Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary

[Gary]

Wait. So Gary thinks that Jesus should have resurrected Himself in front of witnesses? Why is that necessary? The disciples knew that Jesus was dead and were not expecting Jesus to come back to life. They then see Jesus alive after finding out that the tomb is empty. What about the travelers on the road to Emmaus who encountered Jesus without recognizing Him first? Gary is goofy!

There is no evidence for the supernatural event itself. Claims of post-death appearances come a dime a dozen.

Here is one "appearance story" from very recently. If people living today believe that their dead loved ones come back and visit them, why should we be shocked at stories from TWO THOUSAND years ago claiming the very same thing? Except for Paul, the appearances of Jesus all happened to grieving former friends and family members. Jesus didn't appear to a group of Romans or to the Sanhedrin, did he? Even Paul admits that his experience was not reality, but a vision. We don't believe these "appearance stories" today, so why should we believe them from so long ago??

----I recently experienced a friends’ death back around Thanksgiving time (November, 2009). Her 25 year old cerebral palsy disabled son just told me (February, 2010) that he had been crying for his mother, and asking God to help him, because he missed his mother. At some point, the room became dark, and his mother appeared in glorious apparel. She then “read a letter” to him to comfort him, and tell him that she had to die, and leave him behind, so that he would learn to do things on his own. She also advised him to return to a certain church campground where he had been before, where yearly revivals took place. He said when the vision was finished, he felt a tremendous peace.----

Source: https://heavenawaits.wordpress.com/v...ed-loved-ones/

See any similarities? I do:

1. The deceased only appears to grieving family and/or friends.
2. The deceased attempts to comfort the living, explaining the reason, the necessity for his or her death.

Here is another "appearance" from the same source:

---When I was younger, and still living with my parents, my grandmother died. My mother had fallen asleep in the living room on the sofa. She awoke to see a figure in the hallway, dressed in a white nightgown. She ignored it because she thought it was me, up for some reason. The figure went over to one of the pictures in the hallway and pointed to it. It then walked off. She fell back asleep, until awakened by a phone call from my grandfather. My grandmother had gotten up in the middle of the night, fallen, and died. When my mother went home to the funeral, she found money behind the picture frame in my grandmother’s hallway, just as the dream/vision indicated. My parents were able to buy a new car that they needed with the money. ---

OMG! There is no other plausible explanation: the woman's grandmother's ghost really did appear to her mother, and, pointed to a photo on the wall, leading to untold riches...or at least enough riches to buy a new Buick!

See, folks, how strange coincidences and people's fertile imaginations can mix to make the most incredible of "miracle claims" today, so why not a couple thousand years ago?

[psstein]

New Atheist talking points, drink.

[Gary]

New Atheist talking points, drink.

I repeat: Would someone please show me just ONE position that I have taken on this thread that the overwhelming majority (greater than 90%) of NT scholars would refute as false?

1. My doubt as to the historicity of the empty tomb.
2. My doubt as to the historicity of the Joseph of Aramathea story.
3. My doubt that Nick's "Honor-Shame" argument is valid for ALL first century inhabitants of Palestine. My doubt that exceptions to this generalization are impossible, or at a minimum, "implausible", as Nick seems to suggest.
4. My doubt that Paul ever claimed to have seen a resurrected body with his own two eyes. (Not whether or not he believed Jesus had been bodily resurrected but that he had seen Jesus' resurrected body himself.)
5. My doubt that eyewitnesses wrote any of the four gospels.

Please, prove to me that an overwhelming consensus of NT scholars (greater than 90%) holds that my position on any these issues is incorrect and uninformed

[One Bad Pig]

Of Berlinerblau??

Who cares.

YOU do, or you wouldn't have brought him up.

Why don't you address my central statement.

CHRISTIANS
HAVE
ZERO
EVIDENCE
FOR
A
FIRST
CENTURY
REANIMATION/RESURRECTION.

...that you accept. Circumstantial evidence is still evidence.

[Apologiaphoenix]

I'm thinking it would be hysterical to imagine Gary as a criminal defense lawyer.

[Apologiaphoenix]

What, we should drop everything to immediately reply to one of your elephant hurls?

So how long were you waiting for an answer to your question? Do you still even have one?

[Christianbookworm]

I'm thinking it would be hysterical to imagine Gary as a criminal defense lawyer.

If a crime was committed with no witnesses with video cameras, it's impossible for it to be solved!

[One Bad Pig]

So how long were you waiting for an answer to your question? Do you still even have one?

I honestly don't remember. In some fairness, Gary is responding to more people. Expecting an answer within an hour is more than a little ridiculous, however.

[Apologiaphoenix]

I honestly don't remember. In some fairness, Gary is responding to more people. Expecting an answer within an hour is more than a little ridiculous, however.

He also has this delusion that he's some sort of serious threat.

[Christianbookworm]

He also has this delusion that he's some sort of serious threat.

Sure. As much threat as a marshmallow gun!

[tabibito]

2000 + posts in 11 days - Gotta give him credit for sticktoitiveness.

[Gary]

YOU do, or you wouldn't have brought him up.

...that you accept. Circumstantial evidence is still evidence.

You have no eyewitnesses of the "car accident", only alleged appearances of the dead driver a few days later. You therefore have ZERO evidence for the car accident.

[Gary]

I'm thinking it would be hysterical to imagine Gary as a criminal defense lawyer.

More snide remarks but you obviously can't refute my statement, can you, Nick?

I repeat: Would someone please show me just ONE position that I have taken on this thread that the overwhelming majority (greater than 90%) of NT scholars would refute as false?

1. My doubt as to the historicity of the empty tomb.
2. My doubt as to the historicity of the Joseph of Aramathea story.
3. My doubt that Nick's "Honor-Shame" argument is valid for ALL first century inhabitants of Palestine. My doubt that exceptions to this generalization are impossible, or at a minimum, "implausible", as Nick seems to suggest.
4. My doubt that Paul ever claimed to have seen a resurrected body with his own two eyes. (Not whether or not he believed Jesus had been bodily resurrected but that he had seen Jesus' resurrected body himself.)
5. My doubt that eyewitnesses wrote any of the four gospels.

Please, prove to me that an overwhelming consensus of NT scholars (greater than 90%) holds that my position on any these issues is incorrect and uninformed

[Gary]

Sure. As much threat as a marshmallow gun!

More childish insults, but no refutation of my claim:

I repeat: Would someone please show me just ONE position that I have taken on this thread that the overwhelming majority (greater than 90%) of NT scholars would refute as false?

1. My doubt as to the historicity of the empty tomb.
2. My doubt as to the historicity of the Joseph of Aramathea story.
3. My doubt that Nick's "Honor-Shame" argument is valid for ALL first century inhabitants of Palestine. My doubt that exceptions to this generalization are impossible, or at a minimum, "implausible", as Nick seems to suggest.
4. My doubt that Paul ever claimed to have seen a resurrected body with his own two eyes. (Not whether or not he believed Jesus had been bodily resurrected but that he had seen Jesus' resurrected body himself.)
5. My doubt that eyewitnesses wrote any of the four gospels.

Please, prove to me that an overwhelming consensus of NT scholars (greater than 90%) holds that my position on any these issues is incorrect and uninformed

[Apologiaphoenix]

More snide remarks but you obviously can't refute my statement, can you, Nick?

I repeat: Would someone please show me just ONE position that I have taken on this thread that the overwhelming majority (greater than 90%) of NT scholars would refute as false?

1. My doubt as to the historicity of the empty tomb.
2. My doubt as to the historicity of the Joseph of Aramathea story.
3. My doubt that Nick's "Honor-Shame" argument is valid for ALL first century inhabitants of Palestine. My doubt that exceptions to this generalization are impossible, or at a minimum, "implausible", as Nick seems to suggest.
4. My doubt that Paul ever claimed to have seen a resurrected body with his own two eyes. (Not whether or not he believed Jesus had been bodily resurrected but that he had seen Jesus' resurrected body himself.)
5. My doubt that eyewitnesses wrote any of the four gospels.

Please, prove to me that an overwhelming consensus of NT scholars (greater than 90%) holds that my position on any these issues is incorrect and uninformed

You're missing the point. This is like saying someone should be taken seriously on science because they agree the Earth goes around the sun.