Tweet
I plan on addressing some of the claims in this video in 5 minute increments. Would like to hear feedback from other users on the forum.
1. At 1:42 IP says "it's widely agreed that Jesus was buried in a nearby tomb. We have multiple attestation from early sources."
Actually, Paul does not mention a "tomb" at all in his firsthand material and the Markan empty tomb narrative was copied by the authors of Matthew and Luke (2 source hypothesis, synoptic problem). John's gospel was written so late that it's more probable he knew of the Markan narrative and adapted it to fit his story as well. This is argued by Louis A. Ruprecht in This Tragic Gospel, Crossan in The Passion in Mark (pgs. 138-145) and Adela Yarbro Collins http://austingrad.edu/images/SBL/Collins.pdf
Some scholars such as CK Barret, Frans Neirynck, Gilbert Van Belle argue for the possibility of a more direct literary dependence of the gospel of John on some or all of the synoptic gospels.
So in the end, there is no confirmed independent testimony of the empty tomb but rather the evidence points to Matthew and Luke copying, while John had knowledge of the Markan narrative which cannot be demonstrated to come before the year 70.
----
2. At 1:53 IP cites Josephus Jewish War 4.317 as evidence for burying crucifixion victims but there are numerous problems with this in regards to Jesus as Bart Ehrman explains - http://www.reasonablefaith.org/forum...#msg1275426509
----
3. At 1:57 IP states that Jewish law demanded that even foreigners and criminals had to be buried. But Jewish law is irrelevant here because Jesus was executed by the Romans under Pilate, not the Jews. The evidence we have for Pilate is that he did not care about respecting Jewish law or their sensitivities - Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.1-2; Philo Embassy to Gaius 302, Luke 13:1. In fact, Pilate was eventually removed from Judea for not keeping good relations with the Jews.
----
4. At 2:02 IP cites the one archaeological instance of a crucifixion victim being buried but doesn't the fact that the remains of only one person being recovered confirm the ancient sources saying that victims were denied a proper burial? All the contemporary sources which describe crucifixion seem to imply that the victim was left hanging to serve as food for scavenging animals.
Archaeologist Jodi Magness in pg. 48 argues:
Jews buried criminals in entirely different locations as attested by the Mishnah Sanhedrin 6:5:
"And they did not bury them in the graves of their fathers, but two burying places were arranged for the Court (Beth Dīn), one for (those) stoned and (those) burned, and one for (those) beheaded and (those) strangled."
A unique grave was not necessary for crucified people, since crucifixion was not an official Jewish penalty.
The Tosefta 9:8-9 states that criminals may not be buried in their ancestral burying grounds but have to be placed in those of the court. This is justified by a quoting of the Psalm of David: "Do not gather my soul with the sinners" (26:9). In b. Sanhedrin 47a - "a wicked man may not be buried beside a righteous one."
Josephus comments on the end of a biblical thief, (Jos. Ant. V, 44). Somewhat similarly, he says of anyone who has been stoned to death for blaspheming God, (Jos. Ant. IV, 202).
Judging from all this historical evidence we should infer that Jesus was most likely buried in a grave that was reserved for criminals if he was even buried at all. It's highly unlikely that he was given his own "new" and "empty" tomb where "no one had ever been laid" like the later gospels describe.
----
5. At 2:19 IP says that "only a few skeptical scholars from the Jesus seminar deny that Jesus was buried in a tomb" but this relies on a now discredited appeal to Gary Habermas' "70-75% figure" which has numerous problems. https://evaluatingchristianity.wordp...-unpersuasive/
http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/.../4857#habermas
I'm curious as to how IP can honestly claim this without interviewing all the scholars that teach at secular universities in both the U.S. and Europe. From reading critical scholarship, it's pretty evident that more than "just a few" scholars doubt the empty tomb.
----
6.https://books.google.com/books?id=ZI...page&q&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=z-...page&q&f=false----
7. At 4:40 IP cites multiple attestation of people seeing Jesus including Paul and the gospels but only Paul's testimony is firsthand and he makes it clear that what he saw was a vision or had a spiritual experience. Most scholars date Mark c. 70 and he doesn't even narrate any of the resurrection appearances in the earliest manuscripts. Why would he leave the most important part of the story out? Matthew dates to c. 80, Luke 85-90, and John 90-110. All of which are too late to have been written within the lifetime of the original followers of Jesus.
Comment