Book Plunge: Can Christians Prove The Resurrection?

[Gary]

As soon as you come up with one that does.

I have given you possible alternative explanations for every piece of evidence including the empty tomb, the alleged appearances, Paul's conversion, and the growth of a shameful new belief in an Honor-Shame society. You reject all these alternative explanations because they violate one of your generalizations.

The onus is on you to prove that it is impossible for your generalizations to have exceptions.

If each of your generalizations have at least one possible exception, then there is at least ONE plausible, alternative explanation for the early Christian resurrection belief. If you deny this you are demonstrating to everyone that you are illogical, unreasonable, and a fundamentalist.

I'm not asking you to admit that the alternative, naturalistic explanations are MORE plausible than your miracle/supernatural explanation, only that they exist.

"The idea of one person being resurrected before the general resurrection of the righteous would never occur to any first century Jew"---proven false. Jesus was telling his disciples for at least three years that he would be resurrected after being dead for three days and three nights.

"The empty tomb has only one explanation: a bodily resurrection"---proven false. Even many NT scholars question the historicity of Matthew's guards, therefore giving ample time for someone to move the body, even if we exclude the possibility that someone would move a body on the Sabbath. And even if there were guards, there is a window of time before the Sabbath when someone could have moved the body."

"The stone was too big to roll back without equipment or a large crowd"---proven false. Your own sources state that the stone could be moved by "several" men.

"No Jew would ever move a body"---proven false. See Jewish Virtual Library article above.

"No first century Jew living in an Honor-Shame society would ever believe in a crucified/resurrected Messiah without seeing a resurrected body with their own two eyes"---proven false. According to Paul, some Jews in Asia Minor converted because they "searched the Scriptures". They did not see a resurrected body, yet they believed this "shameful, unheard of" belief, based on their interpretation of an ancient book and believing that Paul's story of a "heavenly vision" reflected reality.

Now, Nick, man up and admit that there are plausible, alternative, naturalistic explanations for the early Christian resurrection belief.

[Jedidiah]

First of all you need a plausible explanation that covers all of the objections. Not one for each.

[psstein]

I can be reasonable, Nick. I am willing to admit that the bodily resurrection is a plausible explanation for the early Christian belief in Jesus' resurrection. I believe it is the least plausible of all possible explanations, but I will admit it is plausible.

Now Nick, prove to everyone that you are not a fundamentalist: Announce once and for all that you admit that there are other plausible explanations for the early Christian belief in Jesus' resurrection other than a miraculous bodily resurrection; admit that alternative, non-miraculous explanations are not just theoretically possible, but plausible: admit that alternative, non-miraculous explanations are capable of interpreting all the evidence for the early Christian belief in the resurrection of Jesus.

The issue isn't other explanations. The issue is the best explanation, based on the information we have.

With your "someone moved the body" theory, you have to a) figure out why someone would move the body and b) explain why that person remained silent.

[psstein]

The "sign of Jonah" sayings are part of Jesus' preaching that the Kingdom of God is at hand. This is called exegesis. Gary should try it, rather than ripping passages out of context.

[Gary]

The issue isn't other explanations. The issue is the best explanation, based on the information we have.

With your "someone moved the body" theory, you have to a) figure out why someone would move the body and b) explain why that person remained silent.

WAIT A MINUTE!

I am NOT trying to get Christians to accept that there are better explanations for the early Christian belief in the Resurrection. I would never expect any of you to agree to that. I am only asking Christians to admit that there are other plausible explanations for this belief.

If there are plausible explanations to each piece of evidence then there is a plausible explanation for all the evidence.

[Gary]

First of all you need a plausible explanation that covers all of the objections. Not one for each.

I get the impression that some of you believe that the onus is on skeptics to provide evidence of exactly how the body of Jesus left the tomb if it did not leave supernaturally as the Bible claims. This is false. Skeptics are under no obligation to provide evidence that proves one specific alternative explanation. We only need to demonstrate that the little evidence that there is can be explained by alternative, non-miracle, explanations.

Here is just one possible, alternative, non-miracle explanation:

Not all of Jesus' family believed that he was the Messiah, the Son of God. Some of them thought he was completely nuts. They also thought that Mary and James were nuts to believe his claims.

Jesus crucifixion was conclusive proof to these skeptical family members that Jesus was NOT the Messiah. Every first century Jew knew that the Messiah was not supposed to die. These family members were deeply ashamed that a member of their family had claimed to be the Messiah and had been hung on a tree by the hated Romans, a curse under Jewish law, proving without any doubt, that he was not the Messiah.

The family expected that the Romans would give them Jesus' body after he died to bury in a family burial plot (in Bethany), as was the Roman custom. The family was shocked when members of the Sanhedrin requested that the Romans give them the body. Why would the Sanhedrin want Jesus' body? This was a shocking departure from Jewish custom. The family receives the body, not Jewish authorities. Jesus mother had been right there at the foot of the cross. Why wasn't the body given to her??

The family was furious.

After the Romans took down Jesus' body and handed it to two members of the Sanhedrin, a couple of Jesus' brothers (not James) and a couple of his cousins followed Aramathea and the body, at a distance, to Aramathea's family tomb, immediately adjacent to Golgotha. They watched, from a distance, as Aramethea prepared the body, rolled the stone in front of the door, and left with other members of the Sanhedrin.

As soon as they were out of sight, the family moved the stone back, took the body out, rolled the stone back into place, and took the body to Bethany, where it was buried in an unmarked grave in the same family plot as Zechariah and Elizabeth. They told no one else, not even Jesus' mother (or James), for fear of what the Sanhedrin and Romans might do to them. All that mattered to them, is that their brother and cousin was buried in a family plot, as per Jewish custom in their Honor-Shame society, not in the tomb of one of the very men who had voted unanimously the night before to execute Jesus.

Sometime Saturday, the guards show up to the tomb and seal it shut. They do not roll the stone back to verify that the body is there as they assumed no one would have moved the heavy giant stone.

Very early Sunday morning, some of Jesus' female disciples travel to the tomb. As they reach the entrance of the Garden, they see a man. He turns to look at them..."It's Jesus!"...but he disappears into the mist of the early morning. The women don't go any further into the Garden (so they do not see that the stone is still in place in front of the tomb, nor do they see that the guards are still there). They run to tell the disciples the good news. On their way to the disciples they mention to some people on the road whom they know that Jesus is risen! Word spreads rapidly and makes its way back to the guards at the tomb. Horrified that if this claim is true they will be in danger of being executed for not having checked the tomb for the body prior to sealing it, they break the seal, move back the stone...and no body! The guards run to the Sanhedrin to see if they had moved the body on Friday. The Sanhedrin tells them that they will cover for them with Pilate if the guards will spread the rumor that the disciples had stolen the body.

When the women tell the disciples, the disciples don't believe it. "You saw the gardener!" they say.

The women return to the Garden to check the tomb...and find the stone rolled away.

And from there, the story takes on a life of its own, with embellishment after embellishment as it is told and retold for three to four decades before anyone writes it down. In the euphoria, excitement, and near hysteria in believing that Jesus is alive again, one disciple after another begins to have false sightings of Jesus, seeing him in the distance or in crowds, and some have vivid dreams where Jesus appears to them in person, allows them to touch him, and even eats fish with them.

And the brothers and cousins never say a word...for fear of their lives.

[Adrift]

Too long; Didn't read.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Someone apparently doesn't know that in this case, it would be Jewish custom to not give the family the body. The Sanhedrin was behind the crucifixion so they would be in charge of the body and part of the guard being there was not just to guard the tomb but to prevent mourners from coming. The family was not to come to the tomb to mourn.

[rogue06]

I get the impression that some of you believe that the onus is on skeptics to provide evidence of exactly how the body of Jesus left the tomb if it did not leave supernaturally as the Bible claims. This is false. Skeptics are under no obligation to provide evidence that proves one specific alternative explanation. We only need to demonstrate that the little evidence that there is can be explained by alternative, non-miracle, explanations.

Here is just one possible, alternative, non-miracle explanation:

Not all of Jesus' family believed that he was the Messiah, the Son of God. Some of them thought he was completely nuts. They also thought that Mary and James were nuts to believe his claims.

Jesus crucifixion was conclusive proof to these skeptical family members that Jesus was NOT the Messiah. Every first century Jew knew that the Messiah was not supposed to die. These family members were deeply ashamed that a member of their family had claimed to be the Messiah and had been hung on a tree by the hated Romans, a curse under Jewish law, proving without any doubt, that he was not the Messiah.

The family expected that the Romans would give them Jesus' body after he died to bury in a family burial plot (in Bethany), as was the Roman custom. The family was shocked when members of the Sanhedrin requested that the Romans give them the body. Why would the Sanhedrin want Jesus' body? This was a shocking departure from Jewish custom. The family receives the body, not Jewish authorities. Jesus mother had been right there at the foot of the cross. Why wasn't the body given to her??

The family was furious.

After the Romans took down Jesus' body and handed it to two members of the Sanhedrin, a couple of Jesus' brothers (not James) and a couple of his cousins followed Aramathea and the body, at a distance, to Aramathea's family tomb, immediately adjacent to Golgotha. They watched, from a distance, as Aramethea prepared the body, rolled the stone in front of the door, and left with other members of the Sanhedrin.

As soon as they were out of sight, the family moved the stone back, took the body out, rolled the stone back into place, and took the body to Bethany, where it was buried in an unmarked grave in the same family plot as Zechariah and Elizabeth. They told no one else, not even Jesus' mother (or James), for fear of what the Sanhedrin and Romans might do to them. All that mattered to them, is that their brother and cousin was buried in a family plot, as per Jewish custom in their Honor-Shame society, not in the tomb of one of the very men who had voted unanimously the night before to execute Jesus.

Sometime Saturday, the guards show up to the tomb and seal it shut. They do not roll the stone back to verify that the body is there as they assumed no one would have moved the heavy giant stone.

Very early Sunday morning, some of Jesus' female disciples travel to the tomb. As they reach the entrance of the Garden, they see a man. He turns to look at them..."It's Jesus!"...but he disappears into the mist of the early morning. The women don't go any further into the Garden (so they do not see that the stone is still in place in front of the tomb, nor do they see that the guards are still there). They run to tell the disciples the good news. On their way to the disciples they mention to some people on the road whom they know that Jesus is risen! Word spreads rapidly and makes its way back to the guards at the tomb. Horrified that if this claim is true they will be in danger of being executed for not having checked the tomb for the body prior to sealing it, they break the seal, move back the stone...and no body! The guards run to the Sanhedrin to see if they had moved the body on Friday. The Sanhedrin tells them that they will cover for them with Pilate if the guards will spread the rumor that the disciples had stolen the body.

When the women tell the disciples, the disciples don't believe it. "You saw the gardener!" they say.

The women return to the Garden to check the tomb...and find the stone rolled away.

And from there, the story takes on a life of its own, with embellishment after embellishment as it is told and retold for three to four decades before anyone writes it down. In the euphoria, excitement, and near hysteria in believing that Jesus is alive again, one disciple after another begins to have false sightings of Jesus, seeing him in the distance or in crowds, and some have vivid dreams where Jesus appears to them in person, allows them to touch him, and even eats fish with them.

And the brothers and cousins never say a word...for fear of their lives.

Except that when James and other family members started claiming that He had Risen they would have been mortified at how their plan back-fired and possibly endangered the entire family including themselves. They would have gone to them and told them the truth, taking them to the tomb where they placed them if necessary, in order to get them to shut up.

[Gary]

Someone apparently doesn't know that in this case, it would be Jewish custom to not give the family the body. The Sanhedrin was behind the crucifixion so they would be in charge of the body and part of the guard being there was not just to guard the tomb but to prevent mourners from coming. The family was not to come to the tomb to mourn.

Generalizations, assumptions, and ad hoc nonsense.

Please give a source that states that in cases where the Sanhedrin requested a crucifixion that the body was not given to the family, as was the custom in almost all Roman crucifixions.

"part of the guard being there was not just to guard the tomb but to prevent mourners from coming. The family was not to come to the tomb to mourn"

Huh?? The family takes the body BEFORE the guards get to the tomb, Nick. If you are going to critique my alternative explanations for an empty tomb, please at least read it first!

[Gary]

Except that when James and other family members started claiming that He had Risen they would have been mortified at how their plan back-fired and possibly endangered the entire family including themselves. They would have gone to them and told them the truth, taking them to the tomb where they placed them if necessary, in order to get them to shut up.

When James and Mary started claiming that Jesus had risen because there was an empty tomb, the family members who had secretly moved Jesus' body and buried him in Bethany, thought that they were nuttier than ever...but didn't say anything for fear for their lives.

If an invisible God moved the body, the family would not be in danger. Only if the authorities found out that it wasn't an invisible God, but human hands that moved the body, would they get in trouble. That is why they kept their mouths shut.

[Gary]

I have given just ONE possible non-miracle explanation which explains all the evidence and gives a motive for moving the body. Nick can come up with generalization after generalization against this possible explanation but the weakness in his argument is that most generalizations have exceptions. The onus is on Nick to prove that HIS generalizations do not have exceptions.

Each individual must decide for him or herself the following question: Which is more probable:

1. The family or others moved the body prior to the arrival of the guards (or there were no guards, as even many Christian apologists believe, giving more time for someone to move the body.)

2. A god moved the body.

There is no correct answer. But to say that the ONLY possible/plausible explanation is "a god did it" is irrational.

[Gary]

Too long; Didn't read.

Too bad.

My alternative explanation above completely dismantles the conservative/fundamentalist claim that the only plausible explanation for the early Christian belief in a resurrection was a supernatural act that "a god did it". Nick et al. can make generalization after generalization against my possible explanations (I can come up with many more) but Nick et al. cannot prove that these generalizations have no exceptions. Bottom line: If you believe that the probability that your invisible God did it is astronomically more probable than that somebody moved the body, you will never be convinced otherwise, no matter how many plausible, non-miracle explanations I give you.

But here is something else even more devastating to the conservative Christian belief of a Resurrection: I have dismantled it using ALL the claims in the four Gospels except for one: that a literal body left the tomb and appeared in the flesh to his followers, family, and one Pharisee. What if some of the claims in the Gospels are simply embellishments??

1. What if there were no guards?

Much more time for someone to take the body.

2. What if there was no tomb?

Even Christians admit that at most only 70% of NT scholars believe in the historicity of the empty tomb. Seventy percent is not an overwhelming majority. It is simply a majority. A majority can and many times has been wrong. So what if the empty tomb of Joseph or Arimathea is a later embellishment? Maybe that is why Paul never mentions an empty tomb. What if Jesus body was thrown into an unmarked common grave for criminals by the Romans and no Jew ever knew where it was? What if the true origin of the Resurrection story was simply based on post-death visions/vivid dreams and false sightings of Jesus?

See folks, there are many, many possible explanations for the Resurrection belief of early Christians other than that a god did it.

Open your eyes and see the truth.

Here is what everyone's favorite NT scholar, Bart Ehrman, says on the Empty Tomb:http://ehrmanblog.org/was-jesus-give...a-for-members/

[psstein]

Ehrman is wrong and is speaking outside his specialty. Craig Evans has convincingly demonstrated Jesus' burial, as did Byron McCabe in a book chapter published some 20-odd years ago.

[One Bad Pig]

I get the impression that some of you believe that the onus is on skeptics to provide evidence of exactly how the body of Jesus left the tomb if it did not leave supernaturally as the Bible claims. This is false. Skeptics are under no obligation to provide evidence that proves one specific alternative explanation. We only need to demonstrate that the little evidence that there is can be explained by alternative, non-miracle, explanations.

Here is just one possible, alternative, non-miracle explanation:

<snip imaginative speculation>

Yeah, and it's possible that monkeys might fly out my butt. You keep using the word "plausible." I don't think it means what you think it means.