So, was Jesus Resurrected?

[cj.23]

Hi Cj,
Let's assume that you are correct and we have all of these witness statements and they are true sworn personal statements and not merely the hearsay that they all are. Let's consider these witnesses as being real.

Er, they are hearsay? None of the supposed witnesses speaks bar one, Paul. We have only one sworn piece of testimony -- Paul's. Unless you know better?

These witnesses are all people with an education and world understanding equal to taht of 2000 years ago. Majority are unread. none are unaware how sex results in a baby. Majority have very little understanding of human medicine and how the brain/body works. There are no cameras. There are no videos. There are no anything that would suggest a visual record of Jesus that would make it easy for them to have been able to place a face with a person.

Did Jews use representational art anyway? I think the no graven image thing might have cut in and been applied even to normal folks? So yep...

With that said, what confirmation do we have that all these witnesses weren't simply mistaken or decieved?

None at all. After all if a load of people can see the sun swoop down from the sky (Fatima) people can see anything. People hallucinate, even healthy people, and people claim to see dead folks. Nothing odd about that. They could easily have been mistaken or deceived - the question is if they were, how did it happen? If Paul is right it starts with a single appearance to Cephas/Peter.

I would not stress the idea that people 2000 years ago were less sophisticated in dealing with these things though. Sure there are popular culture frameworks for paranormal beliefs, just as there are now - but some of those folks, like say Philo, were pretty good thinkers, and there were plenty of critical thinkers in the ancient world.

Doesn't an imposter or a falsely documented death make much more sense to explain the resurrection story?

Well they make sense certainly yes. An imposter is a complicated issue, for reasosn I discussed onthe previous page, but we can't rule it out. flasely documented? Um, thats more tricky - because we seem to have varying traditions emerging about events, which might imply some event occurred which was then reported, confabiulated, and confused. We will discuss this. But yes, both perfectly sound hypotheses to explore.

Why should we beleive that these people couldn't have been fooled?

course they could have been fooled, they were human. The human capacity for self deception is vast. I don't see why we should believe they were not fooled at this stafge in the enquiry.

Why should we believe that the people placing Jesus in the Tomb were able to tell the difference between a coma and death?

I don't know enough to answer that yet. My suspicionis they may not have, but they may have had moremedical knowledge than I am crediting them with. But a revived Jesus faces the problem Bokonon raised - what happened to them?

I must again remind that we have mondern witnesses who swear to have seen Elvis alive in the 80s and 90s. hundreds and hundreds of eye witnesses with photos. Does this provide proof that elvis was actually alive or that he was resurrected?

I actually think it entirely possible Elvis WAS alive as it happens - about the only rock star death I would say I had a glimmer of doubt about. However sure, people see folks who are dead, granted.

If not, then why should we allow 2000 year old witness statements as proof of a resurrection 2000 years ago?

Did I suggest we should?

cj x

 

[cj.23]

I was attempting to avoid a protracted discussion on the fact that the witnesses aren't even "good" witnesses in any legal sense.

But wanted to go one step further and show that a bunch of people 2000 years ago claim something great happened. Ok, great. We have a bunch of magical claims of people from hundreds to thousands of years ago. We typically call it BS based upon our understanding of nature. So why is this any different?

It's not. I study precisely those phenomena, and i don't call BS. I ask "so what is actually happening here?" Youn may not have noticed, but I'm appraoching this froma historical/parapsychological perspective, as those are the fields in which I am qualified. I just feel that is more useful than the faith basedapproach when we want to get to the truth here.

cj x

 

[Darat]

Er, they are hearsay? None of the supposed witnesses speaks bar one, Paul. We have only one sworn piece of testimony -- Paul's. Unless you know better?

...snip...

And as I pointed out Paul had strong motivation to come up with anything that supported his authority.

 

[cj.23]

Immortal being can't die because they're ... well ...immortal.

If you can't die you can't be "resurrected".

At best the whole myth is one big con.

So Jesus must be an ordinary guy turned into a zombie.



Pass the chainsaw.


GrrrrRRRRRrrrrrrr-r-rr-rr-rr...put.....r-rr-rr-rr-rrrrrraaaaAAaaaar!







.

Thats good! Immortal beings who happen to be Gods who created these laws of life and death can presumably subject themselves to them, and then choose to un-subject themselves to them, for reasons which seem odd to me - look up the Augustinian Theodicy, which I usally summarise as "God sacrifices Himself to Himself to appease Himself". Maybe that convinces you, it just makes me laugh, cry or reach for a drink. I have a feeling you are actually making a very profound point (possibly by mistake, but it's good anyway), but it's a theological one and I lack the skill set or inclination to try and work through it. If anyone lse cares to, go for it. I'm going to try and skip the theology here!

cj x

 

[cj.23]

And as I pointed out Paul had strong motivation to come up with anything that supported his authority.

Yep

cj x

 

[cj.23]

Philisophical mumbo jumbo doesn't change reality either... We all still die, noone comes back, cope...

I am not as far as I know that bothered by death - I would like to avoid it if possible, maybe by a transhumanist route, maybe by some kind of personal immortality. However that seems to have no bearing on the question of what happened 2000 years ago?

cj x

 

[Cainkane1]

No.

Theres a book called "The Passover Plot" that outlines a supposed plot o make Jesus appear to have died on the cross. The Roman centurion was bribed to put drugs on the sponge offered to Jesus and cause him to only appear dead. Then he was "miraculously" revived. I personally don't believe he was resurrected or that if he was crucified he survived the ordeal.

 

[Hux]

We are asked to imagine that the laws of physics were suspended for the sake of one person, despite the observational evidence that dead tissue does not reanimate.

No one even witnessed a resurrection. That might have been a powerful factor. That He ended up flying in the air is incredibly convenient.

Jesus resurrected, it is said, at least two people. If resurrection is an escape from death, then where are these people now? Where are all the Saints and the dead that got up and walked around Jerusalem at the Crucifiction? These people are never mentioned again nor is it claimed they ascended into heaven. Presumably the undead cannot die again, so where are they?

Without invoking an argument from numbers, there are billions on this planet who consider a resurrection to be ridiculous. Even certain early christians (the Gnostics) were wiped out by other Christians because they didn't believe(amongst other things) that Jesus was resurrected. Muslims say they took Him down and put a ringer in His place. Either resurrection is unique or in the case of other Gods it is a common prerequisite for claims of divinity. In which case it is no big deal as far as Christianity goes.

 

[joobz]

It's not. I study precisely those phenomena, and i don't call BS. I ask "so what is actually happening here?" Youn may not have noticed, but I'm appraoching this froma historical/parapsychological perspective, as those are the fields in which I am qualified. I just feel that is more useful than the faith basedapproach when we want to get to the truth here.

cj x

certainly. But, then the possible answers are rather trivial, aren't they?
Someone made it up and people were fooled. Why does anyone start a cult?

 

[cj.23]

certainly. But, then the possible answers are rather trivial, aren't they?
Someone made it up and people were fooled. Why does anyone start a cult?

I don't know. But I consider this question " Why does anyone start a cult?" and the answer thereto extremely non-trivial.

cj x

 

[cj.23]

We are asked to imagine that the laws of physics were suspended for the sake of one person, despite the observational evidence that dead tissue does not reanimate.

Yes, that is precisely the Christian belief claim.

No one even witnessed a resurrection. That might have been a powerful factor. That He ended up flying in the air is incredibly convenient.

No, but they witnessed the claim is the result of thta resurrection - dead guy walking about.

Jesus resurrected, it is said, at least two people. If resurrection is an escape from death, then where are these people now? Where are all the Saints and the dead that got up and walked around Jerusalem at the Crucifiction? These people are never mentioned again nor is it claimed they ascended into heaven. Presumably the undead cannot die again, so where are they?

Extremely pertinent and sensible questions. I think we need to look at the bolded bits?

Without invoking an argument from numbers, there are billions on this planet who consider a resurrection to be ridiculous. Even certain early christians (the Gnostics) were wiped out by other Christians because they didn't believe(amongst other things) that Jesus was resurrected.

Were they? Wiped out that is, by Christians on these grounds? Genuine question.

Either resurrection is unique or in the case of other Gods it is a common prerequisite for claims of divinity. In which case it is no big deal as far as Christianity goes.

Can you think of any other resurrected gods? I tried this a while ago, as did quite independently Richard Carrier - I think we both found one possible. I will discuss it if you want. As H3LL sagely pointed out, immortal beings don't die, and it is not, perhaps for that reason a common motif?

cj x

 

[cj.23]

Theres a book called "The Passover Plot" that outlines a supposed plot o make Jesus appear to have died on the cross. The Roman centurion was bribed to put drugs on the sponge offered to Jesus and cause him to only appear dead. Then he was "miraculously" revived. I personally don't believe he was resurrected or that if he was crucified he survived the ordeal.

Yes, Hugh Schonfield I think, in the late 60's. Be good to talk that through. You read it? I don't have a copy.

cj x

 

[Undesired Walrus]

cj, I admire the effort you have put into this thread, but for what reason should I take the question of Jesus's resurrection any more seriously than Kim Il-Sung's dead body being carried up into the heavens by hundreds of doves?

 

[cj.23]

cj, I admire the effort you have put into this thread, but for what reason should I take the question of Jesus's resurrection any more seriously than Kim Il-Sung's dead body being carried up into the heavens by hundreds of doves?

None at all. I would regard both as of equal interest: if people hold a belief, that belief is worthy of examination to me, and I'll look at the purported evidence. If I don't find out anything about the claimed phenomena, I might still learn a lot about how people develop, utilise and find meaning in beliefs.

However the point here is NOT to see if the Christian belief in the Resurrection is correct - I can't imagine a way to do that. What we can do however is trace th development of that belief, and look at alternative naturalistic explanations, which do not invoke the supernatural. If I just wanted to make people Christians I'd just say it was so, and if they disagree they will be turned in to a precious Mao button and be distributed to he poor in the region of Thud, or similar. I have read the Principia Discordia. Or more seriously, I would just invest in some heavy duty emotionally charged desire orientated TV and net advertising, and sell the story.

I'm assuming people have chosen their faith or lack thereof for perfectly good reasons, and I do not presume to try and change their minds, as i have no idea why they made that decision and am therefore completely unequipped to so so - they may after allhave better knoowledge fo the facts than me. I'm interested in the historical issues of the Resurection, as it came up in DOC's thread an I thought I'd have a go as he was rather busy with his stuff...

I'm DOC 2.0 if you like, but perhaps a little less given to proselytising? I'm a Christian but I'm not a very good one

cj x

cj x

 

[godless dave]

Since we know that all animals, including humans, die, and since we know resurrection is impossible, and since we have no significant evidence of supernatural events ever happening, I think we can safely conclude that Jesus was not resurrected.

 

[Hux]

No, but they witnessed the claim is the result of thta resurrection - dead guy walking about.

Claiming the result of a resurrection is not of course the same thing. We know many more plausible reasons why Jesus need not have been in the tomb.

Were they? Wiped out that is, by Christians on these grounds? Genuine question.

They were persecuted and destroyed for all sorts of non mainstream beliefs. One was that Jesus was spiritual and therefore did not require a resurrection. For this and so many other things, other Christians kacked them.

Can you think of any other resurrected gods? I tried this a while ago,

The myth described Osiris as having been killed by his brother Set who wanted Osiris' throne. Isis briefly brought Osiris back to life by use of a spell that she learned from her father. This spell gave her time to become pregnant by Osiris before he again died. Isis later gave birth to Horus. As such, since Horus was born after Osiris' resurrection,


Thats one that springs to mind. I dont think its a unique trick for Jesus. I may be well wrong; it strikes me I care little for claims that are contradictory to nature.

 

[cj.23]

Since we know that all animals, including humans, die, and since we know resurrection is impossible, and since we have no significant evidence of supernatural events ever happening, I think we can safely conclude that Jesus was not resurrected.

Yes, we an certainly make that inference from our experience, as I agreed in my OP. That does not necessarily make it true, but it is certainly a sound basis to begin. That still leaves the question of what actually happened then? Even if you reject the supernatural a priori,(and I don't personally) it still strikes me as a very interesting question?

cj x

 

[Hux]

Yes, we an certainly make that inference from our experience, as I agreed in my OP. That does not necessarily make it true, but it is certainly a sound basis to begin. That still leaves the question of what actually happened then? Even if you reject the supernatural a priori,(and I don't personally) it still strikes me as a very interesting question?

Its not, i think a question of rejecting the supernatural. Its a question of showing some evidence that the supernatural exists.

 

[cj.23]

Claiming the result of a resurrection is not of course the same thing. We know many more plausible reasons why Jesus need not have been in the tomb.

Yes. Let's discuss them!

They were persecuted and destroyed for all sorts of non mainstream beliefs. One was that Jesus was spiritual and therefore did not require a resurrection. For this and so many other things, other Christians kacked them.

The Docetics? I don't think anyone kacked them did they? I was not aware they were wiped out, I thought they just sort of became a minority and faded out?

The myth described Osiris as having been killed by his brother Set who wanted Osiris' throne. Isis briefly brought Osiris back to life by use of a spell that she learned from her father. This spell gave her time to become pregnant by Osiris before he again died. Isis later gave birth to Horus. As such, since Horus was born after Osiris' resurrection,

Look up Grenme on this

cj x


Thats one that springs to mind. I dont think its a unique trick for Jesus. I may be well wrong; it strikes me I care little for claims that are contradictory to nature.[/quote]

 

[Undesired Walrus]

I'm DOC 2.0 if you like, but perhaps a little less given to proselytising?

cj x

cj x

More cerebral I'm sure.

But can I ask your own views on the resurrection? Do you take it more seriously than the tales being told about the leaders of North Korea?