Resurrection

[Im slow please be patient]

Why do you believe that the resurrection occurred? I can't really understand it.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Why couldn't one or two disciples have hallucinated and then convinced others?

Because they all willingly died brutal deaths for proclaiming it. Why would they do that over a second hand account from someone given over to hallucinations?

 

[Im slow please be patient]

Because they all willingly died brutal deaths for proclaiming it. Why would they do that over a second hand account from people given over to hallucinations?

I don't know that the sources for that are very good, but assuming they are, is it not possible that people could die for something that they believed to be true despite not having personally witnessed it?

 

[hawkman]

John 20:25 Context​

22And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: 23Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. 24But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. 25The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. 26And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. 27Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. 28And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I don't know that the sources for that are very good

If you don't believe Jesus actually died and rose from the dead, and you don't believe the disciples died for proclaiming He did, and you don't believe the Biblical account, whose account do you believe?

is it not possible that people could die for something that they believed to be true despite not having personally witnessed it?

No. I do not believe people willingly suffer brutal deaths for something they simply heard by second hand account from someone given over to hallucinations, which is your argument.

 

[Beetow]

.
RE: Why do you believe that the resurrection occurred?

REPLY: I've been an on-going student of the Bible since early 1968 via numerous
sermons, lectures, seminars, books, Sunday school classes, and radio programs. In
all those years nobody yet-- not one preacher, not one author, not one Sunday
school teacher, nor one radio speaker --has ever produced rock solid, iron clad,
incontestable empirical evidence proving beyond a shadow of sensible doubt that
that Jesus' crucified dead body was restored to life.

FAQ: How it is that you believe in his resurrection without a good reason to do so?

REPLY: My conscience is relentless, i.e. it insists he did, viz: it's an intuitive conviction
that I have thus far been unable to shake off.

Now of course feelings are not facts; nevertheless feelings, when they're strong
enough, easily overwhelm logic and reason. In other words: my intuition tells me
Jesus' crucified dead body was restored to life in spite of common sense telling
otherwise.

Why does anybody believe in a their relgion? Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, Bahá'í,
Hare Krishna, Jehovah's Witness, Mormon, Catholic, Baptist, Judaism, Voodoo,
Wiccan, Jain, Druze, Native American, etc, etc, etc. The answer? Because it
grips their heart-- the core of their being --which is very different than
persuading someone with logic and reasoning.

When folks are persuaded to buy into a religion by means of logic, they can just as
easily be persuaded to give it up by logic. But someone whose heart is gripped by
their religion is not easily removed regardless of how strong, how sensible, how
convincing, nor how logical the opposition's argument. In point of fact, one of the
prerequisites to Christian salvation is believing with one's heart rather than one's
head. (Rom 10:8-9)
_

 

[Free]

Why couldn't one or two disciples have hallucinated and then convinced others?

We have the problem that none of them expected him to even die, much less rise from the dead, so there is no reason that they should have such a hallucination. More importantly, at any point, if Jesus's body was always in the tomb, literally anyone could have gone to check--Pharisees, priests, soldiers, disciples, or anyone else. But, none did, and the religious leaders even paid the guards to keep quiet about the empty tomb.

Besides, the rest of the disciples didn't initially believe the women's testimony as it was, so two other disciples did go and check. Then, just prior to Jesus's ascension, some of his disciples worshiped him, "but some doubted" (Matt. 28:17). That is, despite seeing him some doubted.

There just is nothing to support the idea of even one disciples hallucinating and convincing the rest.

 

[Im slow please be patient]

If you don't believe Jesus actually died and rose from the dead, and you don't believe the disciples died for proclaiming He did, and you don't believe the Biblical account, whose account do you believe?


No. I do not believe people willingly suffer brutal deaths for something they simply heard by second hand account from someone given over to hallucinations, which is your argument.

So how would this be different from later martyrs dying for things that they did not personally witness, but believed in?

 

[Im slow please be patient]

We have the problem that none of them expected him to even die, much less rise from the dead, so there is no reason that they should have such a hallucination. More importantly, at any point, if Jesus's body was always in the tomb, literally anyone could have gone to check--Pharisees, priests, soldiers, disciples, or anyone else. But, none did, and the religious leaders even paid the guards to keep quiet about the empty tomb.

Besides, the rest of the disciples didn't initially believe the women's testimony as it was, so two other disciples did go and check. Then, just prior to Jesus's ascension, some of his disciples worshiped him, "but some doubted" (Matt. 28:17). That is, despite seeing him some doubted.

There just is nothing to support the idea of even one disciples hallucinating and convincing the rest.

This is assuming that the gospel accounts are reliable.

 

[Free]

This is assuming that the gospel accounts are reliable.

Of course, but regarding Jesus and the likelihood of his resurrection, we also have this extra-biblical writing, from very early 2nd century, during a time of persecution of Christians:

"They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so."

https://earlychristianwritings.com/text/pliny.html

We also have this writing of Josephus, from around 93 A.D.:

3. (63) Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works-a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; (64) and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/maps/primary/josephusjesus.html

There are many ways and things to consider when it comes to the reliability of the gospels, but there really is little reason, if any, to doubt that the gospel accounts are reliable. Why would they be unreliable? Again, we run into the issue of having to explain why the writers of the NT would write things that they knew would bring persecution and death upon themselves. What gain is there?

Here is a great resource (one of many):

https://www.wesleyhuff.com/can-i-trust-the-bible

 

[Who Me]

Why couldn't one or two of the disciples have seen Jesus and then convinced others?

Two people see the miracle of a resurrected Jesus and convince their friends it is true.

That is what you are suggesting. Can you tell me what the difference is between two people seeing what happened and all the reported witnesses in the bible.
Because two eye witness proves the bible account that you are arguing against.

As it happens historians, both Christian and atheist accept the biblical account.

Here's a question for you.
Why did people in the ancient Roman world become Christian?
Why believe in a " crucified " god? Only slaves and traitors were crucified.
A God from where? Who was a manual worker?
He wasn't respectable literally a country bumkin from the backend of the empire.
Who expected followers behaviour to change radically.

Whys hold people today become Christian, many of the Romans objections still apply, but people are being converted, why?

 

[Hidden In Him]

So how would this be different from later martyrs dying for things that they did not personally witness, but believed in?

Answer my question first.

 

[Who Me]

This is assuming that the gospel accounts are reliable.

The usual rule in courts etc is to assume a statement is accurate, yes it is checked for accuracy, but the presumption is it is accurate.
Do you have grounds for doubting the bible, other than it contradicts your beliefs?
Because otherwise you should be working on the assumption that the bible is accurate.

 

[WIP]

Why couldn't one or two of the disciples have seen Jesus and then convinced others?

Actually, in two of the Gospels, Mark and Luke, it tells of some women first encountering the risen Lord and when they told the disciples, they did not believe them. But, something must have happened after that because those same disciples would all later be killed for claiming Jesus had risen. We can read all four of the Gospels to learn what did happen. Jesus appeared to them Himself, multiple times.

 

[Im slow please be patient]

Of course, but regarding Jesus and the likelihood of his resurrection, we also have this extra-biblical writing, from very early 2nd century, during a time of persecution of Christians:

"They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so."

https://earlychristianwritings.com/text/pliny.html

We also have this writing of Josephus, from around 93 A.D.:

3. (63) Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works-a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; (64) and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/maps/primary/josephusjesus.html

There are many ways and things to consider when it comes to the reliability of the gospels, but there really is little reason, if any, to doubt that the gospel accounts are reliable. Why would they be unreliable? Again, we run into the issue of having to explain why the writers of the NT would write things that they knew would bring persecution and death upon themselves. What gain is there?

Here is a great resource (one of many):

https://www.wesleyhuff.com/can-i-trust-the-bible

I don't think that the gospels would have been made up if the disciples didn't genuinely believe in the resurrection, but is it possible that they became convinced of it through one or two who had hallucinations and then wrote these stories to be more convincing to other people?

 

[Im slow please be patient]

The usual rule in courts etc is to assume a statement is accurate, yes it is checked for accuracy, but the presumption is it is accurate.
Do you have grounds for doubting the bible, other than it contradicts your beliefs?
Because otherwise you should be working on the assumption that the bible is accurate.

So why do I work on that assumption for the Bible but not for other religious texts?

 

[Im slow please be patient]

Actually, in two of the Gospels, Mark and Luke, it tells of some women first encountering the risen Lord and when they told the disciples, they did not believe them. But, something must have happened after that because those same disciples would all later be killed for claiming Jesus had risen. We can read all four of the Gospels to learn what did happen. Jesus appeared to them Himself, multiple times.

I don't know that the sources for the disciples' martyrdom are that good, but assuming they are, can people not die for something that they believe to be true despite not personally witnessing it?

 

[Im slow please be patient]

Two people see the miracle of a resurrected Jesus and convince their friends it is true.

That is what you are suggesting. Can you tell me what the difference is between two people seeing what happened and all the reported witnesses in the bible.
Because two eye witness proves the bible account that you are arguing against.

As it happens historians, both Christian and atheist accept the biblical account.

Here's a question for you.
Why did people in the ancient Roman world become Christian?
Why believe in a " crucified " god? Only slaves and traitors were crucified.
A God from where? Who was a manual worker?
He wasn't respectable literally a country bumkin from the backend of the empire.
Who expected followers behaviour to change radically.

Whys hold people today become Christian, many of the Romans objections still apply, but people are being converted, why?

Sorry, I meant to ask why one or two of them couldn't have hallucinated and then convinced the others. Not actually "saw" him.

 

[Im slow please be patient]

Answer my question first.

About what I believe? I don't know what I believe.

 

[Hidden In Him]

About what I believe? I don't know what I believe.

But you seem to know what you do not believe, and that is the scriptural account, and anything contained in it.

So my questions are:

1. Why is that? and
2. How can you be sure it is not the truth if you have nothing stronger to believe?

 

[Free]

I don't think that the gospels would have been made up if the disciples didn't genuinely believe in the resurrection, but is it possible that they became convinced of it through one or two who had hallucinations and then wrote these stories to be more convincing to other people?

No, I don't think that is at all possible, for the reasons I've already given. Jesus's body could have been produced at any time by anyone who doubted or wanted to prove that he hadn't risen, such as the Jewish authorities. And even when the disciples saw Jesus at his ascension, some of them still doubted. No one expected Jesus to rise again--they didn't expect the Messiah to die in the first place. The lack of a single person ever producing the body of Jesus very strongly suggests that he rose from the dead and no hallucinating was involved.

The gospels are eyewitness accounts, not only of those who either wrote or dictated them, but they were also based on numerous other eyewitnesses. There were a lot of people who could have otherwise come forward and produced the body of Jesus or disputed other things in the gospels. But no one did so, even as Christianity began to quickly spread.

https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/analyzing-alternative-theories-for-the-resurrection/