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

[DesertBerean]

There's no reason that Pilate can't have have allowed Jesus's body to be turned over to whoever requested it. It's on YOU to prove he didn't.

[Gary]

Given your track record here, I'd like to see some proof that what you presented is an accurate description of the theory AND proof that it is indeed the "most common" among skeptics. Of course, even conceding the above, the theory requires ignoring the prime sources of evidence to even get off the ground.

Prime sources?? You mean the ONE anonymous story written circa 70 AD? The very document which is under question for historical accuracy??? Please explain why it is impossible or improbable that the author of Mark invented this detail just as the author of Matthew invented dead saints roaming the streets of a major city.

[Gary]

What evidence do you have Gary, that the Jews in Jerusalem typically buried their dead in the ground like we do today? Even secular historians say that they used family tombs where they would lay the bodies, wrapped in spices until only the bones remained, and then put the bones in a box, and the tomb would be ready for the next family member. Heck the tombs are still THERE today.

Jodi Magness is the Kenan Distinguished Professor for Teaching Excellence in Early Judaism in the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She is an active member of the Society of Biblical Literature.

source: https://www.sbl-site.org/publication...?articleId=640

[DesertBerean]

JERUSALEM IS WHERE CHRISTIANITY BEGAN! It is the most improbable place for it to take root, right where he died and was buried under the Romans! Witnesses galore to contradict the apostles' claims! But even when the apostles were dragged before the Sanhedrin, the Jews did not deny the resurrection. They instead forbade them to preach in the name of Jesus.

And until you unearth one syllable from the the Jewish side of the story, dated up to the same criteria YOU demand for the Gospels, you have NOTHING to stand on!

[Sparko]

Jodi Magness is the Kenan Distinguished Professor for Teaching Excellence in Early Judaism in the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She is an active member of the Society of Biblical Literature.

source: https://www.sbl-site.org/publication...?articleId=640

ah thanks.

Hey I have an idea. since you like this NT scholar and consider her authoritative, why don't we go ahead and take her entire quote, in CONTEXT?

https://www.sbl-site.org/publication....sxXSfnIY.dpuf

Gee, Gary, she seems to actually believe the gospel stories are accurate and that Jesus was not buried in a trench.

Thanks, buddy!

[RhinestoneCowboy]

which is why Joseph went and asked Pilate for permission. derp.

Interesting. Was this the same Joseph that was a "prominent member of the council" and condemned Jesus to death in Mark 14:55, 64?

Notice how Matthew omits Joseph being a member of the council and Luke makes sure to add that Joseph "had not consented to their plan and action." It seems they saw problems with Mark's story too.

[RhinestoneCowboy]

There's no reason that Pilate can't have have allowed Jesus's body to be turned over to whoever requested it. It's on YOU to prove he didn't.

The evidence we have for Pilate is that he didn't care about Jewish law or their sensitivities so considering this and the other aforementioned improbabilities, it seems you're trying to shift the burden.

[DesertBerean]

ah thanks.

Hey I have an idea. since you like this NT scholar and consider her authoritative, why don't we go ahead and take her entire quote, in CONTEXT?

https://www.sbl-site.org/publication....sxXSfnIY.dpuf

Gee, Gary, she seems to actually believe the gospel stories are accurate and that Jesus was not buried in a trench.

Thanks, buddy!

Yeah...I forgot. Gary doesn't care about keeping things in context. Or RhinestoneCowboy, apparently. Fine; let them dig this dirt trench deeper around themselves.

[DesertBerean]

The evidence we have for Pilate is that he didn't care about Jewish law or their sensitivities so considering this and the other aforementioned improbabilities, it seems you're trying to shift the burden.

Yet he was so surprised to learn Jesus was dead, he sent to verify it instead of sending Joseph away. He had enough interest to ensure Jesus was indeed dead. He didn't just say, "Whatever...we'll dispose of him when we feel like it.."

[Sparko]

The evidence we have for Pilate is that he didn't care about Jewish law or their sensitivities so considering this and the other aforementioned improbabilities, it seems you're trying to shift the burden.

The evidence you have for Pilate is in the gospels. He didn't want to condemn Jesus to death in the first place. He had no reason to withhold Jesus body, especially when asked by a wealthy member of the council.

In fact you have no reason to doubt the gospel accounts, other than you don't like them. They are the official evidence. The heavy burden is yours and Gary's. Your threads always end up with a bunch of arguments from silence, denouncing the official documentary evidence and saying "well what if..." - the same dumbass arguments over and over.

[RhinestoneCowboy]

Yet he was so surprised to learn Jesus was dead, he sent to verify it instead of sending Joseph away. He had enough interest to ensure Jesus was indeed dead. He didn't just say, "Whatever...we'll dispose of him when we feel like it.."

You're using the same source to prove the reliability of the source. That's circular.

[Gary]

most were not as famous or loved by the masses like Jesus was.

So the anonymously written, non-contemporary, book under question says...

[Sparko]

You're using the same source to prove the reliability of the source. That's circular.

and you are not using any source at all. That's stupid. She was not using the source to prove the reliability of the source. She was using the source to show what happened to Jesus' body because it IS the reliable documentary source.

[Gary]

which is why Joseph went and asked Pilate for permission. derp.

So the anonymous, written-decades-later, in a far away land, uncorroborated by contemporary sources, book, which is the current topic of discussion regarding whether or not it contains non-historical embellishments, says...

[Faber]

Interesting. Was this the same Joseph that was a "prominent member of the council" and condemned Jesus to death in Mark 14:55, 64?

Notice how Matthew omits Joseph being a member of the council and Luke makes sure to add that Joseph "had not consented to their plan and action." It seems they saw problems with Mark's story too.

Of the 71 members of the sanhedrin, only 23 functioned as judges. The others stood by in the event of a tie (if there were an odd number of abstentions). Joseph and Nicodemus may not have been part of that council.