please address the question: do you find it a normal part of human behavior for liars to refuse to recant their lies under horrific torture?

Does it seem reasonable to you that men who lied went to their deaths smiling, singing the praises of God, lighting the ancient world on fire with their glorious deaths?

Chronology again.
Whoever “lied”, may have done so unwittingly.
Whoever believed in that lie, would not know it was a lie.

Did they torture the believers or the originators?

Under the Teacher is Jesus scenario, everyone in the first century AD would only be believers.
Given this, I’ll let Bradski speak for me now:

If someone wants to use the martyrdom of the Apostles for arguing the veracity of Christianity, then (apart from proving beyond reasonable doubt that they did indeed die for their faith), then that person needs to show why a strongly held belief therefore somehow gives greater credibility to said belief.

‘He REALLY believed it, so therefore it must be true’

Abject nonsense…

 

[pocaracas]

So, again, where was the body of Christ?

It’s 40 AD, and some fanatic is claiming that Jesus never died.

Why not simply go to the tomb, pull the rock away, and say, “Exhibit A. The body of your messiah”.

It’s 60BC, the Teacher is dead (most likely, at Qumran)… his people, his followers believe he will be resurrected.
They believe it.
The story travels.
It reaches Jerusalem, the Teacher, now believed by the story-teller to have resurrected, becomes the object of further belief.
Some adjustments are made to have the Teacher be in Jerusalem - where else would such an important figure go, if not the capital?

Where was Jesus’ body in 40AD?

 

[Peter_Plato]

It would be the very earliest story of Christ ever committed to writing, you know?
That would make it the one less contaminated with later wishful thinking.

Well, not exactly.

There is Isaiah, Wisdom, a couple of the Psalms and even Plato’s Republic.

Each of those are just as “proto” as your proto-Christ.

What doesn’t make the Gospel accounts “wishful thinking” is the historical detail and the care taken by the writers to provide the details.

You might want to spend some time looking at why scholars recognize the difference those little details do make.

youtu.be/ay_Db4RwZ_M

youtu.be/KnkNKIJ_dnw

 

[Peter_Plato]

Proto-Christ…

Helpless innocence shall lie at our mercy; not for us to spare the widow, to respect the venerable head, grown white with years. Might shall be our right, weakness count for proof of worthlessness. Where is he, the just man? We must plot to be rid of him; he will not lend himself to our purposes. Ever he must be thwarting our plans; transgress we the law, he is all reproof, depart we from the traditions of our race, he denounces us. What, would he claim knowledge of divine secrets, give himself out as the son of God? The touchstone, he, of our inmost thoughts; we cannot bear the very sight of him, his life so different from other men’s, the path he takes, so far removed from theirs! No better than false coin he counts us, holds aloof from our doings as though they would defile him; envies the just their future happiness, boasts of a divine parentage. Put we his claims, then, to the proof; let experience shew what his lot shall be, and what end awaits him. If to be just is to be God’s son indeed, then God will take up his cause, will save him from the power of his enemies. Outrage and torment, let these be the tests we use; let us see that gentleness of his in its true colours, find out what his patience is worth. Sentenced let him be to a shameful death; by his own way of it, he shall find deliverance. (Wisdom 2)

Heck, even a proto-reference to the Resurrection in that last line. And not the only one.

These are considered prophetic writings. There is no reason that your Essene document couldn’t have been written in a similar vein. No reason to think God couldn’t have permitted the holy men in the Essenes to know what was soon to transpire in their midst. After all, references to the proto-Christ abound in Jewish writings.

The problem with your account is that you have to ignore all the other writings depicting proto-Christ and treat yours as a special case. It wasn’t. It could have been a rewriting of the prophesies, which were even closer to the Christ story in their details.

 

[Peter_Plato]

And, then there is Isaiah 53…

What credence for such news as ours? Whom reaches it, this new revelation of the Lord’s strength? He will watch this servant of his appear among us, unregarded as brushwood shoot, as a plant in waterless soil; no stateliness here, no majesty, no beauty, as we gaze upon him, to win our hearts. Nay, here is one despised, left out of all human reckoning; bowed with misery, and no stranger to weakness; how should we recognize that face? How should we take any account of him, a man so despised? Our weakness, and it was he who carried the weight of it, our miseries, and it was he who bore them. A leper, so we thought of him, a man God had smitten and brought low; and all the while it was for our sins he was wounded, it was guilt of ours crushed him down; on him the punishment fell that brought us peace, by his bruises we were healed. 6 Strayed sheep all of us, each following his own path; and God laid on his shoulders our guilt, the guilt of us all.

A victim? Yet he himself bows to the stroke; no word comes from him. Sheep led away to the slaughter-house, lamb that stands dumb while it is shorn; no word from him. Imprisoned, brought to judgement, and carried off, he, whose birth is beyond our knowing; numbered among the living no more! Be sure it is for my people’s guilt I have smitten him. Takes he leave of the rich, the godless, to win but a grave, to win but the gift of death; he, that wrong did never, nor had treason on his lips! Ay, the Lord’s will it was, overwhelmed he should be with trouble. His life laid down for guilt’s atoning, he shall yet be rewarded; father of a long posterity, instrument of the divine purpose; for all his heart’s anguish, rewarded in full. The Just One, my servant; many shall he claim for his own, win their acquittal, on his shoulders bearing their guilt. So many lives ransomed, foes so violent baulked of their spoil! Such is his due, that gave himself up to death, and would be counted among the wrong-doers; bore those many sins, and made intercession for the guilty.