Is this potential evidence for the resurrection of Christ?

[BilliardsBall]

Paul's are the only writings early enough to account for an eyewitness. And Paul admits that he's not an eyewitness. There are no eyewitnesses to the Resurrection. None.

Someone should tell Wikipedia, since going with the majority of scholars rather than fringe liberal scholars, they date nearly every NT book early enough that young disciples who were eyewitnesses of Jesus could have written them AND locals could have, with their living memory, refuted them, but did NOT.

There are no counter-documents to the early NT documents with their extraordinary claims, including miracles across the Roman world!

 

[blü 2]

Textual criticism is something I do in academic conferences, but it's a lot more easily accomplished when the author(s) is dead and cannot defend their views or veracity. That's my point.

The texts say what the texts say.

They say there are at least five different Jesuses in the NT, for instance ─ one ordinary Jew (Mark), two genetic sons of God (Matthew, Luke), and two demiurges (Paul, John). Mark's is not descended from David; the others are, two (Matthew, Luke) by blatantly fake genealogies, the other two merely by allegation.

I've already pointed out that the accounts of the resurrection are a forensic trainwreck.

And so on.

They're texts you study, so you already know these things.

 

[sojourner]

That's your incorrect determination.

Read decent scholars.

 

[sojourner]

Your Jude dating is minority scholarship, that assumes the apocrypha quoted inside was written first, not vice versa. Jude is a "brother of Jesus Christ" so the dating serves to make the author a liar, convenient for fringe liberal scholars

Markan priority says otherwise that 70. Another fringe scholar "opinion" that lacks forensic proof

Hardly “fringe.” You’re grasping at straws. Very, very fragile straws.

 

[Audie]

Read decent scholars.

Your friend may feel he is gifted with infallible right-readin'.

ETA
"friends" "they are"

 

[sojourner]

I wrote: "You should recall the Jews who wrote the NT were under threat of expulsion from Jewish religious and secular life and under threat of martyrdom from Rome. Stop this nonsense, please..." and not "circa 50 AD expulsion from the City of Rome".

As a Jew, I can say categorically the NT writers have superior mishnah and show intimacy with Jewish customs and religion.

So? That doesn’t change their dates.

 

[sojourner]

Someone should tell Wikipedia

Wikipedia is hardly an acceptable scholarly source. No accredited graduate seminary would allow the use of Wikipedia as a source for an exegetical paper. Try the Anchor Commentary or Sacra Pagina. Heck, Stephen Harris blows Wikipedia out of the water and he’s “NT 101” stuff.

 

[sojourner]

Your friend may feel he is gifted with infallible right readin’

The post reads like typical, conservative head-in-the-sand stuff. They can’t stand that the Bible isn’t credible as an eyewitness history, so they bias their research.

 

[sojourner]

Nope. There's a whole bunch of stiff-necked, spiritually-and-history challenged scholars and historians who blew it on the resurrection.

Jesus is RISEN in all four Gospels and various epistles.

None of those constitute evidence, however.

 

[sojourner]

Textual criticism is something I do in academic conferences

Don’t quit your day job.

 

[Audie]

The post reads like typical, conservative head-in-the-sand stuff. They can’t stand that the Bible isn’t credible as an eyewitness history, so they bias their research.

As I have mentioned elsewhere, religious beliefs seem to
require intellectual dishonesty at some point.
Exceptions would be welcome.

 

[Spartan]

But Jesus did not rise in real life, only on pages of a Book.

You'd love to be able to prove that, wouldn't you!? But you can't.

 

[Spartan]

No shortage of ink after the supposed lifetime of the protagonist in question, however no one that wrote about Jesus ever met the man.

Incorrect.

 

[Audie]

Incorrect.

Again thrashing about like a foul hooked alligstor bitin'
futilely at anything nearby.

 

[tas8831]

Personally I like this usage of the word "miracle". To me being conscious is a miracle, seeing a baby smile is a miracle and so forth.

Not to me, and seeing a baby smile does not mean Yahweh created the universe.

 

[tas8831]

I would not say moot but not important. From my understanding, people on higher planes of consciousness can do what are considered miracles.

I've never heard of such people. What miracles do they perform? You aren't talking about Benny Hinn, I hope..

 

[tas8831]

Why don't you skeptics ever do your proper due-diligence? Read it.

Does it provide evidence for the earthquakes, darkness at noon, and zombies rising from the dead?

 

[tas8831]

Is it an ad populum and appeal to authority when skeptics say, "academia doesn't believe in the Christ or miracles"?

1. I've never heard that - examples?
2. Is that presented as an argument? Or just an observation?

 

[tas8831]

I have tons of evidence, but giving it to people like you who automatically kick it to the curb is a waste of my time. Go find someone else to spin your folly on.

Classic Christian Cop-out....

 

[tas8831]

Ah yes, the old "I have heaps of evidence, but I only show it to people who already completely believe what I'm saying before being shown evidence" claim.

That sort of "belief" permeates the right/religious - I used to get that exact same response when asking for evidence for ID. Still do, sometimes.