The Resurrection is it provable?

[Kenny]

My mistake it's actually "according to" which in Greek at that time was an unusual naming structure but generally meant" as told to me by". It's showing the author isn't the witness.

Carrier writes about it but he explains it here at 30:20

The Gospels are considered anonymous by all historians. Some fundamentalists obviously won't have it. They also say the Earth is 5000 years old.



"The four canonical gospels were probably written between AD 66 and 110.[5][6][7] All four were anonymous (with the modern names added in the 2nd century), almost certainly none were by eyewitnesses, and all are the end-products of long oral and written transmission.[8] Mark was the first to be written, using a variety of sources.[9][10] The authors of Matthew and Luke both independently used Mark for their narrative of Jesus's career, supplementing it with a collection of sayings called the Q source and additional material unique to each."

• Reddish, Mitchell (2011). An Introduction to The Gospels. Abingdon Press. ISBN 978-1426750083.

So, we have a opinion... Did you notice the words "probably" et al? And after all the "probables" he then acted as if it was true?

Nice story. At the expense of all the historical writings that would be contrary to how he views it.

 

[leroy]

No, you have not shown that you have tombs when it comes to Roman crucifixion. It is easy to show tombs for Jewish crucifixion. But this was not a Jewish crucifixion. You are trying to lump all crucifixion together. That is an error on your part.

do you have any source that indicates that this people where not crucified by roman authorities?

From ancient literary sources we know that tens of thousands of people were crucified in the Roman Empire. In Palestine alone, the figure ran into the thousands. Yet until 1968 not a single victim of this horrifying method of execution had been uncovered archaeologically.

In that year I excavated the only victim of crucifixion ever discovered. He was a Jew, of a good family, who may have been convicted of a political crime. He lived in Jerusalem shortly after the turn of the era and sometime before the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

It seems to me that the author is indicating that where are talkign about a victim of a roman crucifixion.(in jewsh territory)

And where did Ehrman say that most scholars disagreed with him?

sure quote from Barth Erman
Second, as it turns out, this post is exactly on a topic that I happened to lecture on today to my undergraduate class (what I said may well have scandalized some students, but I made sure to tell them that my opinion on this matter is a minority view among scholars; I always try to let them know if what I’m saying is standard fare — which is normally the case — or a minority opinion).
The Burial of Jesus: A Blast from the Past | The Bart Ehrman Blog

The abstract is not enough. It does not tell you what crimes resulted in even a possibility of a tomb. Or if they were differentiating between Roman crucifixion and crucifixion by others.

Yes the Abstract is talking about roman crucifixions. And concludes that sometimes people where buried.

Besides What should I do? You don’t accept journals because they are not free you don’t accept blogs because they are not peer reviewd…. You are not giving me too many options.

 

[leroy]

I doubt if you would understand it. If you watched their debate and did not understand it then do you seriously think that posting it again for you would do any good?

At this point is obvious that you are repeating what atheist youtubers say, you haven’t seen the debate, you haven’t identified any mistake from WLC

 

[Subduction Zone]

do you have any source that indicates that this people where not crucified by roman authorities?


It seems to me that the author is indicating that where are talkign about a victim of a roman crucifixion.(in jewsh territory)





sure quote from Barth Erman
Second, as it turns out, this post is exactly on a topic that I happened to lecture on today to my undergraduate class (what I said may well have scandalized some students, but I made sure to tell them that my opinion on this matter is a minority view among scholars; I always try to let them know if what I’m saying is standard fare — which is normally the case — or a minority opinion).
The Burial of Jesus: A Blast from the Past | The Bart Ehrman Blog


Yes the Abstract is talking about roman crucifixions. And concludes that sometimes people where buried.

Besides What should I do? You don’t accept journals because they are not free you don’t accept blogs because they are not peer reviewd…. You are not giving me too many options.

You have your burden of proof backwards again.

 

[Subduction Zone]

At this point is obvious that you are repeating what atheist youtubers say, you haven’t seen the debate, you haven’t identified any mistake from WLC

I gave you the video.. What.part did you not understand?

 

[leroy]

No, you have not shown that you have tombs when it comes to Roman crucifixion. It is easy to show tombs for Jewish crucifixion. But this was not a Jewish crucifixion. You are trying to lump all crucifixion together. That is an error on your part.

And where did Ehrman say that most scholars disagreed with him?



The abstract is not enough. It does not tell you what crimes resulted in even a possibility of a tomb. Or if they were differentiating between Roman crucifixion and crucifixion by others.




I will see if I can find it for you today. Later when I am on my desktop.

So in summery

1 I presented an article that concludes that sometimes crucified people where buried

2 2 examples of tombs form crucified people

3 most scholars accept the burial of Jesus

4 we have at least 2 indepednent testimonies (Paul Mark) confirming that Jesus was buried

5 the burial of jesus had no theological meaning (so why would paul and marl lie)

6 jesus was not a “serous criminal” (from the point of view of the romans)

7 an exception was made because a wealthy and influential man (joseph of arimathea) asked for the body.

My Job is not to convince you, but rather to provide evidence for my claims, and I think I did it with success.

 

[leroy]

You have your burden of proof backwards again.

Once again you are making claims and then you don’t want to support them

 

[leroy]

I gave you the video.. What.part did you not understand?

Ok so ill put this in the list of claims that you won’t support.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

That will be only due to your lack of education. It is dead easy to show that there was no flood of Noah. Do you understand the sciences at all?

To be fair, you would have to marathon Aron Ra’s playlist for a day or two to see all the issues with the flood.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So in summery

1 I presented an article that concludes that sometimes crucified people where buried

2 2 examples of tombs form crucified people

3 most scholars accept the burial of Jesus

4 we have at least 2 indepednent testimonies (Paul Mark) confirming that Jesus was buried

5 the burial of jesus had no theological meaning (so why would paul and marl lie)

6 jesus was not a “serous criminal” (from the point of view of the romans)

7 an exception was made because a wealthy and influential man (joseph of arimathea) asked for the body.

My Job is not to convince you, but rather to provide evidence for my claims, and I think I did it with success.

And you did not understand your failures. As usual you screwed the pooch.

We were not talking about crucifixion. We were talking about Roman crucifixion.. Since all we can read from the abstract we can not tell if they were dealing solely with Roman crucifixion.

It is almost as if we were discussing beagles and you tried to prove something about beagles by citing an article that said "some dogs". Not all dogs are beagles and not all crucifixions are Roman. Your article may have supported you, but we can't tell. It does not help you.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Jesus even said; to paraphrase, he ate and drink like at a wedding feast, but soon this would change into hardship. This sounds like an athlete training for a big prize fight, that would test his endurance to the limits

Or a televangelist who wants to avoid demons by buying his own fleet of private planes.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok so ill put this in the list of claims that you won’t support.

No, I warned you that you would probably not understand. I even asked you what part of the short video you did not understand and you ran away. Did you not even watch it?

So in summery

1 I presented an article that concludes that sometimes crucified people where buried

2 2 examples of tombs form crucified people

3 most scholars accept the burial of Jesus

4 we have at least 2 indepednent testimonies (Paul Mark) confirming that Jesus was buried

5 the burial of jesus had no theological meaning (so why would paul and marl lie)

6 jesus was not a “serous criminal” (from the point of view of the romans)

7 an exception was made because a wealthy and influential man (joseph of arimathea) asked for the body.

My Job is not to convince you, but rather to provide evidence for my claims, and I think I did it with success.

No, you failed at presenting evidence and that was explained to you.

 

[leroy]

And you did not understand your failures. As usual you screwed the pooch.

We were not talking about crucifixion. We were talking about Roman crucifixion.. Since all we can read from the abstract we can not tell if they were dealing solely with Roman crucifixion.

It is almost as if we were discussing beagles and you tried to prove something about beagles by citing an article that said "some dogs". Not all dogs are beagles and not all crucifixions are Roman. Your article may have supported you, but we can't tell. It does not help you.

arrr
T"his essay examines the contention that Joseph of Arimathaea buried Jesus—in light of what one can know from Greco-Roman culture about the disposal of the bodies of crucified individuals. A survey of the statutes governing the burial of criminals and governing the prosecution of those accused of seditious activity indicates that provincial officials had a choice when confronted with the need to dispose of the bodies of the condemned. Greco-Roman texts show that in certain cases the bodies of the crucified were left to decompose in place. In other cases, the crucified bodies were buried."

The abstract makes it clear that the author is talking about roman crusifixtions

 

[leroy]

No, I warned you that you would probably not understand. I even asked you what part of the short video you did not understand and you ran away. Did you not even watch it?
u.

I watch the debate, understand it, and I was unable to spot any mistake from WLC this is why I am kindly asking you to quote a claim made by WLC where he was wrong and corrected.

 

[Subduction Zone]

arrr
T"his essay examines the contention that Joseph of Arimathaea buried Jesus—in light of what one can know from Greco-Roman culture about the disposal of the bodies of crucified individuals. A survey of the statutes governing the burial of criminals and governing the prosecution of those accused of seditious activity indicates that provincial officials had a choice when confronted with the need to dispose of the bodies of the condemned. Greco-Roman texts show that in certain cases the bodies of the crucified were left to decompose in place. In other cases, the crucified bodies were buried."

The abstract makes it clear that the author is talking about roman crusifixtions

The "Greco-Roman culture would include the cultures of the countries that they defeated and occupied.

In other words you are talking about all dogs rather than just beagles.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I watch the debate, understand it, and I was unable to spot any mistake from WLC this is why I am kindly asking you to quote a claim made by WLC where he was wrong and corrected.

You did not watch my video. That was quite a bit of hypocrisy on your part.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Almost certainly not. at least not as the Bible says. This was a Roman crucifixion. Even the biblical myth states that. What they do not explain is how they got the guards to allow the body to come down. Let me save you some time, that it was the Sabbath would not make a whit of difference to the Romans. Part of the punishment of crucifixion was leaving the body up for a long time.. It was not meant to be a pretty sight.

This is why I think the story where Jesus heals a centurion’s servant is important. He would be in charge of the soldiers posted there. If Jesus was owed a favor, it would explain why Jesus is pulled down earlier than normal, something even Pilate remarks on.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

“2 First century Jews considered pagan Gods and abomination, it would have been unlikely that that they would have inspired a new religion based on those Gods.”
Hellenized Judaism was a thing. There are synagogues with Greek zodiac mosaics. It seems like Jerusalem was super conservative, but it wasn’t true of the rest of the Jewish population.

 

[leroy]

The "Greco-Roman culture would include the cultures of the countries that they defeated and occupied.

.

Yes and so what?

The point is that

Sometimes (in some territories) roman authorities would allow the burial of a crucified person

 

[leroy]

You did not watch my video. That was quite a bit of hypocrisy on your part.

I have watched the debate between WLC and Carol if you ever shared any other video I didn’t notice it.