What Real Evidence Exists for The Resurrection?

[footprints]

Originally Posted by Smoke

Not really.

If I claim to be the son of my mother's husband, I doubt that will even excite much doubt in my audience. If I claim to be the son of Elvis Presley, it will be reasonable for them to demand some pretty convincing evidence. If I claim to be the son of Rudolph Valentino, they will be justified in dismissing my claim out of hand, and in demanding the most extraordinary evidence even to consider it.

Yes Really,

Only your own Faith, holds this belief in you. A very lousy analogy.

Even you being the son of your mothers husband, would be the subject of conjecture. Albeit DNA evidence would go a long way to suggesting this was right, anything else would be blind faith.

Unfortunately we cannot test the DNA of Jesus. However we could test this in you to see if you were really the son of your mothers husband, or the son of another person.

[godnotgod]

Originally Posted by footprints

Yes Really,

Only your own Faith, holds this belief in you. A very lousy analogy.

Even you being the son of your mothers husband, would be the subject of conjecture. Albeit DNA evidence would go a long way to suggesting this was right, anything else would be blind faith.

Unfortunately we cannot test the DNA of Jesus. However we could test this in you to see if you were really the son of your mothers husband, or the son of another person.

All Smoke and I have been trying to say is that ordinary claims do not require extraordinary evidence to prove their validity, but extraordinary claims, which the Resurrection is, absolutely does. But in the case of the Resurrection, even ordinary evidence is lacking. All we have is a story, with second and third hand allusions to hearsay evidence.

OK. So the claim that the Resurrection is a historical fact doesn't hold much water, and the Christian must find refuge in his faith. Here the whole story changes. We are on different ground, with different kinds of questions that must be asked in the face of the claim being made. Please remember that Christians are the ones advancing and promoting not just an ordinary claim, but a miraculous event the magnitude of which is quite spectacular; an event not witnessed first hand by anyone. Not a single one of the alleged 500 eyewitnesses of St. Paul provide any testimony whatsoever, either oral or written. Don't you find it a bit odd that no one thought to question any of them; to document what they had seen and heard, even if they might only be mundane details, for the single most important event in the entire history of mankind? As I mentioned earlier, even comets have received more recorded documentation than did the Resurrection of the Son of Man.

I'm sorry, but if you fail to see, in the most common sense sort of way, that something is seriously wrong with this story, then you must be blind, or ignorant, or both.

But to return to the issue of faith alone, the question becomes: why does the Christian find it so easy to casually believe that something as fantastic as a Resurrection, followed by an Ascension (two miracles, back to back, really) could have occurred? What I am suggesting is that there is a very good reason as to why the Christian not only readily chooses to believe it as true, but MUST believe it. For, without the Resurrection, as St. Paul tells us, we have no Christianity.

Does anyone here understand why that is so? Because, as far as I can see, the Resurrection performs no real function, as the Crucifixion does. It is the Crucifixion which is the executive agent that miraculously wipes away man's sin and guilt via of the shedding of divine blood, and exactly how that is accomplished is a topic for another thread.

If you are brave enough to provide an answer for the Resurrection having a function, I would like to hear it. Seems Christians keep avoiding this question, so I keep asking it.

Another poster suggested that the Resurrection was a symbol of cosmic renewal, of the promise of some new world that was coming down the divine turnpike. Now that is quite a miracle to perform just for the purpose of providing a sign to some other future event, and then one which was witnessed by virtually no one!

We are now on Christian ground, that of faith. We have left the ground of Reason and Logic and Provable Facts behind. This should be easy for any Christian to solve, right?

[Copernicus]

Originally Posted by footprints

There is enough evidence for and against this case without having to go to personal beliefs. Personally I accept all evidence from both sides as being credible. Your belief pattern allows you to only see one side.

I am quite aware of the fact that you accept all evidence from both sides, which is why you agree with every criticism I've made of your posts.

[Trusue]

You do well to keep yourself hidden, you have the kind of faith that is exposed as hypocritical.
A true Christian believes God's word, he does not doubt the Scriptures. The Scriptures are the only evidence a true Christian has to build his faith, even from the size of a mustard seed, you don't even have that much faith. You do well to start reading your copy of the Scriptures.

[godnotgod]

SECOND POSTING:

But to return to the issue of faith alone, the question becomes: why does the Christian find it so easy to casually believe that something as fantastic as a Resurrection, followed by an Ascension (two miracles, back to back, really) could have occurred? What I am suggesting is that there is a very good reason as to why the Christian not only readily chooses to believe it as true, but MUST believe it. For, without the Resurrection, as St. Paul tells us, we have no Christianity.

Does anyone here understand why that is so? Because, as far as I can see, the Resurrection performs no real function, as the Crucifixion does. It is the Crucifixion which is the executive agent that miraculously wipes away man's sin and guilt via of the shedding of divine blood, and exactly how that is accomplished is a topic for another thread.

If you are brave enough to provide an answer for the Resurrection having a function, I would like to hear it. Seems Christians keep avoiding this question, so I keep asking it.

Another poster suggested that the Resurrection was a symbol of cosmic renewal, of the promise of some new world that was coming down the divine turnpike. Now that is quite a miracle to perform just for the purpose of providing a sign to some other future event, and then one which was witnessed by virtually no one!

We are now on Christian ground, that of faith. We have left the ground of Reason and Logic and Provable Facts behind. This should be easy for any Christian to solve, right?

[footprints]

Originally Posted by Copernicus

I am quite aware of the fact that you accept all evidence from both sides, which is why you agree with every criticism I've made of your posts.

I do agree with all criticisms you make of my posts. I agree with them from your perception, and from this view I know you are correct. Fortunately for me though, I am not subjected to a single belief, and have many to choose from. I can see many beliefs better than yours.

[footprints]

Originally Posted by godnotgod

All Smoke and I have been trying to say is that ordinary claims do not require extraordinary evidence to prove their validity, but extraordinary claims, which the Resurrection is, absolutely does. But in the case of the Resurrection, even ordinary evidence is lacking. All we have is a story, with second and third hand allusions to hearsay evidence.

OK. So the claim that the Resurrection is a historical fact doesn't hold much water, and the Christian must find refuge in his faith. Here the whole story changes. We are on different ground, with different kinds of questions that must be asked in the face of the claim being made. Please remember that Christians are the ones advancing and promoting not just an ordinary claim, but a miraculous event the magnitude of which is quite spectacular; an event not witnessed first hand by anyone. Not a single one of the alleged 500 eyewitnesses of St. Paul provide any testimony whatsoever, either oral or written. Don't you find it a bit odd that no one thought to question any of them; to document what they had seen and heard, even if they might only be mundane details, for the single most important event in the entire history of mankind? As I mentioned earlier, even comets have received more recorded documentation than did the Resurrection of the Son of Man.

I'm sorry, but if you fail to see, in the most common sense sort of way, that something is seriously wrong with this story, then you must be blind, or ignorant, or both.

But to return to the issue of faith alone, the question becomes: why does the Christian find it so easy to casually believe that something as fantastic as a Resurrection, followed by an Ascension (two miracles, back to back, really) could have occurred? What I am suggesting is that there is a very good reason as to why the Christian not only readily chooses to believe it as true, but MUST believe it. For, without the Resurrection, as St. Paul tells us, we have no Christianity.

Does anyone here understand why that is so? Because, as far as I can see, the Resurrection performs no real function, as the Crucifixion does. It is the Crucifixion which is the executive agent that miraculously wipes away man's sin and guilt via of the shedding of divine blood, and exactly how that is accomplished is a topic for another thread.

If you are brave enough to provide an answer for the Resurrection having a function, I would like to hear it. Seems Christians keep avoiding this question, so I keep asking it.

Another poster suggested that the Resurrection was a symbol of cosmic renewal, of the promise of some new world that was coming down the divine turnpike. Now that is quite a miracle to perform just for the purpose of providing a sign to some other future event, and then one which was witnessed by virtually no one!

We are now on Christian ground, that of faith. We have left the ground of Reason and Logic and Provable Facts behind. This should be easy for any Christian to solve, right?

The thing is though, godnotgod, you admit you see Resurrection as an extraordinary claim. Others see it as something normal and accept it in its simplicity.

You are looking for extraordinary evidence, and I would suggest the only thing which would appease your intelligence. Your faith alone, will keep this in you.

[footprints]

Originally Posted by godnotgod

If you are brave enough to provide an answer for the Resurrection having a function, I would like to hear it. Seems Christians keep avoiding this question, so I keep asking it.

Do you mean brave enough, due to the fact that people of different beliefs will attack it and try to ridicule it (me). I never let narrow minded people worry me, I realise they have problems and issues.

Does the resurrection have a function? Well I would say, we would first have to have sufficient evidence to establish whether resurrection is right or wrong. That would be a very good start. I mean evidence which isn't part of any belief pattern.

However, this aside, Ressurrection does have a function in reality which cannot be denied. This function is it causes debates and friction between people of different beliefs, each trying to show and prove their belief is the one true vision pertaining to God. I would say the function is to try and teach people to be resonable when discussing different beliefs.

[cottage]

Originally Posted by godnotgod

Because those who claim it is real need to be asked for the evidence that supports their view. So we need to understand the premises they base such claims upon.

We know the premise! It is the claim that documentary evidence is proof for supernatural events. But no document can ever be a full and final proof for the existence of a Supreme Being, to which those supposed mystical events are causally attributed. And it is as plain and as simple as that.

Originally Posted by godnotgod

Try not to look at it as a sceptic; try just looking at it. "Sceptic" is already a preconceived notion about what you are looking at.

Oh nonsense! I'm a sceptic because of the lack of proof, not because of any conceptions held in advance. If a thing can be proved or demonstrated then I'm bound to accept it.

Originally Posted by godnotgod

There is no "this world" or "that world", but only ONE world. From the point of view of aliens, the ability to fly around space in saucers and abduct other beings is perfectly natural and ordinary. When they abduct one of us, it is historical, because they are entering our frame of reference, which is time and place.

"On Thursday, Oct. 23, 1984, three people were abducted by unidentified aliens flying an unknown spacecraft from the vicinity of Meadow Lake in Toledo, Ohio. This is an event of historic proportions."

The event is only extraordinary from our point of view.

Your discussion on the ‘point of view of aliens’ is just wandering off the subject, for if there is only one world, as you say, then it follows that ‘our view’ is the one that we all share. The Resurrection and the Ascension are held to be extraordinary, miraculous in fact, even by the claimants themselves! And that those mystical or miraculous events are claimed to have occurred in history gives them no more legitimacy than claims to alien abductions, which must also have supposedly occurred in a time and a place. We have the claim that a being was transported to another world after its dead body was returned to life. It isn’t a question of where and when those events took place, or a matter to be settled by testimony or scholarly analysis. No written account or an appeal to testimony can ever take us beyond the world of experience.

Originally Posted by godnotgod

However, it is not necessarily a supernatural event, by certain standards, "supernatural" implying the intervention of a divine nature.

So what is an entity that supposedly transcends the natural world and has existed from eternity, if not supernatural?

[godnotgod]

Originally Posted by footprints

The thing is though, godnotgod, you admit you see Resurrection as an extraordinary claim. Others see it as something normal and accept it in its simplicity.

Well, no, there is nothing to admit to. When I say that it is an extraordinary claim, it is not a personal view, the fact of the matter. What makes it extraordinary is that there has never been such a claim made before in the history of man. That is not my personal view. Those who accept it "as normal" do not accept the actual event as such, but the doctrine attached to the event. In other words, they accept it because it is part of being obedient to their own brand of creator-God. Obedience is the key, not faith. One dare not dis-believe, on penalty of eternal punishment. Therefore, one better have "faith"....or else!

The concepts of crucifixion as redeeming sacrifice, resurrection from the dead, and ascension into a heaven are all miraculous events, the nature of which, essentially, are magic. If they all exhibit the "simplicity" you claim, then will you will have no difficulty in explaining exactly how they are executed.

Now, had you been referring to the purity and simplicity of Yeshua's teachings, before St. Paul transformed them into the fantasmagorical and apocalyptic block-busting extravaganza that they have become, I would have no problem in agreeing with you.

Dig?

If the Christian truly understood the actual nature of what he was believing in, he would be dumbsruck.

You are looking for extraordinary evidence, and I would suggest the only thing which would appease your intelligence. Your faith alone, will keep this in you.

There is no premise upon which to establish any faith, either evidential or doctrinal.

Show it to me.

Actually, I would be quite satisfied with ordinary evidence, such as a couple of paragraphs of written testimony, either first or second hand, from a handful of the alleged 500 eyewitnesses of St. Paul. The fact that no such written testimony exists out of over 500 eyewitnesses is further indication of the fallacious nature of the Resurrection as a real event....and that does not even include the Ascension!