Resurrection Debate: Fact or Fiction?

  • Thread starter Thread starter thephilosopher6
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thephilosopher6

Guest
If anyone is willing, maybe we can have a good ol’ fashion debate over the resurrection of Jesus i.e. skeptics vs believers? Here will be the points of debate:
  • The historicity of the empty tomb
  • The accuracy/historicity of the Gospels
  • The genuineness of the apostles
  • The nature of resurrection experiences
  • Why non-believers like James and Paul were converted
  • The nature of things described by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8
  • Scholarly attitudes towards this subject
  • If there are any possible outside influences from either the Jewish or Greco-Roman world
Ok, I hope this thread works out to something meaningful.
 
Last edited:
Personally I find these interminable debates a waste of energy.
Have you searched and explored the dozen or so long ones on CAF in the last year or two?

As the witnesses have died we only have the testimony of people “mindlessly” passing on what those witnesses experienced. Hardly the stuff of “fact” but rather trust/belief.

That doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
It just means there is far less certainty so no one is culpable simply for being unable to believe such fragile testimony in itself.

That would be different if we had “facts”.
To deny objective “facts” appears culpable because they are objective, that is the very meaning of a “fact”.

Can people convince themselves of fiction and die for it?
Yes they can.
 
Last edited:
LOL… this will be an exercise in futility…
thephilosopher6 said:
  • The historicity of the empty tomb
Click to expand...
There’s a strange first point… Why not start with the historicity of Jesus himself?
It’s agreed among scholars that there was an historical Jesus, but what was the historical Jesus?
Just a man? a preacher? a teacher?
Man-god? God made man?
An amalgamation of a few characters which were already dead at the time with one of more that lived around that time?

If Jesus was anything less than god under a human guise, then any resurrection account is a less credible.
It would still be possible, I guess, as there was the previous case of Lazarus.
thephilosopher6 said:
  • The accuracy/historicity of the Gospels
Click to expand...
I’ve heard tell time and time again that the gospels were not written as an historical account. They are mostly written with the agenda of convincing folk of the feats by Jesus, or something like that…
thephilosopher6 said:
  • The genuineness of the apostles
Click to expand...
As any present-day student of a grand-master, their awe was probably not false.
thephilosopher6 said:
  • The nature of resurrection experiences
Click to expand...
What?
thephilosopher6 said:
  • Why non-believers like James and Paul were converted
Click to expand...
Why do non-believers nowadays convert?
thephilosopher6 said:
  • The nature of things described by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8
Click to expand...
Paul had an agenda, didn’t he?
thephilosopher6 said:
  • Scholarly attitudes towards this subject
Click to expand...
Don’t know. Bart Ehrman’s Lost Christianities has a lot to say about how crazy things were before the 300sAD.
thephilosopher6 said:
  • If there are any possible outside influences from either the Jewish or Greco-Roman world
Click to expand...
Wasn’t crucifixion a Roman execution method?
Wasn’t Paul writing in Greek?
thephilosopher6 said:
Ok, I hope this thread works out to something meaningful.
Click to expand...
Best of luck! I hope I helped stoke the fires! 😉
 
0Scarlett_nidiyilii said:
40.png
pocaracas:
Wasn’t crucifixion a Roman execution method?
Click to expand...
Persian, actually.
Click to expand...
Then why were the Romans using it?
0Scarlett_nidiyilii said:
dang I just got drawn in
Click to expand...
👼
 
Cultural appropriation.

Drat those Romans. They really needed sensitivity training
 
I think death by lions in the Colosseum would have been worse. I visited it once, but it had been closed for renovations, like, forever, so I didn’t get to see that show.
 
Why is it everytime I read things you post I feel like I’m reading something written by an infidel?

These are NOT words of someone convinced of the truth of the Gospels.

These are words of somebody who has had their faith utterly eroded by an over reliance on the historical critical method.
 
Last edited:
Why is it that whenever I read things you post I feel like I’m reading something written by a cult victim? 🙂

I have gone to daily mass three times a week for almost all my adult life of 45 years from the age of 15 and never seriously broken the Commandments so far as I know… When you have matched that I will take your intuitional observations more seriously.
 
Last edited:
Oh so you’re a living Saint.

Okay, I will just shut my filthy dogmatic sinful mouth then.

Sorry, Your Holiness.
 
Quick question @BlackFriar:

Would you agree that Raymond Brown is one of the greatest scholars, and James Martin is one of the holiest men in our day and age?
 
I need to adjust my glasses, because I read that as James Brown.
 
The undisturbed blood stains on Jesus’ burial shroud are proof that His corpse disappeared from inside of that cloth. Further research reveals that the way that His image was imprinted on His shroud was by that cloth collapsing through the proton radiation that was left by His vanishing corpse.

A close analysis of the 1988 carbon fourteen dating results (1195 to 1448) shows that as the piece of shroud dated gets closer to the image, its date gets younger.* This indicates our Lord’s corpse left both neutron and proton radiation when it disappeared. The thermal neutron radiation caused some of the nitrogen in the Shroud’s linen to be converted to C-14 and the closer to the corpse, the greater the neutron radiation leading to greater conversion of nitrogen to C-14.

The disappearance of Jesus’ corpse from inside of His burial cloth is a now a scientific fact. That disappearance strongly implies His resurrection.

*TEST THE SHROUD, Antonnaci, 2015
 
Wait…So THE VATICAN has officially recognized The Shroud of Turin as legitimately from Christ?
 
Last edited:
Ah… so to convert a human body into the divine nature, one emits neutron and proton radiation… I see… No more Near Death Experiences! Bombard us with neutron and proton radiation! That’s how you go to heaven! :roll_eyes:
 
thephilosopher6 said:
If anyone is willing, maybe we can have a good ol’ fashion debate over the resurrection of Jesus i.e. skeptics vs believers? Here will be the points of debate:

The historicity of the empty tomb
The accuracy/historicity of the Gospels
The genuineness of the apostles
The nature of resurrection experiences
Why non-believers like James and Paul were converted
The nature of things described by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8
Scholarly attitudes towards this subject
If there are any possible outside influences from either the Jewish or Greco-Roman world

Ok, I hope this thread works out to something meaningful.
Click to expand...
http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/resurrection-evidence.htm
 
I would suggest that you read “Report on the Shroud of Turin” by Heller which details the intensive 1978 scientific investigation. No other religious artifact has ever been subjected to such scrutiny.

This investigation proved that the image on the Shroud was not man-made. The Vatican was being overly cautious and then was caught off-guard by the unexpected 1988 C-14 dating results (which BTW were misrepresented as 1260 to 1390 by the British Museum.)
 
  1. Sacred Scripture is devoid of error.
  2. Dogmas of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic church are infallible.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top