Is this potential evidence for the resurrection of Christ?

[Spartan]

Yes, religionists ignore the facts.

Same article:

"Not everyone reported the same thing; some present claimed they saw the sun dance around the heavens; others said the sun zoomed toward Earth in a zigzag motion that caused them to fear that it might collide with our planet (or, more likely, burn it up). Some people reported seeing brilliant colors spin out of the sun in a psychedelic, pinwheel pattern, and thousands of others present didn't see anything unusual at all."

That's Fatima, right? Perhaps those who didn't see it were the spiritually-challenged ones.

 

[Milton Platt]

I'm not really a believer but one question that's really intriguing and could potentially be evidence that Jesus rose from the dead is the fact that doubting Thomas was skeptical of the resurrection but upon touching Jesus' wounds he became a believer in the resurrection. Now assuming the story is true, unless someone can provide reason to doubt that Thomas existed or reason to doubt that he was skeptical of the resurrection even if he did exist, wouldn't the fact that Thomas was skeptical of the resurrection but then became a believer in the resurrection be potential evidence for the resurrection?

You have it backwards. Nobody needs to prove Thomas didn't see a risen Christ, just like nobody had to prove Zeus and Thor don't exist. You need to have corroborative evidence (and lots of it) from independent sources to show that Thomas saw a man who had been supposedly dead. A mere story written by an anonymous author with an agenda won't do.
I think it is the sort of claim that would require an almost insurmountable amount of proof.

 

[Milton Platt]

That's Fatima, right? Perhaps those who didn't see it were the spiritually-challenged ones.

Or those who were not gullible.......

 

[Audie]

Or those who were not gullible.......

"Spiritual" is herein Spartan -defined as
"having a tendency to see thingsthat are not present."

 

[sojourner]

Your analysis is sophomoric. We should believe the Jews of Jesus' day, who killed their own prophets and crucified their own Messiah? You're funny.

That’s not what I meant. Your judgment is the same as theirs. That’s what I meant.

 

[tas8831]

You know, tas, the number of people who would have to be liars, fools, or charlatans (the Gospel writers, the epistle authors, the early church fathers, Phlegon, Julius Africanus, Tertullian, and a hundred others), just so you can be right, is too numerous to casually kick them all to the curb.

Or maybe a lot of people extrapolated in ways favorable to their preconceived notions?

You remind me of Bill Clinton's denials when Christ Wallace asked him, "Why do you suppose all these women are lying"? It's not the crowd who saw the sun darkened at noon that look foolish here, it's those who automatically kick them all to the curb.

LOL!

Yet... NOBODY seems to have seen exactly what is described by non-eyewitnesses after the fact... Weird how that works.

You remind me of Trump supporting "Christians" - their blind devotion to a twice-divorced serial adulterer, cheater, liar, worshiper of wealth, hater of 'the other'..

Classic.

 

[Audie]

Or maybe a lot of people extrapolated in ways favorable to their preconceived notions?


LOL!

Yet... NOBODY seems to have seen exactly what is described by non-eyewitnesses after the fact... Weird how that works.

You remind me of Trump supporting "Christians" - their blind devotion to a twice-divorced serial adulterer, cheater, liar, worshiper of wealth, hater of 'the other'..

Classic.

By their fruits ye shall know them

 

[BilliardsBall]

There is physical evidence for Caesar's existence (in the form of coins bearing his profile and name; contemporary mosaics,etc.), and non-Roman accounts of his life. Here is Brittanica's entry on him:
Julius Caesar | Biography, Conquests, & Facts

An extensive history, with dates, names, etc. Nothing remotely similar for Jesus.

Now, these teams of writers - doesn't that sort of undercut the whole 'eye witness' thing?

And that you will accept the ramblings and paraphrasings of ancient peoples as fact sort of undercuts your exceptionally high bar for evidence when it comes to our science claims, does it not? And your much much lower bar for your anti-science claims, like your whole nonsense about enzymes and the appendix?

1) There are more document writers of Jesus than of Caesar, by far.

2) The "teams of writers" include speakers and their scribal recorders (common practice in the day).

3) What does accepting honest writers and documentarians and historians (despite supernatural events recorded by them in their understanding) have to do with ALSO having a high bar for science and other claims (etymological, for example).

4) Therefore, although you took my enzyme comments far out of context, I WILL respond when you tell me the etymological derivation of "Social Darwinism" - hint - Google.

 

[BilliardsBall]

As the only one of the five principal Jesuses of the NT who became the son of God in accordance with Jewish, rather than Greek, traditions.

So why was the "ordinary" Jesus in Mark crucified? What was the claim He made in Mark, the reason the Pharisees/Saducees put him to death via Rome?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Do you not see how that is different? You probably have watched that video several times. It corrects errors before they become set. Your analogy fails because you had a correcting mechanism. That was not the case with the stories about Jesus.

What often happens in a case like your wedding when there is no way to correct the changes that naturally occur is that a person's memories change. If he runs into someone else from the same event 40 years later the memories of "what happened" are often quite different.

Do I talk about my wedding every day since, firming the details, interviewing and chatting with other eyewitnesses?

Did the apostles frequently or infrequently speak about Jesus, despite persecution, in an attempt to win souls to Jesus?

 

[BilliardsBall]

You share commonly held beliefs with those of your religion, far be it from me to convince you otherwise, better you learn for yourself.

It's not "a common religious belief," for one example, that there are ZERO counter-documents against the NT and apocrypha, rather, that is an observable fact.

 

[BilliardsBall]

OR (and I think this a highly likely possibility), the gospels began as oral transmission. They certainly read like oral stories. And Q (like an oral-only source) shares material with Thomas, meaning that the shared material would have to be very, very early — likely less than 10 years following the crucifixion. That’s good news for the “early” camp. Oral transmission in that culture was highly efficient (although the oral tradition was more “jist of the story” and not so concerned about specific vocabulary. It was only after the stories were written down that we became concerned about “what was “actually” said). I’m firmly in the Mark just after 70 CE camp, and firmly in the John after 90 camp. The earliest manuscripts we have don’t name an author and are not autographed. Whoever actually wrote the Synoptics down was likely a scribe. IMO, the tradition of “apostolic authorship” isn’t backed by any evidence that’s compelling. And the tradition didn’t begin until long after the Synoptics were written.

The gospels were orally transmitted, late in life, former young disciples of Jesus left a written legacy. Some issues are not just the historical markers already cited (people, places, things) that put them early, but the prior written OT with hundreds of fulfilled prophecies of Christ!

 

[BilliardsBall]

Why do you think there would be a body? They didn’t embalm people. Jesus’ Body would have likely either been put in a common grave, or thrown to the dogs.

Or produced on demand to end the Christian heresy. After all, you must consider the texts mention setting a guard and sealing the tomb, to PREVENT a resurrection story!

 

[sojourner]

The gospels were orally transmitted, late in life, former young disciples of Jesus left a written legacy. Some issues are not just the historical markers already cited (people, places, things) that put them early, but the prior written OT with hundreds of fulfilled prophecies of Christ!

I disagree -- especially with the part about the OT taking about Jesus specifically.

 

[sojourner]

Or produced on demand to end the Christian heresy.

Not quite sure I'd use the term "heresy." It wasn't religious purity that Rome demanded; it was public order. They sealed the tomb to prevent Jesus from being hailed as "king."

 

[Audie]

Not quite sure I'd use the term "heresy." It wasn't religious purity that Rome demanded; it was public order. They sealed the tomb to prevent Jesus from being hailed as "king."

Hmm. You sure?

And, Golgotha being what it was, (probably a generic term for
execution grounds) was it not the practice to leave corpses on
display till they disintegrated?

Heck the British were still doing that in the 18th century.

 

[Spartan]

Ah, right - so you have to 'merely BELIEVE' in the first place in order to see the fake miracles.

Sounds about right.

Some are fake, some aren't. But your knee-jerk conclusion assumes they're all fake, and you're a full quart low on evidence to make them all go away.

 

[sojourner]

Hmm. You sure?

And, Golgotha being what it was, (probably a generic term for
execution grounds) was it not the practice to leave corpses on
display till they disintegrated?

Heck the British were still doing that in the 18th century.

Just saying what Matthew's account says. If it's accurate, my thesis stands. That's not to say that the account is historically accurate. We just don't know.

 

[lukethethird]

It's not "a common religious belief," for one example, that there are ZERO counter-documents against the NT and apocrypha, rather, that is an observable fact.

Now you come back with yet another commonly held religious belief. Do you have a single original thought in your head, it doesn't appear so?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do I talk about my wedding every day since, firming the details, interviewing and chatting with other eyewitnesses?

Did the apostles frequently or infrequently speak about Jesus, despite persecution, in an attempt to win souls to Jesus?

Hard to say exactly what the apostles did. And I doubt if you talked about your wedding day every day. If so you would be one rather boring conversationalist.