Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Gary & Rhinestone's Thread on Burial and Resurrection of Christ

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    You mean, like the similar rare exception he made in offering to release Jesus in favor of executing a real criminal? This "man [to be] executed for high treason against Caesar to his family or friends", as you describe him could just have been released?

    Rather than focus on the majority of "normal" cases - why not focus on the unique nature of the prosecution and execution of this incredibly rare case?
    What do you mean by "focus"? I know the story. I am a preacher's kid. I've heard the story my whole life. What do you want me to focus on?

    Could it be true? Yes. Is it probably true? No.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
      A very strong clue that someone isn't impartial is one's insistence that s/he is INDEED SO impartial!

      Of course one can be that exception to the standard of impartiality. One could be, despite the observations of others on his/her inconsistency in evaluating the facts,, in fact qualified to render conclusions. Like a broken clock being right twice every 24 hours.
      I fully admit that I have biases. But I am not closed minded. After all I have a history of "changing sides" after reviewing the evidence for four months. If someone can present better evidence than what I have seen so far I would consider changing sides again.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by seer View Post
        What do you mean the spiritual body is released? Where was it before?
        I was using this in the context of a seed sprouting from a plant.

        And again, the material in the seed is not lost, it is transformed.
        That's not how Paul is using the metaphor. He says what is sown, the "seed" or "earthly body" must die.

        With again fits perfectly with the Phil. passage that says our bodies will be transformed and with the passage that says that our bodies will be redeemed.
        Ok but only if you ignore all the other passages that can be interpreted differently, like where Paul says there are different types of bodies.....geez.

        Again, why does he even say that the mortal will be clothed if it is destroyed? Lost or gone? You are not making sense.
        He says right in 2 Cor 5:1 that the earthly tent "body" can be destroyed. Then in verse 4 he says the mortal will be "swallowed up by life"
        which, again, means that the mortal will be devoured or destroyed.

        Maybe Paul was the one not making any sense. I mean, he was a guy who claimed to have "visions." Does that sound like someone to
        get reliable information from?

        The text says that Jesus was raised from the dead. And given the seed example it would include the same material that was in the seed, just in a different state of being. And if the dead body was not raised from the grave what exactly was? What is the dead thing that was dead then comes back to life?
        Read the sources that explain the diversity of 2nd Temple Jewish resurrection belief and get back to me when you have a grasp on this.
        Last edited by RhinestoneCowboy; 05-12-2016, 11:55 AM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Gary View Post
          Yes, I think he was.

          But that said, probability strongly suggests that his body was tossed into an unmarked hole in the ground as was the Roman custom for disposing of the bodies of persons who had been crucified, especially those crucified for high treason against Caesar. This would explain why Paul never mentions an empty tomb in any of his epistles.

          The only claims we have of an Empty Tomb come from four books written many decades after the death of Jesus; by four authors who were non-eyewitnesses; writing in lands far away; three of whom could well have borrowed the Empty Tomb theme from the first.
          You got your butt whipped last time you asserted that John copied from Mark. You really need to drop that one from your repertoire.

          Also, as has been pointed out to you who knows how many times, we know that the empty tomb tradition is found in Paul's letters in 1 Cor. 15:4. You should know this if you read The Resurrection of the Son of God as you claimed to have,


          Source: The Resurrection of the Son of God by Nicholas Thomas Wright, pg. 321

          The mention of Jesus' burial (verse 4a) can only have attained such a significant place in a brief and summary traditional narrative if it was regarded as important in itself. Much debate has circled around this point, but the most likely reason for its mention is twofold: first, to certify that Jesus was really and truly dead (something the gospel accounts take care of in their own way, as we shall see); second, to indicate that when Paul speaks of resurrection in the next phrase it is to be assumed, as anyone telling or hearing a story of someone being raised from the dead would assume in either the pagan or the Jewish world, that this referred to the body being raised to new life, leaving an empty tomb behind it. The fact that the empty tomb itself, so prominent in the gospel accounts, does not appear to be specifically mentioned in this passage, is not significant; the mention here of 'buried, then raised' no more needs to be amplified in that way than one would need to amplify the statement 'I walked down the street' with the qualification 'on my feet'. The discovery of the empty tomb in the gospel accounts is of course significant because it was (in all the stories) the first thing that alerted Jesus' followers to the fact that something extraordinary had happened; but when the story was telescoped into a compact formula it was not the principal point. The best hypothesis for why 'that he was buried' came to be part of this brief tradition is simply that the phrase summarized very succinctly that entire moment in the Easter narratives.

          © Copyright Original Source



          NT scholar Robert H. Stein adds to this,

          Source: The Historical Jesus: Jesus' mission, death, and Resurrection, edited by Craig A. Evans, Was the Tomb Really Empty? by Robert H. Stein

          The earliest tradition we possess that speaks of the resurrection is probably 1 Corinthians 15:3-4. It is a common consensus today among scholars that Paul here is quoting a confession of the early Church. This confession, which should probably be dated before A.D. 40, specifically states that Christ died and that he was buried. But what does 'being buried' refer to? Some have argued that 'he died' and 'was buried' go together and that the latter phrase simply emphasizes the conclusive reality of Jesus' death. Yet is this all that the tradition is saying? The words 'died', 'buried', and 'was raised' are unintelligible unless what 'died and was buried' was in fact 'raised'. While Paul does not anywhere specifically state that the tomb was empty, it would appear that in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 this is clearly implied. For Paul as a Pharisee, and no doubt for the Jerusalem Church also (which had a strong Pharisaic element; cf. Acts 15:5), the death-burial-resurrection of Jesus would have demanded an empty tomb.

          In Romans 6: 4 and Colossians 2:12 Paul uses the same expressions ('buried' and 'raised') that we find in 1 Corinthians 15:4. There is good reason to believe that the idea of being 'buried' and 'raised' with Christ in baptism as it is found in these two verses is traditional, for Paul introduces his discussion of this theme in Romans 6: 3 with 'Do you not know...,' implying that what he is saying is established doctrine not only in his own churches but also in a church that he did not found - the church in Rome. It was traditional, therefore, to understand the baptism of the believer as in some way reflecting or re-enacting the resurrection of Jesus

          ...

          Two other arguments can be listed to support the view that 'dead, buried, raised' would at least imply that the tomb was empty. The first involves the terms used to describe the resurrection of Jesus. One of those terms is 'raised' (egēgertai). He who died and was buried was raised. This would imply, at least to most, that 'what' was buried was raised and that the tomb as a result was empty.

          A second argument that can be mentioned is found in Acts 2: 29-31, where Peter contrasts the experience of David who died, was buried, and saw corruption with Jesus who was crucified and killed (v. 23) but whose flesh, unlike David's, saw no corruption because God raised him up. The difference between David and Jesus lies in the fact that the tomb of David was still occupied by the bones of David, for he saw corruption. The tomb of Jesus, on the other hand, was empty, for he saw no corruption. It is true that we have here Luke's account of Peter's pentecostal address, but it would appear that Luke has either used early tradition to formulate Peter's sermon or at least witnesses to an early tradition in which the tomb of Jesus was acknowledged as empty. This same comparison between David and Jesus is also found on the lips of Paul in Acts 13: 29-37.

          © Copyright Original Source



          And William Lane Craig points out in his essay in Jesus Under Fire,

          Source: Jesus Under Fire edited by Michael Wilkins and J.P. Moreland, Empty Tomb by William Lane Craig

          There is little doubt that Paul accepted not only the burial but also the empty tomb of Jesus, as is evident (a) from the sequence in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 (death - burial - resurrection); (b) from the Jewish concept of resurrection itself; (c) from the Pharisaic background and language; (d) from the expression "on the third day"; (e) from the phrase "from the dead" in Romans 4:24; (f) from his doctrine of the resurrection and transformation of the body (1 Cor. 15:35-50); and (g) from his belief in the personal return of Christ (1 Thess. 4:14-17). All these imply a physical resurrection and therefore an empty tomb. It seems nearly certain, then, that Paul believed in the empty tomb.

          © Copyright Original Source



          He also offers the following facts as evidence to support the argument for the empty tomb,

          1. The historical credibility of the burial story supports the empty tomb.
          2. Paul's testimony implies the fact of the empty tomb.
          3. The presence of the empty tomb narrative in the pre-Markan Passion story supports its historical credibility.
          4. The use of the “first day of the week” (Mark 16:2) instead of “on the third day” points to the primitiveness of the tradition of the empty tomb.
          5. The nature of the narrative itself is theologically unadorned and non-apologetic.
          6. The empty tomb was discovered by women.
          7. The investigation of the tomb by Peter and John is historically probable.
          8. It would have been virtually impossible for the disciples to proclaim the resurrection in Jerusalem had the tomb not been empty.
          9. The earliest Jewish polemic presupposes the empty tomb.
          10. The fact that Jesus’ tomb was not venerated as a shrine indicates that the tomb was empty.
          Last edited by Adrift; 05-12-2016, 11:58 AM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Gary View Post
            What do you mean by "focus"? I know the story. I am a preacher's kid. I've heard the story my whole life. What do you want me to focus on?
            "knowing the story" doesn't mean you understand it, or won't pervert the meanings.

            Could it be true? Yes. Is it probably true? No.
            Well, that's progress!
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              Well, that's progress!
              Actually it isn't. You haven't had many run-ins with Gary yet, but he likes playing around with words like probable/plausible/possible, but it's all a shell game. For instance, he claims that the miraculous is possible, but simultaneously argues tooth and nail against the possibility, finds the mere idea of the miraculous ridiculous (often comparing it to belief in leprechauns and fairies and the like) and labels himself a non-supernaturalist. So, no. He doesn't actually think it could be true. He's just saying that so that no one can accuse him of being what he is, which is close-minded.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                What do you mean by "focus"? I know the story. I am a preacher's kid. I've heard the story my whole life. What do you want me to focus on?

                Could it be true? Yes. Is it probably true? No.
                I deal with this one comment:

                “Could it be true? Yes. Is it probably true? No.”

                Is the reason you “feel” it is probably not true do to the fact it would have to be supernatural to happen that way?

                Scientist would never invoke the supernatural alternative if there was a natural possible explanation.

                If you “assume” Jesus is the son of God and Messiah, as prophesied about in the Old Testament, would it be probable that Jesus and God would allow Jesus to be tortured, humiliated, murdered and rise from the dead three days later to help willing individuals fulfill their earthly objective?

                What Jesus went through all his life and especially in his death and resurrection fits perfectly; what I would expect from Deity, but to non-believers it all sounds foolish. It all comes together for me, so it is logical and would not make sense if He did not rise.

                The suffering Messiah is found in Isaiah dated back prior to Christ, so for first century Jews it could be explained with the prophecies, so how do you explain away these prophecies (Is. 53)?

                Comment


                • Addressing each of the quotes in Adrift's post:

                  NT Wright: "The fact that the empty tomb itself, so prominent in the gospel accounts, does not appear to be specifically mentioned in this passage, is not significant; the mention here of 'buried, then raised' no more needs to be amplified in that way than one would need to amplify the statement 'I walked down the street' with the qualification 'on my feet'."

                  Poor analogy.

                  To walk, one must be on one's feet. To be buried, one does not need to be in a hand-hewn, rock tomb. One can simply be in a hole in the ground.

                  Robert Stein: "While Paul does not anywhere specifically state that the tomb was empty, it would appear that in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 this is clearly implied. For Paul as a Pharisee, and no doubt for the Jerusalem Church also (which had a strong Pharisaic element; cf. Acts 15:5), the death-burial-resurrection of Jesus would have demanded an empty tomb."

                  Assumption. I do not question that Paul believed that Jesus had been bodily raised from the dead. What I and many skeptics question is that Paul is referring to a burial in a rock tomb and not a hole in the ground. I don't think there is any way to tell from the passage. Stein is simply reading the Gospels into I Corinthians 15: Begging the Question.

                  Stein: "Two other arguments can be listed to support the view that 'dead, buried, raised' would at least imply that the tomb was empty. The first involves the terms used to describe the resurrection of Jesus. One of those terms is 'raised' (egēgertai). He who died and was buried was raised. This would imply, at least to most, that 'what' was buried was raised and that the tomb as a result was empty."

                  Assumption. The language certainly indicates a body being buried and then rising out of that burial location. The language does not tell us that the burial location was a hand-hewn rock mausoleum (tomb) and not a hole in the ground.

                  William Lane Craig: Source: Jesus Under Fire edited by Michael Wilkins and J.P. Moreland, Empty Tomb by William Lane Craig
                  "There is little doubt that Paul accepted not only the burial but also the empty tomb of Jesus, as is evident (a) from the sequence in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 (death - burial - resurrection); (b) from the Jewish concept of resurrection itself; (c) from the Pharisaic background and language; (d) from the expression "on the third day"; (e) from the phrase "from the dead" in Romans 4:24; (f) from his doctrine of the resurrection and transformation of the body (1 Cor. 15:35-50); and (g) from his belief in the personal return of Christ (1 Thess. 4:14-17). All these imply a physical resurrection and therefore an empty tomb. It seems nearly certain, then, that Paul believed in the empty tomb."

                  Assumption. All that this evidence indicates is that Paul believed that Jesus had been buried and had risen from the dead. It in no way indicates what type of burial location Paul believed that Jesus' body had been buried in. THAT IS THE ISSUE. The issue is not whether Paul or any other early Christian believed that Jesus had been bodily resurrected. The issue is from what type of BURIAL LOCATION Jesus was believed to have been resurrected from. No where in any of Paul's writings does he tell us.
                  Last edited by Gary; 05-12-2016, 12:44 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Adrift View Post
                    Actually it isn't.
                    Yeah, I was being overly optimistic.

                    You haven't had many run-ins with Gary yet, but he likes playing around with words like probable/plausible/possible, but it's all a shell game. For instance, he claims that the miraculous is possible, but simultaneously argues tooth and nail against the possibility, finds the mere idea of the miraculous ridiculous (often comparing it to belief in leprechauns and fairies and the like) and labels himself a non-supernaturalist. So, no. He doesn't actually think it could be true. He's just saying that so that no one can accuse him of being what he is, which is close-minded.
                    So, intellectual dishonesty.... um....

                    yeah, got it.


                    Thanks
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • Gary, I kind of think the fact they detailed how Jesus was buried would convey that something unusual DID happen.

                      But until accept that Jesus is Christ, and that he was raised from the dead, You will never acknowledge that. We Christians who pay attention to Scriptures know we must stand firm on the Resurrection. That's why you keep hammering away at us...you know we must and you want us to abandon it so badly. Hm. Why?
                      Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                        To be buried, one does not need to be in a hand-hewn, rock tomb. One can simply be in a hole in the ground.
                        No, being thrown into a hole in the ground to have your corpse devoured by crows and wild dogs is not at all the same thing as being buried.

                        Assumption. I do not question that Paul believed that Jesus had been bodily raised from the dead. What I and many skeptics question is that Paul is referring to a burial in a rock tomb and not a hole in the ground. I don't think there is any way to tell from the passage. Stein is simply reading the Gospels into I Corinthians 15: Begging the Question.
                        Nope. You're the one who's making the assumptions that Jesus' body was thrown into a pit to be devoured by wild animals. If such an alternative existed, then the early church's enemies would have mentioned it. They don't. Rather, they assume the empty tomb tradition.

                        Assumption. The language certainly indicates a body being buried and then rising out of that burial location. The language does not tell us that the burial location was a hand-hewn rock mausoleum (tomb) and not a hole in the ground.
                        A hole in the ground is not burial.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
                          \ That's why you keep hammering away at us...you know we must and you want us to abandon it so badly. Hm. Why?

                          Because he wants us to be as hopeless, miserable and amoral as him?
                          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by seer View Post
                            Because he wants us to be as hopeless, miserable and amoral as him?
                            Christ is Risen!
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                              Addressing each of the quotes in Adrift's post:
                              You haven't addressed the quotes in the slightest. And learn to use the quote tags. Dang dude, you've been on this forum for nearly a year now, is it that difficult?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                Christ is Risen!
                                No, just his ghost! ; )
                                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                14 responses
                                42 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                78 responses
                                411 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X