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!

The empty tomb

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by Agnostic75, May 26, 2010.

  1. outhouse

    outhouse Atheistically

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    35,805
    Ratings:
    +1,881

    No he was "said" to have been brough back.

    The authors that wrote THAT script never knew or met jesus or lazarus. What you have is just a story
     
  2. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    39,836
    Ratings:
    +3,089
    Actually... a complex rebuttal is not needed.
    I like the scripture about the guards at the tomb...just fine.

    Works for me.
     
  3. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84


    Consider the following from Wikipedia:

    I started this thread in order to discuss Christian apologetics, which, as the article says, deals with "historical evidence, philosophical arguments, scientific investigation, and arguments from other disciplines."

    Millions of Christians are interested in Christian apologetics, and many well-known Christian organizations deal with Christian apologetics, such as the Institute for Creation Research, and Answers in Genesis, largely because they (Christian individuals, and Christian organizations) know that their main intended audience, who are non-Christians, much prefer discussing evidence to listening to mere and obvious declarations of faith from Christians. Many Christians have said that Christian apologetics has strengthened their faith. If you are not interested in Christian apologetics, that is fine, in which case I do not have anything to discuss with you.

    You are free to start threads of your own and use whatever approach that you want to use. Please be courteous, and respect my desire to discuss Christian apologetics in this thread.
     
    #143 Agnostic75, Nov 25, 2011
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2011
  4. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    39,836
    Ratings:
    +3,089
    Historical evidence?...to explain scripture?
    This forum is full of efforts to that effect.
    If you want evidence, YOU search for the threads that do so.

    If you want to be philosophical...we are already doing that.

    If you were hoping to debunk a long standing belief....
    in the face of scripture written as is....
    you will be disappointed.

    As for science... I love science.
    Got an experiment for that 'lack of guard'?
     
  5. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84
    Message to Thief: Are you interested in discussing my two part opening post in detail? If not, just say so, in which case there is not anything more for use to discuss.
     
    #145 Agnostic75, Nov 25, 2011
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2011
  6. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84
    Do you have experiments that support the claims that creationism is true, that a global flood occurred, and the earth is young? If so, we can discuss those issues at the Evolution/Creation forum. There have been lots of experiments regarding the evolution of the flagellum, and no experiments are needed in order to know that the global flood theory contradicts the laws of gravity.
     
    #146 Agnostic75, Nov 25, 2011
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2011
  7. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84
    Of course since Christian apologetics deals partly with history, and since some of my arguments deal with history. Christians have thousands of books and articles that deal with the histority of the Resurrection apart from just faith. As far as I know, all Christian colleges teach the historicity of the Resurrection apart from just faith.

    If I need to, I will go over the opening post one argument at a time, whether or not you reply to the arguments. Many Christians are interested in Christian apologetics. You are not, at least as far as the guards at the tomb are concerned. That is fine.
     
    #147 Agnostic75, Nov 25, 2011
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2011
  8. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    39,836
    Ratings:
    +3,089
    I'm interested in the discussion of the guards at the tomb.
    You keep offering everything else.
    The guards play a part of the story.
    That portion should not be tampered with.
    As an article of faith...removing gospel testimony of the guards as watchmen over the tomb would be inappropriate.

    The story is what it is.

    Deal with it.
     
  9. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84
    Not the opening post.

    I'm interested in the discussion of the guards at the tomb. You keep offering everything else.[/quote]

    I offered the opening post. You conveniently refuse to directly discuss what I posted.

    Guards of mentioned, but you have not provided sufficient historical evidence that guards were posted at the tomb.

    Any portion of the Bible should be questioned that is not backed upon by sufficient historical evidence.

    I started this thread in order to discuss Christian apologetics. Christian apologetics partly deals with historical evidence other than faith.
     
  10. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84
    Edit: Deletion of duplicated post.
     
    #150 Agnostic75, Nov 25, 2011
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2011
  11. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84
    Since Thief has consistently, and conveniently refused to directly discuss the opening post, I will discuss it one issue at a time, whether or not he replies to any of my arguments. I will number my arguments for easy reference.


    Argument #1


    http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billc...ocs/guard.html



    What Craig says would make some sense if such kinds of arguments were taking place, but he did not provide any credible historical evidence that such arguments were taking place.
     
    #151 Agnostic75, Nov 25, 2011
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2011
  12. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84
    Argument #2


    William Lane Craig tried to attempt to use the non-canonical Gospel of Peter to back up Matthew, but that did not work. First, let's take a look at the relevant part of the Gospel of Peter. Consider the following:


    http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/proj...eraccount.html



    Now, let's take a look at what a conservative Christian scholar has to say about the Gospel of Peter.


    4Truth.net Home - 4Truth.net



    Even though Professor Quarles is a conservative Christian, he knows better than to use the Gospel of Peter as a source since. Quarles easily dismisses by implication Craig's claim that "the gospel of Peter also relates the story of the guard at the tomb, and its account may well be independent of Matthew, since the verbal similarities are practically nil."
     
  13. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84
    Anything is appropriate that is backed up with good evidence. There is good evidence that evolution is true, whether naturalistic or theistic, that a global flood did not occur, and that the earth is old. It is no wonder that even many conservative Christians accept evolution, do not believe that a global flood occurred, and believe that the earth is old. Over 99% of experts in the U.S. accept naturalistic or theistic evolution. I assume that over 99% of experts also do not believe that a global flood occurred, and believe that the earth is old.

    What historical evidence do you have that guards were posted at the tomb?
     
  14. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    39,836
    Ratings:
    +3,089

    Like I said...you keep offering everything else.

    I happen to love science.

    I believe in God.

    I believe guards were posted at the tomb.
    Such gospel characters are important to the story.
     
  15. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84
    On the contary, it is you who have refused to directly reply to anything that I mentioned in my two part opening post. Your personal declarations of faith do not have anything whatsoever to do with the opening post.

    Like I said, I am interested in Christian apologetics, and so do millions of Christians. Christian apologetics partly deals with historical evidence aside from faith. You are not interested in Christian apologetics, at least as far as the issue of the guards at the tomb is concerned. That is fine. I am happy to continue discussing historical arguments in this thread with or without your participation. You have been offering everything but direct replies to the arguments that I used in my two part opening post.

    Good, then you should know that evolution is true, that a global flood did not occur, and that the earth is old.

    Irrelevant to Christian apologetics as defined by Wikipedia, and to the purposes for which I started this thread.

    Irrelevant to Christian apologetics as defined by Wikipedia, and to the purposes for which I started this thread.

    I agree. That is why so many Christians make a big deal out of the empty tomb, and the guards. However, you have not provided any historical evidence at all that supports your position that can be considered Christian apologetics. People who start threads can use whatever approach they wish. I wish to discuss Christian apologetics, which deals with evidence other than faith.

    Assertions of faith are already obvious to everyone, and never lead anywhere.

    I will continue to post my historical arguments with or without your participation.

    With my post #151, and #152, I have started discussing my entire opening post, one argument at a time, and I am numbering myk arguments for easy reference. If you do not wish to reply to those posts, that is fine.
     
    #155 Agnostic75, Nov 25, 2011
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2011
  16. Walkntune

    Walkntune Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,517
    Ratings:
    +133
    Its the same historical evidence you have that Jesus exists.You take it on faith and through faith devine revelation .To take part of the gospel as true on faith and not all of it is a little odd? To try and reason through historical accounts taking on faith is pointless. I mean why do you even assume there was a tomb in the first place?
     
  17. allright

    allright Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    Messages:
    643
    Ratings:
    +46
    Matthew 27

    62 The next day, the one after Preparation Day, the chief priests and the Pharisees went to Pilate. 63"Sir," they said, "we remember that while he was still alive that deceiver said, 'After three days I will rise again.' 64 So give the order for the tomb to be made secure until the third day. Otherwise, his disciples may come and steal the body and tell the people that he has been raised from the dead. This last deception will be worse than the first."

    If the chief priests and the Pharisees actually said that, I believe that the following subsequent scenario is plausible:

    Pilate:

    "No, there is no need to have guards posted at the tomb. No one could get away with claiming that the empty tomb reasonably proves that Jesus rose from the dead.

    Why would he be certain they wouldnt get away with it. Pilate was willing to believe the emperor was god

    Your own spies have told you that none of Jesus' followers believe that he will rise from the dead.
    Not only that, but I have much more important things for my guards to do at this time."

    He had just faced a screaming mob calling for Jesus death. He killed Jesus to appease the crowd and the Jewish rulers.
    If he was willing to do that to avoid trouble, why wouldnt he spare 4 or 5 soldiers to guard the tomb and keep the Jewish rulers happy
    How would Pilate know what these make believe spies told the Jewish leaders unless the Jewish rulers told him and why would they tell him if they wanted guards posted


    Regarding "not only that, but I have much more important things for my guards to do at this time," even granting for the sake of argument that Pilate was moderately concerned about Jesus' followers, and normally would have been willing to post guards at the tomb, if he believed that the guards were more needed elsewhere, possibly for an emergency, that would have been sufficient reason for him to refuse to post guards at the tomb.

    What other things. There were hundreds of roman soilders, he coulnt spare 4 or 5 to guard a tomb a few miles away
    The soldiers had so little to do that they called out the whole guard to mock Jesus

    As it supposedly turned out, Pilate's hypothetical comment "no one could get away with claiming that the empty tomb reasonably proves that Jesus rose from the dead" was correct since the empty tomb did not convince Peter and Mary Magdalene that Jesus had risen from the dead, and since Jesus criticized his disciples for their unbelief.

    There are a lot of posters on this site who do not believe Jesus rose fron the dead. If he didnt than Pilate was wrong or how do you explain a billion plus Christians in the world

    Consider the following Scriptures:

    Matthew 13

    10 The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables?" 11 He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.”

    Even though the disciples were given "the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven," they still had unbelief.

    So what? Its what Pilate believed and all he heard was what the Jewish rulers told him

    It is doubtful that Pilate would have paid much attention to the followers of Jesus even if he had been aware of them.

    If the rulers were able to convince Pilate that Jesus was enough of a threat to crucify him, it would have been a minor thing to convince him to provide a few guards for three days to prevent future problems from his followers
     
    #157 allright, Nov 25, 2011
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2011
  18. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84
    No, the issue of the guards at the tomb is a much different issue than the existence of Jesus. If guards were not posted at the tomb, that would not automatically invalidate the claim that Jesus rose from the dead. It would only make it somewhat more difficult to back up the claim.

    Millions of Christians choose to assist their faith with Christian apologetics, which deals with evidence other than faith. If you are not interested in Christian apologetics, that is fine, but this thread is about Christian apologetics, not faith. The NIV says in the book of Acts that the disciples went about "confirming the message of his grace with signs and wonders." That evidence was obviously considered to be appropriate by the writer of the book of Acts. There is another Scripture that says that Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead was an assistance to faith.

    No, it is not odd at all for the millions of Christians who are not inerrantists.

    Millions of Christians disasgree with you, including many conservative Christian scholars.

    If a God exists, he is not obligated to provide inerrant texts to Christians any more than he is obligated to protect people from hurricanes, and give food to starving people. God is not merely a convenience for Christians. He can do as he pleases.

    Millions of people died without having any Bible at all, let alone an inerrant Bible.

    I don't. As I said previously in this thread, I only agreed that there was a tomb for the sake of argument in order to have some common ground with Christians for some discussions.

    If faith is your only argument, what are you trying to accomplish at this forum?
     
  19. Agnostic75

    Agnostic75 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    4,407
    Ratings:
    +84
    That is an example of the fallacy of "argumentum ad populum," which says that truth depends on how many people believe it.

    What historical records do we have for the trial of Jesus other than the Gospels?

    As I said in the opening post, noted conservative Christian apologist and Bible scholar N.T. Wright has said that in the first century, there were not even enough Christians to mount a riot in a small village.

    Around 35 A.D., Christians were a very small, fragmented, and uninfluential movement. Pilate would scarcely have noticed them.

    Anyway, without Jesus' post-Resurrection appearances, the empty tomb would not have been useful evidence for early Christians if the book of John correctly says that even Peter and Mary Madgalene were not convinced by the empty tomb. The chief priests and the pharisees must have known that the belief that Jesus would rise from the dead was believed to be so unlikely by practically eveyone, even Jesus' closest followers, that even if the disciples has stolen the body, almost no one would have believed that Jesus had physically risen from the dead. Such a notion would have been considered to be a joke by almost everyone.
     
    #159 Agnostic75, Nov 25, 2011
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2011
  20. Walkntune

    Walkntune Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,517
    Ratings:
    +133
    I like to read and learn from others points of view.
     
Loading...