Easter Is Coming in 8 Weeks

Quote: Dalex64

But the bible says they did not recognize him, and did not believe it was him. Why didn't they? There are also references to sticking fingers into wounds. Why was he so hard to recognize, and why didn't they believe it was him?

He was changed, in a glorified body. The last time they had seen Jesus was when His back was lacerated to the bone, a crown of long thorns was pressed unto His head, and His hands and feet were nailed to a cross. Seeing Him completely restored was a little bit of a shock I am sure. This is where the references to seeing and examining the wounds becomes so important. Thomas says I won't believe it till I see and examine the wounds. He is thinking, like you, that this is not Jesus but an imposter or someone else. When He does see the Lord and His wounds He doubts no more and believes it is Jesus.

This also is important to talk about because of another theory to deny the Resurrection that surprisingly hasn't come up yet. I think it is the most sane of all the objections, far more so than the Apostles and disciples mistaking another person for the man they loved and followed for so many years or that a crucified man with a gaping wound from a lance would come back to life in a tomb and be mistaken as resurrected. The thought is that the Apostles and disciples experienced a group hallucination or an actual appearance of Jesus, but a spiritual one. Think Obi-Wan in Star Wars appearing to Luke. This could explain the growth of Christianity and the fervor of its followers. However, it fails the touch test. Thomas, had to touch the wounds and Jesus ate with His disciples even after the Resurrection showing clearly that He was not an apparition.

Quote: FrGamble

Do you know of anyone else who woke up days later after being crucified by the Romans?

No, but why would we. There were no reporters
then, and if you did wake up you sure as heck
would not go tell everybody for fear of the
Romans doing it again because they botched
it the first time.

Speaking to that, Jesus showed himself to
hundreds of people and he was semi famous.
How come the Romans didn't hear about this
and kill him again. Please don't say it was
'gods will', that's not an answer. He was in
the same area he was killed in, walking
around free as a bird, and nobody in charge
heard about it? If it was as 'amazing' and
miraculous as they say, word would have
gotten to the Romans right away.

It's interesting Paul never mentions Jesus having
been resurrected in the flesh. He never mentions
empty tombs, or any of the physical appearances.
He never mentions or quotes any of the gospels.
It's almost like the resurrection stories were not
being told when Paul was alive, which would have
been very very odd if they were true. He would
have mentioned the physical resurrection all the
time, it's what the religion was based on. And
he blatantly did not because he obviously had
never heard of it. How could that be if it was true.

Quote: FrGamble

So you are looking for documents from the Jewish authorities or Romans declaring that Jesus truly Resurrected?

Documenting the rumor.

Quote:

Think about that for a second.

You think about this:

Quote:

[..]all within 15 years in the ancient world,

Listening to Mike Duncan's History of Rome podcasts, plus several Great Courses lectures on the Ancient world, I've developed a rough feel for travel times in the ancient world. This sounds like the story about a resurrection was made up about 14 years and three to six months after Jesus was executed. Then it caused a ruckus in Rome's Jewish community.

Judea is far from Rome, but not that far. And the route to it was well-travelled. I may be off a few weeks or even a few months, but something of that magnitude would have reached Rome within a year, not a decade and a half later. If it took fifteen years to cause a sensation in Rome, then it took at least 12 years, if we're generous and assume a host of travel difficulties, for the story to even get out of Judea.

It's hard to come up with a comparison, being used as we are to instant communications, but let's try. News stories often take time to develop. Back in the 80s there was a report on network news about a newspaper in Lebanon, I think. The paper, largely unknown, reported a deal between Iran and the US to trade weapons for hostages. Between that and the Iran-Contra hearings stands a span of months. And the media of the time offered saturation coverage within weeks. That's about what it took for a major news story back then to go viral.

Now imagine if we hadn't heard a word about it until Reagan's last month in office. That would be the equivalent of waiting 15 years in the Ancient world.

Quote:

You can't explain this by a half dead Jesus waking up from a Roman crucifixion

I just explained it with a fully dead Jesus and an invented resurrection story years later.

Quote:

Then they stand by that story in the face of great persecution, ostracization, and death.

Persecution often makes an ideology more attractive, not less, particularly for desperate or fed-up people looking for a change. They figure those in power are afraid, and that's why they resort to repression. Therefore the ideology is having a big impact.

Quote:

They also spread this story with a fervor that is unquenchable and unrelenting all the time knowing that it wasn't true.

Just because something isn't true doesn't mean people won't believe in it.

You seem to think a large bunch of people got together and invented the story of the resurrection. hardly. Most likely this involved Jesus' innermost group, perhaps even only one or two of them. Others believed it.

Infinite regression is solved equally well with:
A sentient creator who has been here forever
Matter and energy which has been here forever

When scientists talk about the beginning of our universe, they are only talking about the big bang. There may or may not have been something before.

Several of you have stated rationalizations explaining why one of the two possibilities listed above is correct. That is all they are - rationalizations. No one has proven either of them, and at least two of you here won't be able to prove it to eachother.

Let's put this another way. You have both used logic to develop a theory. Now prove it. Demonstrate it experimentally. I think you might have similar difficulties to the people who are trying to prove string theory.

Quote: Dalex64

When scientists talk about the beginning of our universe, they are only talking about the big bang. There may or may not have been something before. .

Hinduism, the worlds oldest religion, covers
this rather well. They believe the universe is
born again and again, over an infinite amount
of time. We are here again and again, not
our ego's, but who we are really, over an
infinite amount of time. It's a great mystery.
It's always been here, and we can't understand
it because we are part of it.

Quote: Evenbob

"American patriot Thomas Paine, in The Age of Reason, asked: 'Is it more probable that nature should go out of her course, or that a man should tell a lie? We have never seen, in our time, nature go out of her course; but we have good reason to believe that millions of lies have been told in the same time; it is, therefore, at least millions to one, that the reporter of a miracle tells a lie.' "

Easter is about Spring, hats, bunny ears on dogs, parades, new frocks, tulips, and sales at stores. I don't see no miracles nor much in the way of lies being involved.

Quote: Dalex64

I think you might have similar difficulties to the people who are trying to prove string theory.

Prove String Theory? Simple.

Take one piece of string, add one playful kitten... pure joy. Ford's in his flivver, all is right with the world.

Quote: FrGamble

The thought is that the Apostles and disciples experienced a group hallucination or an actual appearance of Jesus, but a spiritual one. Think Obi-Wan in Star Wars appearing to Luke. This could explain the growth of Christianity and the fervor of its followers.

I would have never thought of that. It's bad logic to pick one impossibility to explain another. It would be like saying a perpetual motion machine doesn't break the laws of thermodynamics, but rather makes use of protonic energy from a parallel universe.

Quote: Dalex64

Infinite regression is solved equally well with:
A sentient creator who has been here forever
Matter and energy which has been here forever

The problem of an infinite regress is only solved by an unmoved mover or first cause. Matter and energy cannot have been here forever according to the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Quote:

Let's put this another way. You have both used logic to develop a theory. Now prove it. Demonstrate it experimentally. I think you might have similar difficulties to the people who are trying to prove string theory.

None of these theories because of their very nature can ever be demonstrated experimentally. How do you experiment or observe something before there was anything? However, you can use our experiences of the universe to help us point to a solution. We have ample experiences and the use of logic that consistently shows us that things that begin to exist have a cause. Before Evenbob jumps in with the notion that the materials of a house already exist they are just rearranged and give the appearance of creation, let's be clear we are talking about going backwards to the creation of the wooden beams, the trees, the ground, the earth, the stars, and eventually the universe. Everything around us is contingent on something else before it, it makes sense that this applies to the universe as well. This universe is also fine-tuned for the existence of life based on its physical laws and chemical and atomic properties. This and much more point to the converging probability that the Universe was indeed created out of nothing from an all-powerful, all-knowing, spiritual, and non-contingent being.

Quote: Nareed

Documenting the rumor.

There is no shortage of pagan or secular historians documenting what they thought was a rumor. In fact they even documented what they thought were love orgies and cannibalism in the life of the early Christians, hence part of the reason for their constant active persecution. From before Claudius and then on to Nero and beyond people knew about Christians and roughly what they believed, especially the Resurrection.

Quote:

Listening to Mike Duncan's History of Rome podcasts, plus several Great Courses lectures on the Ancient world, I've developed a rough feel for travel times in the ancient world. This sounds like the story about a resurrection was made up about 14 years and three to six months after Jesus was executed. Then it caused a ruckus in Rome's Jewish community.

Judea is far from Rome, but not that far. And the route to it was well-travelled. I may be off a few weeks or even a few months, but something of that magnitude would have reached Rome within a year, not a decade and a half later. If it took fifteen years to cause a sensation in Rome, then it took at least 12 years, if we're generous and assume a host of travel difficulties, for the story to even get out of Judea.

Let's remember what the Roman's thought of Judea and Jerusalem at the time. This was a way station and a frontier outpost, more valuable for its strategic location than anything else. The news of Jesus was big news in that area and among the local Romans and certainly the Jews there. However, its impact on the rest of the Roman Empire and the Emperor was not something that would be considered big news. They were used to and probably tired of hearing about a new Jewish Messiah and an uprising in that part of the world. They had happened many times over and the official policy was ignore it. They always burn out, because they are always false.

However, Jesus Christ was the true Messiah and truly God and had been truly Resurrected so this news didn't burn out it. The Resurrection lit a spark that instantly began to spread, but in the ancient world and under persecution and ridicule it smoldered. It would never be extinguished. It makes sense that although the news of this Jesus Christ reached Rome quickly it lay there in need of oxygen in the form of St. Paul and Peter who when arrived confirmed the truth that everyone had heard and the fire was lit and never stopped spreading to this day.

Quote:

It's hard to come up with a comparison, being used as we are to instant communications, but let's try. News stories often take time to develop. Back in the 80s there was a report on network news about a newspaper in Lebanon, I think. The paper, largely unknown, reported a deal between Iran and the US to trade weapons for hostages. Between that and the Iran-Contra hearings stands a span of months. And the media of the time offered saturation coverage within weeks. That's about what it took for a major news story back then to go viral.

Now imagine if we hadn't heard a word about it until Reagan's last month in office. That would be the equivalent of waiting 15 years in the Ancient world.

Nice try and you put a lot of thought into it. The comparison falls apart first in its content. The fate and supposed Resurrection of another Jewish Messiah wouldn't have even trended on an ancient Roman version of Twitter if they had it. It was not news or interesting to pagan Rome so far removed from the troublesome Jewish outposts of Judea and Jerusalem. Even when Claudius set down his edict he did not yet know that this Christus who was causing this trouble would eventually bring down the entire belief system of paganism and change the world as we know it.

Quote:

I just explained it with a fully dead Jesus and an invented resurrection story years later.

good try but no.

Quote:

Persecution often makes an ideology more attractive, not less, particularly for desperate or fed-up people looking for a change.

What about poor fishermen and ordinary folk whom Jesus attracted to Himself.

Quote:

You seem to think a large bunch of people got together and invented the story of the resurrection. hardly. Most likely this involved Jesus' innermost group, perhaps even only one or two of them. Others believed it.

This is the worst explanation yet. One or two people could not possibly have made up this idea and then convinced the rest of the group to not only believe it but to lay down their lives for it. You have to keep asking yourself the question why would they do this at all? Why make up a story that would certainly lead them to their deaths? Why make up a story as far fetched as the Resurrection that especially if they knew it was made up had no chance of ever catching on or making a difference? Why not hide out for a few days and go back to their normal lives, putting this adventure with Jesus behind them? There is simply no other reason for them to do what they did then a real, true, powerful, inspiring, and life-changing encounter with Jesus Christ who had conquered death and confirmed in their hearts, minds, and souls that He was truly God.