Can 500+ Eyewitnesses Be Wrong? (Jesus, Earth, disciples, Corinthians)

[michel]

Originally Posted by robtex

I find great interest in that verse too. Could you please list names of some of the 500 (with sources of names attached) and explain why not a single one of them came forward to colloborate Paul's claim.

Furthermore, you do realize that Paul said he did not see the resurrection himself and converted on the road to Damacus (acts 9 9) at an unspecified later time when he claimed to have been visted by Jesus. Why do you think Paul did not convert at the time the 500 witness told him of this amazing endeavor but than turned around and assigned merit to it?

He was busy persecuting them:

Galatians 1:13 = FOR YE HAVE HEARD OF MY CONVERSATION IN TIME PAST IN THE JEW'S RELIGION, HOW THAT BEYOND MEASURE I PERSECUTED THE CHURCH OF GOD, AND WASTED IT.

He then, later, meets Jesus' Himself while he's traveling to Damascus, and gets saved.

It's possible that the 500 people he's talking about are some of the Christians he, himself put to death. Stephen being the most famous one in Acts 7. (See Acts 8:1, where Saul was present at Stephen's execution.)

[robtex]

Originally Posted by AV1611

He was busy persecuting them:

Galatians 1:13 = FOR YE HAVE HEARD OF MY CONVERSATION IN TIME PAST IN THE JEW'S RELIGION, HOW THAT BEYOND MEASURE I PERSECUTED THE CHURCH OF GOD, AND WASTED IT.

He then, later, meets Jesus' Himself while he's traveling to Damascus, and gets saved.

It's possible that the 500 people he's talking about are some of the Christians he, himself put to death. Stephen being the most famous one in Acts 7. (See Acts 8:1, where Saul was present at Stephen's execution.)

You are missing what I am saying. paul said there were 500 witness. None that were ever named by anyone else, and none that ever collaborated in print or in verbage the resurrection of Christ. Not a single one. The bible is the only source of this resurrection (with collaboration at a later time using the bible as a primary source). Nobody else confirmed any eye-witness and none of the eyewitness came forward or were named by the other apostles.

The 500 witness are like ghosts..no names no print no mention except in the bible....why is that?

[michel]

Originally Posted by Jensa

So you're arguing that because they tried to suppress a new cult (that's what it was at the time; I mean no offense to any Christians on the forum) and put to death those going against what they ordered, but it managed to survive through some believers until Constantine took it up, that it's right? I'm not going to touch that argument with a 10 foot pole.

No offense taken. We ARE a cult, by definition. But you also have to take into consideration that this "cult" predicted the death, burial, and resurrection of it's own Leader, not to mention their Leader prediction His closest followers denying Him.

[Jaymes]

It's not the only one that's done that, though; many other gods have been killed and resurrected. I'm not up to date on predictions made by other religions, though, so I can't comment there.

[michel]

Originally Posted by robtex

You are missing what I am saying. paul said there were 500 witness. None that were ever named by anyone else, and none that ever collaborated in print or in verbage the resurrection of Christ. Not a single one. The bible is the only source of this resurrection (with collaboration at a later time using the bible as a primary source). Nobody else confirmed any eye-witness and none of the eyewitness came forward or were named by the other apostles.

The 500 witness are like ghosts..no names no print no mention except in the bible....why is that?

There ARE names mentioned. Stephen for one.

IF anyone else wrote about the account (and I would have to guess that they did), then two primary things happened:

• Luke, under divine guidance, chose not to use them - (Luke 1:1-2)
• They faded into obscurity over time

As for why their names aren't mentioned outside of Scripture, I don't know. Other than the fact that no official document was drawn up (it wouldn't have been necessary, or very smart, either --- Saul would have been knocking at your door).

[michel]

Originally Posted by Jensa

It's not the only one that's done that, though; many other gods have been killed and resurrected. I'm not up to date on predictions made by other religions, though, so I can't comment there.

I'm sure you're right, but for 500+ people to come forward, when there was an axe over their heads, doesn't make sense, unless they knew it to be true.

Yes, some have died in the past for other religious figures, but not one that is still in its infancy. Usually it's because of going to war with neighboring countries in the name of their leader, or just downright anarchy that is needing to be suppressed.

[Mr Spinkles]

Originally Posted by AV1611

The Roman Empire took action to suppress this

While the Roman persecution of early Christians was certainly tragic, it is not very good evidence that what Christians believe is true. The followers of virtually every religion in existence today have been suppressed in the past. So?

Originally Posted by AV1611

Some of the higher-ranking Jews themselves did, too

So if high-ranking Jews try to suppress something, it must be true?

Originally Posted by AV1611

Many, if not most, of these eyewitnesses were put to death

People were certainly put to death, but whether or not they say a resurrected man is in dispute.

Originally Posted by AV1611

With so much hostile witnesses against this claim, how did it grow?

1) Are you suggesting that if a belief grows despite a lot of "hostile witness" that belief must be true? 2) Did you know that there are other religions which have grown despite "hostile witness"? Scientology has grown immensely, yet there is a lot of hostility in our country towards it. How many Jews, Pagans, Native Americans, Buddhists, etc. do you think have died for their beliefs throughout history?

I think the growth of a belief in the face of oppression shows the resilience of the human spirit, but it does not necessarily mean the belief is true.

Originally Posted by AV1611

In other words, even those hostile to Christianity were admitting the resurrection.

Could you provide some references for us, please?

[greatcalgarian]

Why are so many people so obsessed about getting the names of the 500 witnesses? Even the important line of descendent , the geneology of Jeses Christ can be different from the two gospel of Matthew and Luke:

Matthew, after naming twenty-four generations as filling out the line, and making it complete between David and Jacob, concludes by saying, "and Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary."

But Luke, antecedent to spinning out his list to fourteen generations more than Matthew, i.e., making it fourteen generations longer, declares that "Joseph was the son of Heli." So that Joseph either had two fathers, Jacob and Heli; or Matthew or Luke, or both, were most egregiously mistaken, with all their "inspiration."

There may be 500 witnesses, or there may be 1000 as stated by Paul. However, it is important to show that witnesses can be found outside the bible source.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by Jensa

Just because someone would die for their beliefs it doesn't make them right. I hear this argued often; 'they'd die for it, they must be right!' People that aren't Christians die for their beliefs. Therefor, they must be right as well, yes? China has spent who knows how much trying to suppress or wipe out religions in their occupied areas, killing priests and sometimes burning them alive for trying to protect the temples.

Originally Posted by FeathersinHair

If dying for their beliefs makes someone right, then I'll add pagans, Buddhists, atheists... well, a whole lot of