Post-Easter Discussion: Christ's Resurrection (Jesus Christ, rituals, Earth, Messiah, gospel)

[FatMan]

This is one of the only religious debate thread I have started, but thinking about my past education and research into a wide range of religions and this past weekend's rememberance of Easter, I'd like to get the board's reaction to a couple of statements.

Let me preface this by saying that I do not hold the bible to be a literal interpretation of how what has happened. I look at it to be a story on the origins of christian beliefs. That being said, here are the points I come back to whenever I begin questioning the events of Jesus Christ:

1) Had Jesus Christ not lived, nor if he were not resurrected, what other kind of event could have turned those of the Jewish faith to a new religion? Let's face it, the Jewish faith is a strong one, yet there was something that turned devout Jewish followers into those who adopted a Judeo-Christian faith. was the evidence of Jesus Christ's resurrection undoubtable back then?

2) What type of event could have occured that caused an entirely new day to become devoted to worship?? Prior to the formation of christianity, almost any other religion I researched worshipped on Saturday. What suddenly made sunday the holy day? Was it the fact that Jesus was resurrected on a Sunday?

In all honesty, I don't give these two questions that much thought, but if I were to ever disavow christianity because I did not believe in it, I'd have to have the two questions above answered definitively to show that there could have been an event of similar significance that brought about such a change, rather than just having a group of follwers going on about a fanciful story.

Any thoughts??

[Super Universe]

Religion puts too much into this resurrection business. It's their own fault, they did not understand what was revealed to them and they put their faith into rituals and beliefs that separate and divide humans into groups.

Christ said you must be born again, ignorant people thousands of years ago thought that meant "born of the flesh" even though that's not what Christ said or meant. What did they know of being born again as spirit in the afterlife?

Christ talked about His Father, ignorant people thus said "He claims to be the Son of God!". We are all spirit and thus, all are sons and daughter's of God but what did they know of this? They could not accept it.

So what Jesus did not resurrect in the body? He could not have ascended if He did, their are no material beings in the next dimension.

But don't believe me, it's 2007 now, decide for yourself.

[lunamoth]

Hi Fatman,

I'm not sure I fully understand your questions, but they both seem related to the idea that it was a belief in the Resurrection of Christ that is the impetus for the launching of Christianity as a new religion with a new day for worship. Addressing the second question first, I'm not sure exactly when Christians started worshiping on Sunday. I would guess that this came later after Christianity had expanded well beyond Palestine, and most likely the earliest Christians still kept Sabbath on Saturday.

But for the first part of your question, I think it is was the resurrection of Christ that was the defining foundation of Christianity. From our modern view this seems very difficult to believe...we know what happens to decomposing bodies and we do not witness physical resurrections. But, there's no getting around the fact that our earliest records of Christianity, the Epistles of Paul and the Gospel of Mark, both feature the resurrection as a reality. Whatever else we may think about the possibility or impossibility of this, we must take into account that the resurrection of Christ, and faith in our own future resurrection, was a founding belief in Christianity. Of note, a physical resurrection was part of Jewish belief during the time of Jesus.

From what I've read, I think the popularity of Christianity was probably due in large part because it met a need that somehow was not being met among some portion of the Jewish population of Israel at the time...the marginalized and oppressed who for one reason or another did not have access to Temple worship. Jesus was politically and religiously dangerous because He preached a message that said, in essence, you don't need the Temple any longer because God has done a new thing...whatever you thought stood between you and God has been taken care of. Certianly this would have appeal for all of those mentioned in the sermon on the mount, the meek, those who hunger for righteousness, etc.. As for the spread beyond the Jewish population of Israel, I'm not sure of why it had such appeal. Probably it had to do with the charism of the Christians themselves, the radical message of love and grace, the breaking down of social barriers, perhaps also the powerful simplicity and portability of the communal meal and the extension of charity among the Christians all combined to make it an attractive faith, especially to the peasant class. Frankly, I think all of these things are what still make Christiantiy attractive today.

[FatMan]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Hi Fatman,

I'm not sure I fully understand your questions, but they both seem related to the idea that it was a belief in the Resurrection of Christ that is the impetus for the launching of Christianity as a new religion with a new day for worship.

Lunamoth, thanks for the response. I don't really have any questions per se, what I'm trying to relate is that although I'm not a staunch believer of religion, it is hard for me to dismiss certain things in the religious historical aspect.

If I take a step back and ask the simple question, "What was the impetus for Christianity?", I assume that the event that triggered it had to be one that was both unbelievable, yet perceived by many to have actually happened, or else you would not have seen the conversion of so many Jewish persons to a new Judeo-Christian faith, nor would you have seen the dramatic change to worship on Sunday. This event was apparently the Resurrection.

I'm always a skeptic, yet these two points stick with me as having to have a lot of weight in the origins of the early church.

[lunamoth]

Originally Posted by FatMan

Lunamoth, thanks for the response. I don't really have any questions per se, what I'm trying to relate is that although I'm not a staunch believer of religion, it is hard for me to dismiss certain things in the religious historical aspect.

If I take a step back and ask the simple question, "What was the impetus for Christianity?", I assume that the event that triggered it had to be one that was both unbelievable, yet perceived by many to have actually happened, or else you would not have seen the conversion of so many Jewish persons to a new Judeo-Christian faith, nor would you have seen the dramatic change to worship on Sunday. This event was apparently the Resurrection.

I'm always a skeptic, yet these two points stick with me as having to have a lot of weight in the origins of the early church.

I think I understand what you are saying. Of course, religions have been launched without supernatural miracles like that of the Reusrrection. In Islam the revelation of the Quran is considered a miracle, but that is quite different than the Resurrection. And the Baha'i Faith was similarly launched based mostly upon the writings and person of Baha'u'llah. I don't know about in Islam, but miracles are greatly downplayed in the Baha'i Faith, yet there is no doubt it is a growing autonomous religion.

[dogsgod]

Originally Posted by FatMan

1) Had Jesus Christ not lived, nor if he were not resurrected, what other kind of event could have turned those of the Jewish faith to a new religion? Let's face it, the Jewish faith is a strong one, yet there was something that turned devout Jewish followers into those who adopted a Judeo-Christian faith. was the evidence of Jesus Christ's resurrection undoubtable back then?

It was gentiles, late in the second century, far removed from their Jewish roots that started to accept the Gospels as historical events.

Scholars specializing in the second century have characterized the Christianity of the apologists as essentially a philosophical movement. Whereas the premier expression of Christian development in the first century, the one centered around Paul and his circles, was an apocalyptically oriented phenomenon with a strong Jewish flavor and preaching a dying savior, that of the apologists, who were all located in cosmopolitan centers across much of the empire, was grounded in Platonic philosophy and Hellenistic Judaism.http://www.jesuspuzzle.com/

[lilithu]

Originally Posted by FatMan

1) Had Jesus Christ not lived, nor if he were not resurrected, what other kind of event could have turned those of the Jewish faith to a new religion? Let's face it, the Jewish faith is a strong one, yet there was something that turned devout Jewish followers into those who adopted a Judeo-Christian faith. was the evidence of Jesus Christ's resurrection undoubtable back then?

Something dramatic happened, to be sure. But that doesn't prove to me that there was a literal resurrection of Jesus' body.

These particular followers of Jesus were not just any Jews. They believed that Jesus was the Messiah. They believed that Jesus was here to overthrow their oppressors, the Romans, and reclaim the throne of David. They believed that Jesus would reign on earth. When that didn't happen, when instead he was tortured and executed like a common criminal, they fell into despair and fear for their lives. Then the question was: was everything that they had hoped for a lie or was there some greater truth that they had yet to grasp? In the days fafter Jesus' death, the followers of Jesus grasped a greater truth, a truth that took away their fear and made them willing to stand up against the authorities so that many of them ended up meeting the same fate as Jesus. I have no doubt that they genuinely perceived this as their teacher returned to them to give them courage. I have no doubt that it was a transformative experience. But that still doesn't prove a literal resurrection of Jesus' body.

I wrote in another thread that Jesus the man, died on the cross. But God was so moved by his devotion and the injustice of his death that God resurrected Jesus as Christ in the hearts of his believers. Not a literal resurrection of the body, but a real resurrection nonetheless. After reflecting on the resurrection story once again this year, especially with the help of a guest minister, I am more convinced than ever that this interpretation has scriptural support. Before Jesus' death, he alone was the embodiment of God's will. He alone had the Spirit. Even tho he had been preaching for three years, his followers clearly did not understand what he was saying. Time and time again they are confused by his stories. They fall asleep when he asks them to stay awake with him in Gethsemane. They turn violent when he says not to. They run away. They deny him. They are full of fear. Then... the resurrection. They perceive Jesus amongst them. They then perceive Jesus ascend into heaven. ie - leave earth. Fear turns to joy. Doubt turns to certainty. And they are the ones who now do God's will on earth. These same disciples, the ones who were pretty much bungling idiots before the resurrection. They face torture and death for God's sake with calm. They are now what Jesus was. Christ is resurrected in them.

Originally Posted by FatMan

2) What type of event could have occured that caused an entirely new day to become devoted to worship?? Prior to the formation of christianity, almost any other religion I researched worshipped on Saturday. What suddenly made sunday the holy day? Was it the fact that Jesus was resurrected on a Sunday?

If I remember correctly, early Christians still worshiped on Saturday. It wasn't until the growing tension with the Jewish community and the desire to distinguish themselves from them that caused Christians to switch from celebrating the Sabbath to celebrating on Sunday, the day of Christs' resurrection.

btw, when you say "almost any other religion that I researched" does that include things like Buddhism and Hinduism, etc? Or does "almost any other religion" only mean Judaism and its possible offshoots?

[FatMan]

lilithu - Thank you for the detail. I think you raise excellent points about whether or not the resurrection was literal, as well as the points made regarding the followers of Jesus. The logical thinker in me wants to dismiss any events that are inconceivable for us to understand, and you make excellent connections to how the development of a new religion could have happened without a supernatural effect.

By the way, when I said "almost any other religion that I researched", I should have specified Middle Eastern religions of that day. Those faiths wsorshipped on saturday or had Saturday as their holiest day of the week.