Christ's Resurrection: A Historical Fact.

I can't remember now who wrote it, but in the Case for Christ by Lee Strobel one of the interviewees talked about other theories regarding Jesus' resurrection.

One theory that bit the dust was the swoon theory.. that Jesus did not die but merely swooned on the cross.

Problems with this theory:

Say he did swoon.. even though he was mostly dead anyway from the way Romans crucify people..
Now he is wrapped in linen cloth that would be too tight to breathe in.. so that would have finished him off..
Now say he somehow survived that.. and then revived in the tomb as the theory is supposed to say..
He is still half dead.. severley bruised and beaten.. hardly able to breathe fully..
And then he is somehow supposed to have moved the boulder covering the tomb?
And then in the state he is to say he is risen to his disciples?

Preposterous imagination!

Other theories have similar problems.. resurrection is the most likely

Muslims can "make" the same claim... that doesn't mean they can "support" the same claim.
These are different things.

Weber,
I realize you started off by playing devils advocate, just to get people thinking.
However, we all have a very limited amount of time to answer questions.
Therefore, because we all have a limited amount of time for this,
I'd ask you to please consider refraining from so much dependence on the "devil's advocate" tactic,
and asking questions you don't really need answered.
A.) If you have information to add, please just add it, so we can all learn and enjoy.
B.) If you have a genuine question, which is from a genuine uncertainty, then please go ahead and ask.
C.) But, for the sheer sake of everyone's time, please consider refraining from the socratic questioning just to get everyone WRITING UP ANSWERS to things most of us already know. This isn't a good use of everyone's time. If you already know a thing, then please don't ask a question about it, as if you don't know. I'm sure you don't mean to waste anyone's time, but that is what tends to happen on forums when we get into socratic dialectics.
We all have very limited time.



Thank you.

.

.

They were experts at murder. They knew beyond any doubt that he was dead.

In my answer to @Magenta I didn’t mention or allude to supernatural events, but you already knew that.

If you are genuinely interested there are a number books available that do support biblical timeline events which I personally find fascinating and inspirational, @maxwel listed a few good ones previously. If books aren’t your thing there is a video docu-drama of Lee Strobles book, “Case For Christ” that is a good watch.
I wish you the all the best.
God bless you.

.
Faith is believing what you know ain't so.
Mark Twain

Jesus Christ's resurrection is alleged a supernatural event; that to my
knowledge has never been proven beyond a hint of reasonable doubt to be
an actual historical event; and yet millions of people the world over believe
in it. Why would they do that? Why would they believe in something that's
never been proven true?

Well; why does anybody believe in what they believe? 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 and
reasoning, they can be just as easily persuaded to renounce it by logic and
reasoning. But someone whose heart is gripped by their religion is not so
easily removed regardless of how strong, how sensible, how convincing, nor
how logical the opposition's argument.

Here's a pertinent excerpt:

"If you . . . believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead . . For it
is with your heart that you believe" (Rom 10:9-10)

The apostle Thomas was persuaded by means of empirical evidence to
believe in Jesus' resurrection; but everybody else on down the line has been
pretty much required to follow their hearts.

"Jesus told Thomas: You believe because you have seen me. Blessed are
those who haven't seen me and believe anyway." (John 20:29)

* The Greek word translated "blessed" means fortunate. Some would say
that belief in Jesus' resurrection is gullible rather than fortunate, and I'm
afraid that on the face of it, they're right. From a strictly sensible point of
view, Christians are definitely insensible; and the irony of it is: that's the
way they're supposed to be.

"Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you
were wise by human standards." (1Cor 1:26)
_

This is an little aside, but people claim Thomas actually put his hands in Jesus' wounds.

The text does not say he did. The text says Thomas claimed he would believe on this
condition only, and Jesus invited him to do so, yet at seeing Jesus' wounds, Thomas
replied, “My Lord and my God!” And then Jesus says, “Because you have seen Me, you
have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

Thanks, all, for the responses. I also like the works of those like Bill Craig, Lee Strobel, Dr. Habermas etc on the Resurrection.

For us Christians, the witness of the Bible is enough. For Non-Christians, we can cite first century Jewish historians like Flavius Josephus: I wrote an article on that here: https://onepeterfive.com/secularists-proof-resurrection/ Church Fathers St. Ambrose and St. Jerome mention Josephus' Testimony on Jesus in their Apologia for Christianity. Some liberal scholars deny the authenticity of this testimony, but it is found in all the manuscripts of Josephus that we have. Josephus is a renowned historian and his testimony has great value.

Basically, the evidence is (1) the fact of Christ's Public Death under Pontius Pilate around A.D. 33 (2) The fact of the Empty Tomb (3) the fact of the Apostles' completely changed lives after they began giving testimony to Christ's Resurrection. (4) The fact of their Martyrdom as Eyewitnesses, without ever changing or recanting their story, even under death and torture. All opposing explanations fail here.

(1) Were the Apostles just lying? Hardly likely. Would anybody be able to invent such a lie, convince 10 of their colleagues to go along with it, and then all the Apostles become Martyrs for what they knew to be a lie? The witnesses would not have been unanimous first of all if it were a lie, and at least some of them would have cracked under pressure from Caesar or the Sanhedrin, and given "the lie" away. That none of them did so is strong evidence, that they were not lying, but had really seen Jesus Christ risen from the dead.

(2) Were the Apostles subjectively convinced, but in reality hallucinating? The mere fact of the Empty Tomb argues against this theory. Also, hallucinations do not happen in groups, and to all at exactly the same time. And Christ purposefully ate with His Apostles after He rose from the dead, probably precisely in order to put an end to such speculations which He knew would rise up later.

(3) What alternatives really remain? The Apostles were not lying, and not hallucinating, when they bore witness that Christ had Risen. [That Christ did not really die, but only "swooned"? If so, the Apostles would have rather felt pity for Him, and never worshipped Him as God as St. Thomas did, but rather tried to help Him. Clearly implausible in light of what actually happened when St. Thomas met the Lord again.] Therefore, with all these false theories excluded, it remains that they were telling the Objective Truth: Christ is Risen!

New Advent puts it like this:

"Briefly, therefore, the fact of Christ's Resurrection is attested by more than 500 eyewitnesses, whose experience, simplicity, and uprightness of life rendered them incapable of inventing such a fable, who lived at a time when any attempt to deceive could have been easily discovered, who had nothing in this life to gain, but everything to lose by their testimony, whose moral courage exhibited in their apostolic life can be explained only by their intimate conviction of the objective truth of their message. Again the fact of Christ's Resurrection is attested by the eloquent silence of the Synagogue which had done everything to prevent deception, which could have easily discovered deception, if there had been any, which opposed only sleeping witnesses to the testimony of the Apostles, which did not punish the alleged carelessness of the official guard, and which could not answer the testimony of the Apostles except by threatening them "that they speak no more in this name to any man" (Acts 4:17). Finally the thousands and millions, both Jews and Gentiles, who believed the testimony of the Apostles in spite of all the disadvantages following from such a belief, in short the origin of the Church, requires for its explanation the reality of Christ's Resurrection, for the rise of the Church without the Resurrection would have been a greater miracle than the Resurrection itself." https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12789a.htm

God Bless, All.

Mark Twain was a famous atheist of his time.

He was a very brilliant, creative, charming atheist.... kind of like the Christopher Hitchens of his day.

.

I had to laugh cuz I do not find Hitchens charming at all... or maybe I am thinking of Dawkins...

And of course Hitchens is now deceased whereas Dawkins is not.

Hitchens, Hawking, Dawkins. An unholy trio.

How can you prove the supernatural like a resurrection? There were many many witnesses who saw Christ resurrected and many have seen him in visions or dreams. Also many Muslims claim to have seen him and were converted to Christ. did you not know this? As for other events there is one they found recently in the desert a rock split in 2. go see this link;

https://splitrockresearch.org/portfolio/the-split-rock/

The best evidence of the supernatural and infinite power of GOD however is the creation of the universe which you are part of. This we can all see.

May the lord open your eyes and heart, blessings,

JF

.

Archeology is defined as the scientific study of material remains (such as
tools, pottery, jewelry, stone walls, and monuments) of past human life and
activities

Visions, dreams, apparitions, unidentifiable split rocks and/or personal
conversion experiences do not qualify as archeological findings pertinent to
Jesus' resurrection.
_

So basically are you saying you no not believe in Jesus Christ's resurrection? because there is no proof or do you believe the Muslim version that Jesus never died and went to India for which they claim they have proof?

JF

Never heard that Muslim declare Jesus went to India, but some Buddhist claim it.

That's impossible. Jesus had been known as a craftsman/technician (tekton), according to the folks in his home town.

yes of course Jesus did not go there but a Muslim girl where i used to work lent me a book with ""proof" of jesus did not die on the cross but webt to india...I discredited the work as it was very poorly written and without any evidence to present either. I knew it was not true of course, I am sorry I brought it up. do not waste any time on this i say.

BLESS,

JF

.

Jesus just left Chicago
And he's bound for New Orleans,
Workin' from one end to the other
And all points in between.

Took a jump through Mississippi
Well, muddy water turned to wine,
Then out to California through
The forests and the pines.

You might not see him in person
But he'll see you just the same,
You don't have to worry 'cause
Takin' care of business is his name.
ZZ Top 1973
Billy Gibbons, Dusty Hill, Frank Beard
_

Flavius Josephus (A.D. 37 – c. 100) was a Jewish historian born in Jerusalem four years after the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth in the same city. Because of this proximity to Jesus in terms of time and place, his writings have a near-eyewitness quality as they relate to the entire cultural background of the New Testament era. But their scope is much wider than this, encompassing also the world of the Old Testament. His two greatest works are Jewish Antiquities, unveiling Hebrew history from the Creation to the start of the great war with Rome in A.D. 66, while his Jewish War, though written first, carries the record on to the destruction of Jerusalem and the fall of Masada in A.D. 73.

Josephus is the most comprehensive primary source on Jewish history that has survived from antiquity, and done so virtually intact despite its voluminous nature (the equivalent of 12 volumes). Because of imperial patronage by the Flavian emperors in Rome —Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian —Josephus was able to generate incredible detail in his records, a luxury denied the Gospel writers. They seem to have been limited to one scroll each since the earliest Christians were not wealthy. Accordingly, Josephus has always been deemed a crucial extrabiblical resource, since his writings not only correlate well with the Old and New Testaments, but often provide additional evidence on such personalities as Herod the Great and his dynasty, John the Baptist, Jesus’ half-brother James, the high priests Annas and Caiaphas and their clan, Pontius Pilate, and others.

Against this background, we should certainly expect that he would refer to Jesus of Nazareth, and he does—twice in fact. In Antiquities 18:63—in the middle of information on Pontius Pilate (A.D., 26-36)—Josephus provides the longest secular reference to Jesus in any first-century source. Later, when he reports events from the administration of the Roman governor Albinus (A.D. 62-64) in Antiquities 20:200, he again mentions Jesus in connection with the death of Jesus’ half-brother, James the Just of Jerusalem. These passages, along with other non-biblical, non-Christian references to Jesus in secular first-century sources—among them Tacitus (Annals 15:44), Suetonius (Claudius 25), and Pliny the Younger (Letter to Trajan)—prove conclusively that any denial of Jesus’ historicity is maundering sensationalism by the uninformed and/or the dishonest.

Because the above references to Jesus are embarrassing to such, they have been attacked for centuries, especially the two Josephus instances, which have provoked a great quantity of scholarly literature. They constitute the largest block of first-century evidence for Jesus outside biblical or Christian sources, and may well be the reason that the vast works of Josephus survived manuscript transmission across the centuries almost intact, when other great works from antiquity were totally lost. Let us examine each, in turn.

Antiquities 18:63
The standard text of Josephus reads as follows:

About this time lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was the achiever of extraordinary deeds and was a teacher of those who accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. When he was indicted by the principal men among us and Pilate condemned him to be crucified, those who had come to love him originally did not cease to do so; for he appeared to them on the third day restored to life, as the prophets of the Deity had foretold these and countless other marvelous things about him, and the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day. (All Josephus citations, except the next, are from P. L. Maier, ed./trans., Josephus –The Essential Works (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1994).

Although this passage is so worded in the Josephus manuscripts as early as the third-century church historian Eusebius, scholars have long suspected a Christian interpolation, since Josephus could hardly have believed Jesus to be the Messiah or in his resurrection and have remained, as he did, a non-Christian Jew. In 1972, however, Professor Schlomo Pines of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem announced his discovery of a different manuscript tradition of Josephus’s writings in the tenth-century Melkite historian Agapius, which reads as follows at Antiquities 18:63:

At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.

Here, clearly, is language that a Jew could have written without conversion to Christianity. (Schlomo Pines, An Arabic Version of the Testimonium Flavianum and its Implications [Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1971.])

Scholars fall into three basic camps regarding Antiquities 18:63:

The original passage is entirely authentic—a minority position;
it is entirely a Christian forgery – a much smaller minority position; and
it contains Christian interpolations in what was Josephus’s original, authentic material about Jesus—the large majority position today, particularly in view of the Agapian text (immediately above) which shows no signs of interpolation.
Josephus must have mentioned Jesus in authentic core material at 18:63 since this passage is present in all Greek manuscripts of Josephus, and the Agapian version accords well with his grammar and vocabulary elsewhere. Moreover, Jesus is portrayed as a “wise man” [sophos aner], a phrase not used by Christians but employed by Josephus for such personalities as David and Solomon in the Hebrew Bible.

Furthermore, his claim that Jesus won over “many of the Greeks” is not substantiated in the New Testament, and thus hardly a Christian interpolation but rather something that Josephus would have noted in his own day. Finally, the fact that the second reference to Jesus at Antiquities 20:200, which follows, merely calls him the Christos [Messiah] without further explanation suggests that a previous, fuller identification had already taken place. Had Jesus appeared for the first time at the later point in Josephus’s record, he would most probably have introduced a phrase like “…brother of a certain Jesus, who was called the Christ.”

.

It isn't necessary to prove Jesus' crucified dead body was restored to life; in
point of fact, you're not even supposed to try.

• John 20:29 . .Jesus told Thomas: You believe because you have seen me.
Blessed are those who haven't seen me and believe anyway.

The Bible says that Jesus showed himself alive by many infallible proofs
(Acts 1:3). However nobody in our time has access to those alleged infallible
proofs. The best that people have to go on today is hearsay, viz: they have
a holy book; that's all.

• 1Cor 2:5 . .Your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the
power of God.

In other words: were somebody to attempt to prove Jesus' resurrection in a
court of law, the case would be thrown out because it just can't be
substantiated except by sophistry and conjecture; which are inadmissible as
evidence. Attempts to prove beyond a hint of reasonable doubt that Jesus'
crucified dead body was restored to life are just as doomed to failure as a
gnat drinking up the Atlantic ocean.
_

On the contrary, the Word says God has given "many Infallible Proofs" of His Resurrection. God has given us evidence of His Resurrection in history, just as He has given us evidence of His Creation in nature. Those who seek God will find Him.

Acts 1:3 "To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:"