Re: Gym Debate Commentary: Was Jesus physically resurrected according to the Bible? (Apologia Phoenix vs. Ahmed_Deedat82)
Originally posted by Bible Defender
The brief mention of Jesus and brother James were second hand and altered, from a record made at least a generation after Jesus. How does a simple reference to someone who lived and dies, well after the fact, have anything to do with this issue?
There are no known first-hand reference to anything in the life of Jesus within his life time. Absolutely nothing, not a word from Philo or any one else at the time. Paul never met nore knew Jesus and we do not have any original letters from Paul recorded at the time.
Maybe you misunderstood my position. I do not need the Bible to be the inspired Word of God in order to prove the resurrection. Again, in case of the resurrection we DO have first hand claims. Even if you take the gospels as nothing more than ancient literature, there is also the writting of Paul. I do not want to tip my hand too much here since I am in a debate already.
Old turf need not be plowed twice, thrice or more times. All you need to do is provide any historical writings that report the ressurection of Jesus, much less his life that can be dated to within 100 years of the life of Jesus. A debate is not necessary. so far no one has found or provided this evidence.
Like I said however, if you want to have a formal debate on the issue, the sign up.
A simple list of the dated documents available on many internet sites. If you are willing to provide anything else other than what the scholars have available, please do so.
For academic history, this is true, Undocumented supernatural events such as those found in the Torah, NT, Quran, Vedas, as well as UFOs, Unicorns, elves, and vampires will not be accepted as historical fact when there is only anecdotal testimony to support them.
The reason why SOME historians do not consider supernatural claims is not because of evidence but a biase against the supernatural.
Do you have a reference to the historical methodology that would be accepted by major universities like Yale, Harverd, Duke, Cambridge and Oxford?
I would like to disagree. There ARE historians that do believe in the resurrection and that using historical methodology. Again, if you'd like to debate it I would be happy to.
What this leads to is honest historical analysis. You shouldn't just reject things a-priori. Reason? You weren't there. If there is NO evidence for or against a position. All one can say is that there is no evidence for it.
If we debate we would have to have an academic methodology that would be acceptable in an unbiased way by the major history and theology departments of the above universities..
True, if this person was a witness. We at present have no records of witnesses dated to the time of the life of Jesus in any writen datable records for or against the case, Nada, nothing, nillo, absolutely zero. We have Philo who visited Jeruselum at the time and wrote widely about the world at that time and he said nothing. What we have is at least one witness who reprts that nothing happened.
I am a military policeman. I can tell you first hand that this IS the way it is. Or do you just consider a witness as automatically lying without first weighing the evidence for and against him? For example, if a witness came forward in a murder investigation, the witness is given the presumption of truthtelling until, under cross examination he is found unreliable. And again, historian treats ancient documents, ie Livy for example and just says "since there is no other corroborating evidence, it is untrustworthy." Historians continue to look for evidence for and against.
I have in the past, now and in the future will investigate all the truth claims surrounding ALL the religions. That is why . . . everything is in pencil, but at present there is abaolutely no evidence for anything involving Jesus during his life.
There are some that hold on to alternative explanations. But none of them hold any kind of consensus and is not taken seriously by them. They themselves have admitted so.
I agree that supernatural claims CAN be false or exagerations. No doubt. But before you can just shrug them off a-priori, one should investigate the claims in question.
Again, I agree, one should weigh the evidence for and against.
It proves nothing for the claims of ALL religions including Christianity.
What this DOES prove is that the followers were sincere in their beliefs. The REALLY believed in whatever it is that they believed. Muslims REALLY believe that if they give their lives they will go to heaven.
They may be wrong, but it shows that they were sincere. Same here. The disciples were martyred for what they professed. They professed to have experiences that they believed were the risen Christ. They may be wrong, but, they were sincere. If they were sincere, it shows that they were not intentionally lying. One will not willingly die for something that they KNOW to be a lie. That they were sincere is conceeded by all critical scholars that have studied the issue.
No it is not, the nature of being human allows to many alternative explanations for these circumstances, especially since we have no known records that date from the life of Jesus that document these supernatural events. The current documents we have that make these claims cannot be dated to before 150 CE at best.
That is a killing argument to your bribery/theft theory.
Same as above.
As a witness of human nature sincerity has never been a measure of truth in history. There are not any references before or against these claims that can be dated before 150 CE.
They may have been mistaken, but again what this shows is that they were sincere. Also, agian there is no contrary statements of correction from the enemies of Christianity (ie the enemies of Jesus who were there). Again, if they had been wrong, the other witnesses who were enemies would have gleefully pointed out the errors in their testimony.
I am not making the accusation that these events did not take place. I really do not know one way or another, because there are no historical documents that make these claims or record anything surrounding these events for or against. YOU have provided none what so ever. Documents attacking Christian claims date from the about the same time that the known Christian documents are dated.
Please point to any kind of historical evidence that backs that up. Don't just make empty accusations. YOU too, have the burden of proof when making historical assertions.
SORRY?!?!?! Can you provide any evidence for the documents that refer to the resurection and empty tomb before about 150 CE. All the scholars in the world cannot provide them.
ALL of the positive evidence we DO have is agianst it. We have documents from the first century, stating that the guard was placed at the tomb. The only story we DO have is that the guards were to say that they were asleep and the disciples stole the body. This is also reported outside of the Bible. There is NO evidence for your position. Again the only postive evidence from the first century is not the alternative explanation you are posing. Sorry.
Last edited by shunyadragon; October 25th 2007 at 11:05 PM.
Go with the flow the river knows.
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Gifts of jade-silk change weapons and war into peace and friendship.
I do not know, therefore I think . . . and everything is in pencil.