Resurrection Story debunked?

[Philthy]

redhen:

Is that fair though? Is it fair that certain generations are witness to unquestionable signs and miracles and others not?

Fair? Interesting concept. Im not sure what you mean by fair. It seems like you are postulating a standard of fairness but its origin and content you have not offered. That would leave your question unaswerable. Perhaps you could explain a sense in which you believe the situation described to be “unfair” and state why you believe it to be unfair. Then I might be able to answer your question. As it stands, however, I dont know what you mean.

 

[redhen]

Philthy:

Fair? Interesting concept. Im not sure what you mean by fair. It seems like you are postulating a standard of fairness but its origin and content you have not offered. That would leave your question unaswerable. Perhaps you could explain a sense in which you believe the situation described to be “unfair” and state why you believe it to be unfair. Then I might be able to answer your question. As it stands, however, I dont know what you mean.

See my previous question earlier in this post;

"If someone were to try to prove or disprove this themselves it would take years of study. First you would have to learn Hebrew, Aramiac, Greek, Latin and probably German. Then you have to study ancient history, the history of Judaism, Christianity Mithraism, Zoroastrism and myriad other ancient religions. Next you would have to master Logic, Rhetoric and Philosophy.

Finally you would have to learn archeology, anthropology and forensic analysis of artifacts using carbon 14.

For something that would affect all mankind, for all time, why would God base this on the resurrection of one man observed by a handful of others in one tiny spot on one tiny planet in one tiny corner of the cosmos ?

Wouldn’t it have better to say, etch out “Jesus Lives” (in Greek) on the face of the moon, where all humankind could witness the miracle, and observe it for all time without relying on hearsay?"

 

[Philthy]

redhen:

See my previous question earlier in this post;

"If someone were to try to prove or disprove this themselves it would take years of study. First you would have to learn Hebrew, Aramiac, Greek, Latin and probably German. Then you have to study ancient history, the history of Judaism, Christianity Mithraism, Zoroastrism and myriad other ancient religions. Next you would have to master Logic, Rhetoric and Philosophy.

Finally you would have to learn archeology, anthropology and forensic analysis of artifacts using carbon 14.

For something that would affect all mankind, for all time, why would God base this on the resurrection of one man observed by a handful of others in one tiny spot on one tiny planet in one tiny corner of the cosmos ?

Wouldn’t it have better to say, etch out “Jesus Lives” (in Greek) on the face of the moon, where all humankind could witness the miracle, and observe it for all time without relying on hearsay?"

I had read your earlier post regarding this. The answer to your question above is, “No, it would not have been better to write it on the moon.” You don’t like that answer - for reasons of your own making - but that is still the answer. You might even characterize it is unfair - again for reasons of your own making - but it’s still the answer.
Part of the reason you dislike God’s plan is that you feel it would be better if we had irrefutable proof based on the personal observation of the resurrection. God apparently disagrees. Instead, he has provided witnesses to the event and the indwelling of His Spirit to provide the bridge between the intellect and the will in order to allow us to believe.

 

[Writer]

Vi Type:

There has been plenty of contemporary scholarship in this area. William Lane Craig, I believe, has the best resources when it comes to the resurrection or general apologetics all together.

The arguments on the Infidels website are classics that have been refuted numerous times. No non-theistic reputable historian or psychologist will agree with these classical explanations for various miraculous events relative to the resurrection.

Jesus physically rose from the dead; that can be proven and rationally believed.

Salvation is from the Jews by Father Schoemann also offers an interesting perspective on this issue. There are corrlations between Jewish religious events and the Resurection. One interesting example concerns a cloth hanging outside the Jewish temple, which suddenly stopped turning red after the Resurection; this Jewish miracle ceased. As I recall, earlier versions of the Talmud refer to Christ and warn the Jews to avoid His followers and teachings. I don’t recall whether, or not, there were allusions to the Resurection, but it seems that there may have been. Not perhaps a lot by and of itself, but pretty cool stuff when viewed within the entire historical context.

Besides looking back over our shoulders, though, it is the large and small miracles since the Resurection–not the least of which is the preservation and safeguarding of the Catholic Church for 2,000 years–which further confirm our beliefs and give the believer hope in the world to come. It boils down to faith–you have it, or you don’t.

 

[Nullasalus]

redhen:

Wouldn’t it have better to say, etch out “Jesus Lives” (in Greek) on the face of the moon, where all humankind could witness the miracle, and observe it for all time without relying on hearsay?"

Not really, though I can understand why you’d think so.

There is no such thing as an undeniable miracle. Jesus was a common name at the time - how do we know the Jesus that’s etched on the moon is the Jesus the christians refer to? How do we know the Jesus the Church talks about is the real Jesus? How do we know God etched those words into the moon? Maybe the words were there first and someone just called himself Jesus and tried to capitalize on an odd event.

You can go on and on. There’s always a way to explain things away - hallucination, incredible coincidence or misunderstanding, even some kind of quantum physical oddity. And even if there’s no good explanation, there’s always that nagging skeptical doubt available that allows you to say ‘Well, maybe I don’t have an explanation to disprove this miracle. But that isn’t to say that one does not exist.’