1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Resurrection of Christ - What's the evidence for and against a literal resurrection

Discussion in 'Scriptural Debates' started by adrian009, Jan 6, 2018.

  1. adrian009

    adrian009 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    8,905
    Ratings:
    +7,025
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    Sounds like a harsh and dismissive view of one of the most important OT books. Jesus referred to the prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27 twice. The restoration of the temple was real.

    Matthew 24:15
    Matthew 18:21-22

    I suppose like most who study the bible I try to consider the work as a whole, not selected parts. I don't dismiss whole books or sections because it doesn't suit my world view. History and genuine textual analysis is really important to me. Why do you suggest it isn't?
     
  2. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    8,134
    Ratings:
    +1,906
    Religion:
    Øneness
    Since I'm waiting for the same answer to @siti's question:

    Show with evidence from scripture that there are two time periods prophesied, as based on the line, "this generation will not pass away, until all these things are accomplished", some read that to mean only one time period is being referenced.

    In my opinion. :innocent:
     
  3. adrian009

    adrian009 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    8,905
    Ratings:
    +7,025
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    Matthew 24:34 appears to be the preterists strongest argument. The most obvious answer, is it refers to the imminent fate that awaits the Temple, Jerusalem, and the Jewish people. However the text appears allegorical for events in the distant future too. For example:

    And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. (Matthew 24:14)

    This does not happen in the first century, but much later.

    Another example is reference to the time of the gentiles:

    And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

    Luke 21:24
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. siti

    siti Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2017
    Messages:
    3,854
    Ratings:
    +2,882
    Yes it was, but most scholars believe it had already happened BEFORE the Book of Daniel was compiled.

    Because you seem to be accepting the Book of Daniel as genuinely prophetic of Jewish restoration written during the Babylonian exile, whilst most scholars hold that it was written much later, well into the second temple era, and was - at least for the most part - a compilation of earlier Jewish mythology and post-exilic reinterpretations of history written in the apocalyptic literary style that was quite common in that period.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. siti

    siti Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2017
    Messages:
    3,854
    Ratings:
    +2,882
    So truth is determined by popularity amongst conservative Christians? Hmmm! Not sure that will suit the Baha'i faith terribly well.

    Are they? Let's look at the problems with the problems you have highlighted:

    But that is a covenant that involves the law being written "on their hearts" - this is a prophecy about a spiritual condition - not a national identity. In any case, it does not say it is everlasting, it says it will cease when the "fixed order" - of days following nights, the procession of the stars across the sky and the daily ebb and flow of the tides - ends. If that is symbolic of a spiritual change, then it ends at least when "the present heavens and earth" pass away (2 Peter 3; Revelation 21:1-4). There is nothing in any of these passages that suggests anything other than this being symbolic of the passage of divine favour from the natural to the spiritual "Israelites" - from the written code with its old physical temple in the old earthly Jerusalem under the "old heavens" to the heavenly "New Jerusalem" and the law written on the hearts of the faithful.

    There is no way that this prophecy is about anything later than a post-Babylonian exile restoration - read the chapter in context and it is obvious that it talking about the Jews returning from Assyria as - it compares - they had come out of Egypt. Without a preconceived notion of a far later eschatological interpretation, there is no way this could be read as referring to anything other than the restoration of the 5th century BC.

    I don't think anyone argues that Paul's letters were not written in the mid-1st century - before the destruction of the Temple in 70CE - indeed it is almost certain that Paul was dead by the mid 60s so, on that interpretation, the 'spiritual resurrection' that was symbolized by the final destruction of the Jewish temple had not happened when he wrote this. Does that mean it must still not have happened 1800+ years later? How so?

    If that is correct then how are we to interpret the "generation" addressed by Jesus in the following verses:

    Matthew 12:39, Matthew 17:17, Matthew 23:33-36, Mark 8:38, Luke 11:29, Luke 11:50-51

    To be consistent, if you are insisting that when Jesus referred to "this generation" in Matthew 24, he meant people who would be alive in the 19th/20th centuries - he also meant that the blood of the faithful prophets of old would be avenged on the people who were alive in the 19th/20th centuries. Obviously that makes no sense, but having 'this generation' - of the Jews - witness all these signs and bear guilt for their unfaithfulness in "this generation" of contemporaneous 1st century Jews is both consistent and makes sense (whether it is true or not).

    So far, there seem to be more problems with the futurist interpretation than the preterist one - wouldn't you say?
     
  6. siti

    siti Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2017
    Messages:
    3,854
    Ratings:
    +2,882
    Not according the Bible - Acts of the Apostles 2:5, Acts of the Apostles 17:6, Romans 1:8, Romans 10:18, Colossians 1:5-6, Colossians 1:23, 1 Thessalonians 1:8

    Objection your Honor! Asked and answered
     
  7. CG Didymus

    CG Didymus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2012
    Messages:
    5,246
    Ratings:
    +2,247
    Religion:
    undecided
    Hey Adrian, another great thread, but this post is your answer. Why is the resurrection so important? It's the climax and whole point to the story. What good is a story where the hero only symbolically conquers his adversary.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. CG Didymus

    CG Didymus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2012
    Messages:
    5,246
    Ratings:
    +2,247
    Religion:
    undecided
    "I am pretty sure that they intended it to be taken as a literal physical resurrection..." That's the thing. Baha'is have to prove that the gospel writers intended it to be symbolic.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. CG Didymus

    CG Didymus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2012
    Messages:
    5,246
    Ratings:
    +2,247
    Religion:
    undecided
    Adrian where are you? Any I'll add to this. Even though it's piggy backed off of Siti's post, it was meant for you to answer.

    It sure seems like the gospel writers intended to write the story as if Jesus had come back to life. Something easily believable to non-scientific ancient people. Jesus appears and disappears, no problem. If he was dead and now alive, why not the added bonus of being able to materialize from some other dimension. And, if he could do that, why not float off to space. Crazy? Absolutely. So forget if it is scientifically possible. Forget if it really happened. Did the writers believe it, and did the early Church believe it?

    That's the problem facing the Baha'is. You say the body was taken and buried elsewhere. If so the appearances never happened as reported. Jesus cannot say to touch him and see that it is truly him, alive and well and with scars to prove it. The gospel writers would have to be perpetuating a hoax to have written the story as they did.

    But Baha'is can't have them lying either. So, for the Baha'is, they need the writers to have known Jesus was dead and stayed dead physically, but that they meant on a symbolic level he came back to life. But, if Christians and Baha'is believe in a soul or spirit that lives on after the body dies, what is so strange and mysterious about that? Of course his soul lives on.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. adrian009

    adrian009 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    8,905
    Ratings:
    +7,025
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    I'm working 6 days a week so haven't had too much time for RF.

    Its hard for us to step into the midset of the gospel writers. We can't even be certain who wrote any of them were. I wonder if they were so enamoured and intoxicated by the Spirit of Christ that historic accurancy was not a central concern.

    I understand your concern, but I doubt if the early Christians set out to create a hoax and decieve people. The apostles were busy preachng about Christ and spreading the word. Its just the way the story of Christ unfolded.

    The life of the spirit after death is a key message of the resurrection. More important is the life of the spirit in this world and the effect the Teachings of Christ could have on His followers. The most potent symbol to descibe the difference between unbelief and belief is the resurrection.

    Do you really believe the apostles of Christ were busy deliberately masterminding a hoax?
     
  11. adrian009

    adrian009 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    8,905
    Ratings:
    +7,025
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    As a starting point I'm aligned with conservation Christian belief.

    The book implies that Daniel was its author in several passages, such as 9:2; 10:2. That Jesus concurred is clear from his reference to “ ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel” (Mt 24:15; see note there), quoting 9:27 (see note there); 11:31; 12:11. The book was probably completed c. 530 b.c., shortly after Cyrus the Great, king of Persia, captured the city of Babylon in 539.


    The widely held view that the book of Daniel is largely fictional rests mainly on the modern philosophical assumption that long-range predictive prophecy is impossible. Therefore all fulfilled predictions in Daniel, it is claimed, had to have been composed no earlier than the Maccabean period (second century b.c.), after the fulfillments had taken place. But objective evidence excludes this hypothesis on several counts:


    1. To avoid fulfillment of long-range predictive prophecy in the book, the adherents of the late-date view usually maintain that the four empires of chs. 2 and 7 are Babylon, Media, Persia and Greece. But in the mind of the author, “the Medes and Persians” (5:28; see note there) together constituted the second in the series of four kingdoms (2:32–43; see note there). Thus it becomes clear that the four empires are the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Greek and Roman. See chart, p. 1777.
    2. The language itself argues for a date earlier than the second century. Linguistic evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls (which furnish authentic samples of Hebrew and Aramaic writing from the third and second centuries b.c.; see essay, p. 1939) demonstrates that the Hebrew and Aramaic chapters of Daniel must have been composed centuries earlier. Furthermore, as recently demonstrated, the Persian and Greek words in Daniel do not require a late date. Some of the technical terms appearing in ch. 3 were already so obsolete by the second century b.c. that translators of the Septuagint (the pre-Christian Greek translation of the OT) translated them incorrectly.
    3. Several of the fulfillments of prophecies in Daniel could not have taken place by the second century anyway, so the prophetic element cannot be dismissed. The symbolism connected with the fourth kingdom makes it unmistakably predictive of the Roman empire (see 2:33; 7:7,19), which did not take control of Syro-Palestine until 63 b.c. Also, a plausible interpretation of the prophecy concerning the coming of “the Anointed One, the ruler,” approximately 483 years after “the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem” (9:25; see note on 9:25–27), works out to the time of Jesus’ ministry.

    Objective evidence, therefore, appears to exclude the late-date hypothesis and indicates that there is insufficient reason to deny Daniel’s authorship.

    Intro to Daniel

    I don't know for certain who wrote the book of Daniel. However I do believe in the God of Abraham who is concerned for His creation, has sent great and inspired and Teachers throughout history, and prophets whom God communicated to humanity for guidance and to provide hope for the future.

    The book of Daniel as you know is important to Baha'is from a Christian background, and both Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi referred to Daniel on numerous occasions.
     
    #171 adrian009, Jan 19, 2018
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2018
    • Winner Winner x 1
  12. adrian009

    adrian009 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    8,905
    Ratings:
    +7,025
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    Baha'is believe share many beliefs with Christians.

    Agreed. The fulfillment of this prophecy was only partial though Christ and needs completion through the Returned Christ for this to be accomplished.

    There is more to the Eternal Covenant in the OT than Jeremiah 31:21-24

    [​IMG]

    These verses in Peter and Revelation are clear use symbols to describe the end of one religious dispensation that accompanys the beginning of a new one. The old world order is rolled up and a new one brought forward in its stead. This is a continuation of God's grace to man and fulfilling His pledge that His Covenant is Eternal. God will never leave humanity, no matter how much humanity turns its back on God.
     
    #172 adrian009, Jan 19, 2018
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2018
  13. adrian009

    adrian009 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    8,905
    Ratings:
    +7,025
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    If that were true how would we explain the following verses later in Isaiah 11 ?

    The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
    And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
    And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
    They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.

    Isaiah 11:6-9

    The Jews see many of the verses in Isaiah as Messianic as well.

    Messiah in Judaism - Wikipedia


    I think you are making my argument for me. Jesus in all the scripture you have provided uses generation in a negative sense. He is referring to the Jewish people and so in the Olivet discourse He is making reference to their plight, climaxing in the destruction of the temple. That need not destract at all from references to far off future events. I don't have a problem with it, but then I'm reading the text more allegorically, whereas you seem to be much more literal.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. CG Didymus

    CG Didymus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2012
    Messages:
    5,246
    Ratings:
    +2,247
    Religion:
    undecided
    The important question is... Do Baha'is believe that the writers believed that Jesus had risen from the dead?
     
  15. adrian009

    adrian009 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    8,905
    Ratings:
    +7,025
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    Like many specific questions about the Bible, Baha'is are free to form their own conclusions.

    As you know, Baha'is don't believe in the physical resurrection really happened, instead it was the body of Christ (the church) that was raised.

    I found a letter from Abdu'l-Baha to an individual believer about the resurrection I thought might be of interest to you.

    Bahá'í Reference Library - Tablets of Abdul-Baha Abbas, Pages 191-193
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. syo

    syo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2016
    Messages:
    2,969
    Ratings:
    +751
    Religion:
    pagan
    this. also, the enemies of christianity would definately use christ's dead body as evidence against christians. but there is no body, so...
     
  17. Rough Beast Sloucher

    Rough Beast Sloucher Well-Known Member
    It's My Birthday!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,538
    Ratings:
    +478
    Religion:
    None of the above
    So maybe some followers of Jesus took the body.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. syo

    syo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2016
    Messages:
    2,969
    Ratings:
    +751
    Religion:
    pagan
    no. he appeared alive.
     
  19. Rough Beast Sloucher

    Rough Beast Sloucher Well-Known Member
    It's My Birthday!

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    1,538
    Ratings:
    +478
    Religion:
    None of the above
    There are multiple narratives about Jesus being seen alive that disagree substantially from each other.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. adrian009

    adrian009 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2014
    Messages:
    8,905
    Ratings:
    +7,025
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    According to the gospel of John the Christians took Jesus's body.

    And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus.
    And there came also Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight.
    Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury.
    Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid.
    There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews' preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand.


    John 19:38-42
     
Loading...