Johnny Skeptic

Ok.

Ok.

It doesn't matter. All that matters is whether or not Jesus made some appearances after he rose from the dead. What he was composed of is irrelevant.

If Jesus rose from the dead, and descended directly into heaven from the tomb, it doesn't matter what he was composed of.

aa5874

But, a supernatural being can be in heaven and still be on earth or hell or appearing to be dead in a tomb while appearing in China.

There can be no logical argument against the veracity of supernatural events once concessions are granted.

Juststeve

If Jesus was in fact seen alive after being crucified the most reasonable inference to draw is that he didn't die.

Steve

Johnny Skeptic

But Christians need reasonable proof for "particular" supernatural events, not just any supernatural events. The same goes for the followers of other religions that make supernatural claims. If Jesus rose from the dead, and ascended directly into heaven without making any personal appearances, that discredits conservative Christianity and inerrancy.

Regarding "there can be no logical argument against the veracity of supernatural events once concessions are granted," since the Bible puts atheists and non-Christian theists in the same boat, from a biblical perspective, the main issue is not naturalism versus theism, but Christianity versus all other worldviews.

Johnny Skeptic

I agree, but for purposes of this thread, since I have already conceded for the sake of argument that Jesus was buried in Joseph of Arimathea's tomb, his death is implied since Joseph got Jesus' body from Pontius Pilate, and Joseph prepared the body for burial.

aa5874

Well, it makes no sense to concede that Jesus made post-ascension appearances if that is what you want Christians to prove.

The resurrection story in gMatthew clearly demonstrate that the body of Jesus must have been stolen, removed or in another tomb ONCE Jesus was just HUMAN and did die.

The visitors to the tomb could not have claimed Jesus was resurrected if they had NO IDEA of the location of the DEAD body after they found the tomb empty.

The visitors to the tomb would not have known if they had been set with a trap.

Johnny Skeptic

Consider the following:

That obviously indicates that I did not concede that Jesus made post-ascension appearances, only that he rose from the dead and directly ascended to heaven from the tomb without making any appearances.

My premises eliminate those possibilities.

That is not a problem. For purposes of this thread, my premise is that the location of the tomb was well-known, that guards were posted at the tomb, and that dozens of other opponents of Jesus guarded the tomb along with the guards.

I do not understand what you mean.

Even with all of the concessions that I have made, Christians will still have difficulty reasonably proving that Jesus made post-ascension appearances.

josephchoi

What evidence is there that shows the body wasn't moved? Also, how could the Pharisees and the Sadduccees, Roman subjects, have such political pull that they can just post roman guards at tombs at whim? This is ridiculous.

Let's also not forget matthew's OTHER inventions like the zombie prophet invasion.

Johnny Skeptic

I like that argument. Let's go with that for awhile since I have not been able to achieve the success that I wanted to achieve in this thread. I could start a new thread if necessary.

Biblical Criticism and History is sure complicated, much more complicated than I had imagined it was.