Jesus was crucified by the Romans in Jerusalem in about 32 AD. According to Luke, Jesus spend 40 days on earth and then ascended into heaven. (This story was added to Mark's gospel in the second century).
The first to write of Jesus' Resurrection was Paul in his 1 Corinthians. It's a letter written to Corinth (about 800 miles from Jerusalem) about 20 years after the fact although Paul was not in the West when it was is supposed to have occurred. The writers of the gospels did not include this story in any of the Gospels.
Is it believable that a man who had been "raised" from the dead was walking around for 40 days and people of that area didn't know about it?
Or is just a bible fiction?
Is the Resurrection a fictional story?
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Is the Resurrection a fictional story?
Post #11[Replying to post 1 by polonius]
Hi Polonius, yes, I believe that it was an actual and factual historical event. This, for one, is the catalyst behind the Christian faith, since all men invariably die, we understand that because God raised Jesus from the grave, there is hope that God will do the same for us (those that believe and accept Christ as Lord & Saviour).
Is there empirical evidence, not outside of implicit evidence. As Gamaliel said, 'if it is not from God, it will fail'. All those who lived at the time and heard about the crucifixion, would have no doubt in their minds that Jesus was a failed Messiah, and yet, how many have died in his name since that time? What can account for the number of converts that exist today. What would compel such a large contingency of believers to go by the name of Christian through the centuries, and amidst times of severe persecution? For even the western world's calendar is based on his birth. ...what an impact his death has made.
But, it is not just the historical facts that compel, it is the wisdom of God that chose to have such an ignoble and discouraging event as the crucifixion, lead to a somewhat undocumented testimony (outside of the Gospels), as the premise for one to receive salvation and eternal life. It separates the boys from the men. The proud cannot accept such a humble, meek, unconventional and outcast principle and theology.
All four Gospels document that Christ was risen after his death and seen by over 500 people, and then after 40 days, ascended into heaven. Those who recognize the grace and righteousness of God, and the need for repentance of man, understand the necessity of these events, and therefore, its veracity, despite the lack of tangible proof.
The Romans officially crucified Christ, due to the prompting by the Jews. Pontias, although reluctantly, did comply with their wishes as he followed through with his traditional offer to allow a prisoner to go free, and to condemn another. All the soldiers during the trial, and the crucifixion, were acting entirely under the auspices of the Roman government. Pilate merely displayed his disapproval, but was too intimidated by the Jews to defy their request. The cross, soldiers and sign on the cross were all supplied by the Roman govt.
We believe that by Christ's death, man has been given the offer to free himself from the curse of death which has befallen all of us.
Hi Polonius, yes, I believe that it was an actual and factual historical event. This, for one, is the catalyst behind the Christian faith, since all men invariably die, we understand that because God raised Jesus from the grave, there is hope that God will do the same for us (those that believe and accept Christ as Lord & Saviour).
Is there empirical evidence, not outside of implicit evidence. As Gamaliel said, 'if it is not from God, it will fail'. All those who lived at the time and heard about the crucifixion, would have no doubt in their minds that Jesus was a failed Messiah, and yet, how many have died in his name since that time? What can account for the number of converts that exist today. What would compel such a large contingency of believers to go by the name of Christian through the centuries, and amidst times of severe persecution? For even the western world's calendar is based on his birth. ...what an impact his death has made.
But, it is not just the historical facts that compel, it is the wisdom of God that chose to have such an ignoble and discouraging event as the crucifixion, lead to a somewhat undocumented testimony (outside of the Gospels), as the premise for one to receive salvation and eternal life. It separates the boys from the men. The proud cannot accept such a humble, meek, unconventional and outcast principle and theology.
All four Gospels document that Christ was risen after his death and seen by over 500 people, and then after 40 days, ascended into heaven. Those who recognize the grace and righteousness of God, and the need for repentance of man, understand the necessity of these events, and therefore, its veracity, despite the lack of tangible proof.
The Romans officially crucified Christ, due to the prompting by the Jews. Pontias, although reluctantly, did comply with their wishes as he followed through with his traditional offer to allow a prisoner to go free, and to condemn another. All the soldiers during the trial, and the crucifixion, were acting entirely under the auspices of the Roman government. Pilate merely displayed his disapproval, but was too intimidated by the Jews to defy their request. The cross, soldiers and sign on the cross were all supplied by the Roman govt.
We believe that by Christ's death, man has been given the offer to free himself from the curse of death which has befallen all of us.
Re: Is the Resurrection a fictional story?
Post #12RESPONSE: Really? And what precisely is your evidence?onewithhim wrote: [Replying to post 1 by polonius]
There were hundreds of people who saw him after his resurrection.
Re: Is the Resurrection a fictional story?
Post #13QUESTION: Did any of those 500 people or perhaps the thousands they would have told leave any written records? Neither did the writers of the New Testament.DB wrote: [Replying to post 1 by polonius]
Hi Polonius, yes, I believe that it was an actual and factual historical event. This, for one, is the catalyst behind the Christian faith, since all men invariably die, we understand that because God raised Jesus from the grave, there is hope that God will do the same for us (those that believe and accept Christ as Lord & Saviour).
Is there empirical evidence, not outside of implicit evidence. As Gamaliel said, 'if it is not from God, it will fail'. All those who lived at the time and heard about the crucifixion, would have no doubt in their minds that Jesus was a failed Messiah, and yet, how many have died in his name since that time? What can account for the number of converts that exist today. What would compel such a large contingency of believers to go by the name of Christian through the centuries, and amidst times of severe persecution? For even the western world's calendar is based on his birth. ...what an impact his death has made.
But, it is not just the historical facts that compel, it is the wisdom of God that chose to have such an ignoble and discouraging event as the crucifixion, lead to a somewhat undocumented testimony (outside of the Gospels), as the premise for one to receive salvation and eternal life. It separates the boys from the men. The proud cannot accept such a humble, meek, unconventional and outcast principle and theology.
All four Gospels document that Christ was risen after his death and seen by over 500 people, and then after 40 days, ascended into heaven. Those who recognize the grace and righteousness of God, and the need for repentance of man, understand the necessity of these events, and therefore, its veracity, despite the lack of tangible proof.
The Romans officially crucified Christ, due to the prompting by the Jews. Pontias, although reluctantly, did comply with their wishes as he followed through with his traditional offer to allow a prisoner to go free, and to condemn another. All the soldiers during the trial, and the crucifixion, were acting entirely under the auspices of the Roman government. Pilate merely displayed his disapproval, but was too intimidated by the Jews to defy their request. The cross, soldiers and sign on the cross were all supplied by the Roman govt.
We believe that by Christ's death, man has been given the offer to free himself from the curse of death which has befallen all of us.
And, by the way, what happened to those many souls raised from the dead at the time of Jesus' death? Remember, according to the scripture, a man can die but once, so are they hanging around somewhere?
Re: Is the Resurrection a fictional story?
Post #14[Replying to post 13 by polonius]
Hi polonius, are you unaware that all the NT writers wrote of Jesus' resurrection?
Again, each of the 4 Gospels recount the fact that Jesus had risen from the tomb, only Mark does not give an account of him being seen by anyone after the fact.
The Epistles all are professing Christ's resurrection, for this is the hope of the Christian, '...if Christ is not raised then our faith is in vain...and we are to be pitied the most among men...'
But, yes, none of the 500, as far as anyone knows, documented this fact. Surprising, yes, somewhat, ...unlikely, depends on the literacy of those 500 (remember, publication in those times, was both oral and written). Not to mention, others had simply been raised from the dead too (Lazarus, widow from Nain's son, Jarius' daughter, Elijah & Elisha raised the dead). So that this phenomenon was not necessarily common, but may have not had the exclusive impact that one might expect from those who have never seen or heard of this before (the centuries that followed)?
But the remarkable fact about Jesus, is that he ascended into heaven as the first-born from the dead, this is the faith of a Christian, to share the same fate as Jesus.
So, in regard to the others who had been raised from the dead, and that you mentioned about the NT saints who were raised also, ...yes, they all died again. All the occurrences that I mentioned above, and the ones that you mentioned, died twice. Thus, the fact that the scriptures state that a man is two die once, is true, but that's an expression that, for brevity, sums up the situation by the landslide majority of people who ever lived. For example, when we speak of love, we cite all the good points, we don't start going into examples where sometimes 'tough-love' is required, or how discipline is a sign of love also... Men are destined to die once, if an exception occurs, we allow this licence in God's plan for the sake of testimony, as in, to allude to a greater principle and lesson (miracles had this effect and purpose). Many other anomalies and aberrations have occurred throughout history, they don't redefine the rules.
Hi polonius, are you unaware that all the NT writers wrote of Jesus' resurrection?
Again, each of the 4 Gospels recount the fact that Jesus had risen from the tomb, only Mark does not give an account of him being seen by anyone after the fact.
The Epistles all are professing Christ's resurrection, for this is the hope of the Christian, '...if Christ is not raised then our faith is in vain...and we are to be pitied the most among men...'
But, yes, none of the 500, as far as anyone knows, documented this fact. Surprising, yes, somewhat, ...unlikely, depends on the literacy of those 500 (remember, publication in those times, was both oral and written). Not to mention, others had simply been raised from the dead too (Lazarus, widow from Nain's son, Jarius' daughter, Elijah & Elisha raised the dead). So that this phenomenon was not necessarily common, but may have not had the exclusive impact that one might expect from those who have never seen or heard of this before (the centuries that followed)?
But the remarkable fact about Jesus, is that he ascended into heaven as the first-born from the dead, this is the faith of a Christian, to share the same fate as Jesus.
So, in regard to the others who had been raised from the dead, and that you mentioned about the NT saints who were raised also, ...yes, they all died again. All the occurrences that I mentioned above, and the ones that you mentioned, died twice. Thus, the fact that the scriptures state that a man is two die once, is true, but that's an expression that, for brevity, sums up the situation by the landslide majority of people who ever lived. For example, when we speak of love, we cite all the good points, we don't start going into examples where sometimes 'tough-love' is required, or how discipline is a sign of love also... Men are destined to die once, if an exception occurs, we allow this licence in God's plan for the sake of testimony, as in, to allude to a greater principle and lesson (miracles had this effect and purpose). Many other anomalies and aberrations have occurred throughout history, they don't redefine the rules.
-
Checkpoint
- Prodigy
- Posts: 4069
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:07 pm
- Has thanked: 105 times
- Been thanked: 64 times
Re: Is the Resurrection a fictional story?
Post #15When it was first claimed in writing is irrelevant.polonius wrote: [Replying to post 3 by Checkpoint]
About the "Resurrection" first claimed in 52 AD by the "Apostle" Paul.
So for 20 years following Jesus' execution, nothing was written about it.
A "story" not necessarily historical fact. Right?
And when was it first claimed that Jesus as divine? Was the claim believed?
It was claimed on the Day of Pentecost by the early church, and from onwards.
That was less than 50 days after his crucifixion.
Acts 2:
22 “Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.
23 This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.
24 But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.
Post #16
There is solid evidence that Jesus was seen- in some form or another- by a number of people after his crucifixion. Peter and John and James saw him, and Paul knew Peter and John and James, and reported this.
But what form? Botched execution, vision, spirit, or truly resurrected body? The Gospels themselves are not entirely clear. His wounds are said to be visible, he eats broiled fish- and yet appears out of nowhere behind closed doors. Paul's account tends to discount a physical body, as he includes his own vision of Jesus; and elsewhere he describes the resurrected body as being not of flesh at all. Plus, the mysterious "500" reference is sometimes thought to refer to the Pentacost experience which is clearly not a physical presence. Luke and John have instances where Jesus is seen but not at first recognized.
That's all the real evidence there is; the rest is purely a matter of hypothesis- or faith.
But what form? Botched execution, vision, spirit, or truly resurrected body? The Gospels themselves are not entirely clear. His wounds are said to be visible, he eats broiled fish- and yet appears out of nowhere behind closed doors. Paul's account tends to discount a physical body, as he includes his own vision of Jesus; and elsewhere he describes the resurrected body as being not of flesh at all. Plus, the mysterious "500" reference is sometimes thought to refer to the Pentacost experience which is clearly not a physical presence. Luke and John have instances where Jesus is seen but not at first recognized.
That's all the real evidence there is; the rest is purely a matter of hypothesis- or faith.
