Resurrection Story debunked?

  • Thread starter Thread starter redhen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
redhen:
I’m terribly sorry, I did not intend to influence anyones beliefs. I was just trying to find answers for myself.

“If we decide to believe it anyway, is that ok or is it cognitive dissonance?”

Yes, that would be the textbook definition. But it’s not necessarily a bad thing, it’s just another way of dealing with incongruities.

Again, I am not proposing any alternatives, sorry if I unsettled anyone here. Now I feel bad.
Click to expand...
No don’t feel bad. It is good to examine the foundations of our faith. Iron sharpens iron as they say. I don’t expect I’m leaving Catholicism, but I would if I could be shown there was a better alternative, which I usually ask for because it is easy to pile on criticism, but not so easy to build the case for something else (especially without running into the same problems one just slammed the old world-view for having). The point I was driving at was that I could never really go in for hardcore skepticism because it questions everything except hardcore skepticism.

Scott
 
The whole article is really ridiculous.
  1. The Gospels are reliable historical texts, not because they say they are, but because they were written within living memory of the events. (Keep in mind Christ died around 30 AD.)
  • Matthew and John gave eyewitness accounts. The ealiest discovered fragment of Matthew’s gospel (Oxford Fragment) dates from about 60 AD. And our earliest fragment of John’s gospel (Rylands Papyrus) dates to 100 AD…however, this fragment was found in Upper Egypt (about two thousand miles away), which means that it spent many years traveling and being hand-copied before that date.
  • Mark was the disciple of Peter, and recorded his (Peter’s) account of the gospels. A fragment of Mark’s gospel (Qumran Fragment 7Q5) was found with the Dead Sea Scrolls, and dates to about 50 AD.
  • Luke was a historian who thoroughly investigated the whole thing in detail, even obtaining information from other eyewitnesses that none of the other gospel writers recorded. His gospel easily dates to no later than about 60 AD…his second book, Acts of the Apostles, had to have been written before Paul’s martyrdom in Rome in 67 AD.
  • None of the gospels mention the fulfillment of Christ’s prophecy concerning destruction of the Temple, which took place in 70 AD…this strongly suggests that it hadn’t happened yet when these gospels were written, because otherwise such a significant event certainly would have been included.
  • Anything in the Gospels that can be historically and/or archeologically verified (such as kings and rulers, customs of that time period, and locations such as cities and towns) already has been. There’s also the fact that the gospels are written in a very factual manner, with nothing too spectacular…case in point, no one witnessed the Resurrection. If the apostles and disciples were really making all of this stuff up, don’t you think they have tried to make it just a little bit more fantastic/exciting than it is now?
  1. And then we have Josephus, a non-Christian (unbiased) Jewish historian of the same time period (first century), who recorded the facts that Jesus of Nazareth existed, that He performed miracles, that He was executed, that His tomb was found empty, and that many Christians now claimed He had risen from the dead.
  2. Yes, Jesus Christ was physically raised from the dead. His body disappeared from the tomb, He appeared to hundreds of people, He ate food with his apostles/disciples, and Thomas physically touched his wounds. Come on, this really isn’t that difficult to figure out.
40.png
Philthy:
What piece of evidence, exaclty, could possibly exist now that would be “proof positive” of Christs physical resurrection?
Click to expand...
The Shroud of Turin, actually. I’ve done the research/papers on it, and once you get down to the facts, it is incredibly difficult (if not impossible) to logically reach any other conclusion. :cool:
 
True story:

Just finished eating some Chinese leftover food. Yesterdays fortune cookie was the usual pap. “you are courteous and charming”. Um, ok whatever.

There was one left today, which I ate. The message read:

“do not seek so much to find the answer as much as to understand the question better”.

Coincidence? What are the chances of getting a Zen koan in a fortune cookie? Pretty good. What are the chances of getting this one? Not improbable.

If not coincidence, why would God reveal himself to me in a fortune cookie? God has a sense of humour? God would use a Buddhist proverb to do this?

Am I grasping at straws? This almost sounds like looking for guidance by picking a random page in the Bible.

Anyways, I pinned it up on the bulletin board, just because.
 
40.png
redhen:
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?
Click to expand...
I think you are imposing fleshly human preferences on God. God has chosen to reveal Himself in the manner He has for reasons we dont fully comprehend. One thing that is patently obvious is that he is not impressed with making himself obvious by fleshly human standards like writing it on the moon. Perhaps that is because, ultimately, faith comes from him. And perhaps it is the necessary means of drawing us away from our tendency to want to understand everything and to only believe that which we understand. Why? Because God is beyond our comprehension and we must seek Him on his terms, not ours.
 
What this guy is saying is just his OWN interpretation. We see this all the time with countless denominations. We make ourselves our own popes and declare what we see AND want as truth and the right interpretation.

The Gospels and the letters of the New Testament speak clearly to me on the resurection of Christ and so does the early Christians and Church fathers.

Hey, you can make the Bible say whatever you want but it will always come down to our own personal opinon.
 
40.png
Philthy:
I think you are imposing fleshly human preferences on God. God has chosen to reveal Himself in the manner He has for reasons we dont fully comprehend. One thing that is patently obvious is that he is not impressed with making himself obvious by fleshly human standards like writing it on the moon. Perhaps that is because, ultimately, faith comes from him. And perhaps it is the necessary means of drawing us away from our tendency to want to understand everything and to only believe that which we understand. Why? Because God is beyond our comprehension and we must seek Him on his terms, not ours.
Click to expand...
Is that fair though? Is it fair that certain generations are witness to unquestionable signs and miracles and others not?
 
40.png
redhen:
Can anyone help me refute this one?

infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/resurrection/lecture.html

If you discount the circular logic, i.e. using the New Testament to prove the New Testament, there’s not much that apologetics have to prove the resurrection.

The best apologetic argument I’ve seen is that “no one would die for a lie”

yet, " Matthew 28:17 actually claims that some eye-witnesses didn’t believe what they saw and might not have become Christians, which suggests the experience was not so convincing after all"

The only two martyrs in the New Testament were Stephen and James, and they were killed for breaking Jewish law, nothing for which they could recant for.

The article goes on and on…

Anyone want to take a stab at this?
Click to expand...
redhen, please don’t take this the wrong way, but based on several posts of yours that I’ve read, I feel a more appropriate name might be “red fox” in the hen house. Your questions always sound a little bit like you’re not really a Catholic to begin with, and that you want to give the impression that you are a devout Catholic so that readers will see you as a member of the Faith seeking the Truth rather than as a fox in the hen house.

The Catholic Church has never claimed She can demonstrate through “scientific” proofs that Our Blessed Lord rose from the dead. That is why belief in the Resurrection is an article of faith. What the Catholic Church has claimed is that She can refute any argument that Christ didn’t rise from the grave. Because science and faith both teach the same truth, those arguments that Christ didn’t rise from the dead can typically be answered by a closer examination of the Biblical text or Sacred Tradition.

With respect to the arguments raised in your post, they have been answered in these forums on a number of occasions, and indeed, those arguments have been trotted out in every century since Our Blessed Lord rose from the dead, and they have been answered in turn by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church.

Incidentally, St. Stephen and St. James–strange that you leave the “St.” off of each of those names–were not the only martyrs in the New Testament. They were the only martyrs specifically mentioned by name, but if you read the New Testament a little more closely you’ll find that other Christians were murdered because they professed their belief in the Risen Lord. Perhaps more significantly, Catholics do not limit themselves to the New Testament, our witness is the 2,000 years of Faith that we have lived. Might I suggest that you pull out a good translation of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History to find out just how many witnesses, including Sts. Peter and Paul, were willing to die as a witness to the Resurrection of Christ.

God bless and Happy Easter!
 
40.png
redhen:
Hmm, I read his arguments, and intellectually I now have my doubts that Jesus rose physically from the dead.

What’s will have to do with it?
Click to expand...
redhen,

you should try to remember that we are possibly living in the end times. so it’s entirely to be expected that their will be satanic attacks upon the Church and the people of God.

Many will try in as many ways as they can to shake your faith and “disprove” all that Christianity has taught for centuries. You need only turn on your TV or the Internet to experience the “latest deception of christianity” as we have come to see with the Davinci Code deception and now they are trying to disprove the resurrection.

After this it will probably be trying to “proove” that Jesus never lived, after all some are trying to say the Holocaust never happened – and that was just 60 years ago!

Hold fast to your faith and do not give an ear to those who would tempt you otherwise.

Jesus Christ, King of Kings and Lord of Lords, is their biggest fear. He conquered Death and He has conquered Satan. The evil one knows his time is short — he’s getting desperate!
 
40.png
SFH:
Your questions always sound a little bit like you’re not really a Catholic to begin with, and that you want to give the impression that you are a devout Catholic so that readers will see you as a member of the Faith seeking the Truth rather than as a fox in the hen house.
Click to expand...
I said near the beginning of this thread that I was a lapsed Catholic.
40.png
SFH:
With respect to the arguments raised in your post, they have been answered in these forums on a number of occasions, and indeed, those arguments have been trotted out in every century since Our Blessed Lord rose from the dead, and they have been answered in turn by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church.
Click to expand...
And these have been counter-answered, and so on…
Like an earlier poster said
Hey, you can make the Bible say whatever you want but it will always come down to our own personal opinon…
Click to expand...
But something so important should not be subject to personal opinion. Which goes back to the idea that a resurrection is not that persuasive, heck happens all the time these days in hospitals all over the world.

My other big problem with taking the NT at face value is the reaction to it by believers. If you really really believed that Jesus was the key to a blissful life after death where the alternative is eternal dammnation in hell, you would be dancing in the streets, shouting it from the roof tops, nothing else would matter, this is the biggest and best news since the world was formed !

You would give away all your possessions and try to convert as many friends and family as possible. I know I would.

But is that the reaction you see in church, or are people just going through the motions out of habit, or being forced by their parents, or to keep up with the Joneses ?

Then again it’s been 16 years since I last attended a eucharistic mass, have things changed?
 
To redhen:

I would recommend reading this list of things supporting the resurrection of Jesus and then taking every point and seeing if there is a rebuttal to each in the article:

Central tenets
  • Multiple eyewitness accounts claiming to see and interact with the resurrected Christ, from differing times and situations.
  • The conversion to Christianity of Skeptics, including James, a cousin (or possibly half-brother) of Jesus, and Saul of Tarsus, a pharisee who persecuted Christians.
  • The early recording of events (by Christians) suggests that myth-making is unlikely.
  • Occam’s Razor: If a resurrection is indeed possible, claiming that Jesus really did rise and appear to his disciples is clearly the most logical explanation for the complex events that came later.
  • That hundreds of millions of Christians worldwide claim to have met Jesus personally and/or experienced the coming of the Holy Spirit.
Historical support
  • All resurrection witnesses repeatedly risked their lives to preach Christianity, and many were martyred, which limits the range of potentially false motives for their testimonies.
  • The martyrdom of many of the early church leaders for their faith; some claimed to have met or been disciples of the Apostles. Including: Polycarp, Ignatius, Papias, Irenaeus, and Justin Martyr.
  • The first witnesses to the empty tomb and the resurrected Jesus were women, whose testimony was not regarded as credible in the patriarchal Judaism of that period. This is usually seen as a precedent for the gospels being explanations of fact over socially convenient fabrications.
  • Most resurrection stories of antiquity emphasize the immortality of their hero’s soul; the New Testament descriptions of the resurrection are (arguably) unique in being thoroughly bodily and physical.
  • A general acceptance by a majority of biblical scholars and historians that Jesus’ disciples at least thought they met Jesus after he died.
  • A historical check is served by the presence of hostile witnesses during the time of early Christianity.
Biblical support
  • An early Christian Creed proclaims Jesus’s resurrection - repeated in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8
  • Jesus is reported to have flesh and bones - Luke 24:39
  • Jesus showed himself to the Apostles with many “infallible proofs” - Acts 1:3
  • Christ’s “flesh did not see corruption” - Acts 2:31
  • The Jewish Scriptures contain statements which some apologists have interpreted as saying that God would take a body, die for sins and rise again.
  • The resurrection stories speak poorly of the faith of Jesus’ Apostles when he met with them after rising, which some say portrays the gospel writers as honest.
Secular claims
  • Roman guards could be punished by death if ever they allowed a crucified man to live. The Roman guards even pierced Jesus on the side with a spear; his body bled and released water, a sign of death.
  • Roman guards could be punished by death if they allowed a condemned man’s remains to be stolen.
  • The Toledoth Yeshu, (a compilation of early Jewish writings), alludes to stolen body hypothesis, as does the record of a second century debate between a Christian and a Jew. Apologists see this an acknowledgement that the tomb was empty, with an attempt to explain it away.
Appeals to silence
  • The are no records of protests against the empty tomb.
  • There is no record of the Jewish and Roman authorities disproving the belief by publicly presenting the real corpse of Jesus.
  • The Biblical claim that over 500 people were witnesses of the resurrected Jesus, many still alive at the time. (It is notable, though, that this open declaration was to Athenian non-Christians who could respond.)
Other points
  • Western legal standards argue for the historicity of the resurrection of Christ, attested to by former Chief Justices of England.
  • A former Watergate conspirator argues that because conspiracies are hard to maintain in the face of persecution, the Apostles were telling the truth regarding the resurrection of Jesus.
  • Jesus and his apostles are regarded as highly moral people, as opposed to some religions and cults where the leader or the leader’s disciples are untrustworthy.
  • Jesus fulfilled many Jewish prophecies; nearly impossible to fulfill by chance.
  • The poor educational level of the disciples would have made devising an elaborate cover-up difficult.
  • The early church spread rapidly, though highly persecuted.
  • Jewish culture was unfamiliar with mythical stories of Gods and rebirths.
  • The gospel of John portrays medical knowledge not available at the time; eg. the flow of “blood and water” after a soldier is recorded to have pieced Jesus’ side.
I must admit that there is no one I like debating more than a Doubting Thomas. I do hope that these points restore your faith in the Resurrection.
 
And LASTLY, Faith is a Gift from God. Not all will have it, but as Christ said while he was “living on earth” …“Blessed are those who have **not ** seen and yet believe”…

If you want to believe but are having doubts, pray that God will give you the gift of faith — that your eyes may be opened.

Blessed Mother, I commend our sister to you in Jesus name. Amen.
 
The Shroud of Turin - can also be an aid in helping to augment faith in the Living lord ; www.unitypublishing.com has article on the reasons for some of the controversies on the dating of The Shroud !

The fact that many Christains do not seem to live their faith, partly true ; people are at their diffrent stages ; there is Mo. Teresa and her nuns , other countless priests and saints …

When we try to learn, isn’t it better to look at the ‘master(s)’ than the ones who seem to be flunking! 🙂

Any practice or belief in astrology etc: could seriously hamper efforts of wanting to come home - one admirable virtue in the prodigal son was he was honest enough not to steal when they wouldn’t give him even the pig feed ; no child of The King need any pigfeed of putting trust in pagan practices ! 🙂

Faith is , may be like love - the trust factor being critical ; that is what we lost in the garden with the fall and now The Lord gives us many chances to trust Him, His visible authority in The Church !

Sitting in The Presence of The Risen Lord, in Eucharistic Adoration and pleading - ‘Lord, help my unbleief .’ …

May God Bless us all !
 
40.png
redhen:
I said near the beginning of this thread that I was a lapsed Catholic.

And these have been counter-answered, and so on…
Like an earlier poster said

But something so important should not be subject to personal opinion. Which goes back to the idea that a resurrection is not that persuasive, heck happens all the time these days in hospitals all over the world.

My other big problem with taking the NT at face value is the reaction to it by believers. If you really really believed that Jesus was the key to a blissful life after death where the alternative is eternal dammnation in hell, you would be dancing in the streets, shouting it from the roof tops, nothing else would matter, this is the biggest and best news since the world was formed !

You would give away all your possessions and try to convert as many friends and family as possible. I know I would.

But is that the reaction you see in church, or are people just going through the motions out of habit, or being forced by their parents, or to keep up with the Joneses ?

Then again it’s been 16 years since I last attended a eucharistic mass, have things changed?
Click to expand...
The BIBLE should not be subject to personal opinon but sad to say it is! That’s why there are so many different forms of Christianity. One believes as he sees through scripture.

Well that all depends on how much Faith you have within you. Also, it’s not a sin to not give away ALL your possesions. Sure that would be great and blessfull, but just because one doesn’t doesn’t mean they’re a bad Christian. We all have different paths and goals to follow and we have different gifts that come from the will of God.
 
Wow, I didn’t know Richard Carrier, a professional historian of Columbia University, was so misguided! Maybe someone should e-mail him about the arguments contained within this thread and give him a real education! Perhaps he will convert…

Feel free to post a thread debunking his article at the Secular Web’s Discussion Forum (Feedback Section). The moderators of the forum will then in turn contact Mr. Carrier, and he will probably respond to your objections himself.

I’d like to see that…
 
40.png
clarkal:
Wow, I didn’t know Richard Carrier, a professional historian of Columbia University, was so misguided! Maybe someone should e-mail him about the arguments contained within this thread and give him a real education! Perhaps he will convert…

Feel free to post a thread debunking his article at the Secular Web’s Discussion Forum (Feedback Section). The moderators of the forum will then in turn contact Mr. Carrier, and he will probably respond to your objections himself.

I’d like to see that…
Click to expand...
Thank you Richard Carrier, after two-thousand years YOU with your incredible knowledge have finaly proved the resurection wrong lol. I’ll just “agree” with what you “say” because it just makes so much “sense.” Wow I feel better now 🙂
 
The Catholic:
Thank you Richard Carrier, after two-thousand years YOU with your incredible knowledge have finaly proved the resurection wrong lol. I’ll just “agree” with what you “say” because it just makes so much “sense.” Wow I feel better now 🙂
Click to expand...
Nice one.

Actually, he doesn’t claim to disprove the Resurrection.

Are you going to debunk his article at the Infidel forums? I mean, it would be easy if he is as stupid as many are suggesting in this thread.
 
40.png
clarkal:
Nice one.

Actually, he doesn’t claim to disprove the Resurrection.

Are you going to debunk his article at the Infidel forums? I mean, it would be easy if he is as stupid as many are suggesting in this thread.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t claiming he was stupid, I responded that way because of your silly little arrogant comments. I mean no offense though 🙂
 
The Catholic:
I wasn’t claiming he was stupid, I responded that way because of your silly little arrogant comments. I mean no offense though 🙂
Click to expand...
I know why you responded, but I don’t think my comments were silly. If people in here think Carrier is a simple man or easily refuted, then write a feedback thread at the Infidels discussion board and refute him. He will most likely respond or others will, and then we will at least have a better argument that isn’t so one sided.
 
Didn’t we have an eye witness account of over 500 witnesses?

Wasn’'t one of the great theologians of his day a great persecutor of “The Way” converted on the road to Damascus? He gave up a promising career in the Pharisees government for a lie? He sailed all over the Mederteranian Sea for a lie?

Some lies and compounding of lies are too fantantic. The Truth is Jesus is alive and loves you…

Believe the Truth: We are just people and there is a God that loves you and gave you a Way to come back to Him.
 
Peter 2

I shall also make every effort to enable you always to remember these things after my departure. 16 We did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming 9 of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received honor and glory from God the Father 10 when that unique declaration came to him from the majestic glory, “This is my Son, my beloved, with whom I am well pleased.” 18 We 11 ourselves heard this voice come from heaven while we were with him on the holy mountain. 19 Moreover, we possess the prophetic message that is altogether reliable. You will do well to be attentive to it, as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 12 Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, 21 for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top