Rick Sumner

Having finally gotten a chance to almost catch-up on my reading, I had occasion to finish the article Peter had written for the JHC on the empty tomb. Persuasive and well-written though it was, the concluding paragraphs, at the risk of sounding blunt, claim substantially more proof than has been provided. In particular, Peter writes:

The problem with this is the inherent premise that the physical resurrection is rooted in the empty tomb narratives. But then we're left the question of why anyone made up the empty tomb narrative in the first place?

The best explanation, it seems to me, is that the empty tomb narrative serves as an apologetic: "Yes, he really rose from the dead, even his tomb was empty." That being the case, the tomb is based on the belief in a physical resurrection, which means that the belief in physical resurrection was based on something else.

Let me draw a parallel. I have no idea where my grandmother's grave is, except that it's in Thunder Bay, Ontario. I've never been to Thunder Bay, and probably couldn't find it with a map and a trail of breadcrumbs. But if my grandmother appeared to me in the flesh tomorrow, I would be obligated to conclude that she had physically resurrected. Retelling the story might lead future narrators to recount an empty tomb in Thunder Bay. Then it might be established that the tomb story they tell is entirely fictitious, that she was buried in an unmarked grave in the forest, and nobody knows where it is. But here lies the rub: establishing their tomb story as fiction in no way negates the initial experience.

This is not to say that anyone rose from the dead (nor, for that matter, that they didn't--it's really not pertinent to the caveat being raised). What it is to say is that establishing that early Christians 1) Had no idea where Jesus' body lay and 2) Subsequently fabricated stories about it does not necessarily indicate that the physical resurrection is a fiction.

If there was no missing body, then there was no resurrection, this is unequivocably true. But if the empty tomb narratives are fictions, all we can safely conclude based on that premise is that the empty tomb narratives are fictions.

Regards,
Rick

Peter Kirby

Rick, my concluding section was a bit of theology. To show that neither side is unbiased and unmotivated.

Christian apologists reason:

1. There was an empty tomb.
2. Jesus rose from the dead.

Early Christians reason:

1. Jesus rose from the dead.
2. There was an empty tomb.

The intelligent Christian will realize that and accept the more authentic Christian argument. The self-deceiving Christian will attempt to nitpick my evidence.

My internet article concludes with Archbishop Peter Carnley of Perth in Australia as saying:

cite

Carnley, ibid., pp. 60-61: "For, try as we may, and with all the positive good will in the world, we simply do not have sufficient evidence to say for certain whether the tomb is a very primitive story whose kernel is factual, or whether in fact it is a later development, the product of faith, given a particular set of theoretical presuppositions about what might necessarily be involved in resurrection belief. Given the meagreness of the evidence it is difficult to see that the logical shortfall can be overcome by purely rational argument, using only the critical techniques of scientific historiography."

Peter's argument throughout The Structure of Resurrection Belief is that we start with confidence in the Church and conclude that the witness of Christians throughout history evinces the truth of the resurrection of Christ.

Protestants hate such an idea.

best,
Peter Kirby

bleubird

You assume there was a Jesus.There still is no exbibical evidence for an historic savior in the first century.It is all allegory and myth,
and you can prove nothing.

Much faith is required.

bleubird

Peter Kirby

Who does?

best,
Peter Kirby

bleubird

Even in my small search into this subject I see the catholic conspiracy.
And I was raised Roman catholic.
It is all astrology and conspiracy and BS.
I think most bibical research is interesting .However, it is still mythology.Joe Campbell .Frazer,mack,massey.et al
I took the Eucharist at my fathers funeral.Just too make show.
Winter,spring,summer,fall.

bleubird

Peter Kirby

Do you have any faith?

best,
Peter Kirby

bleubird

no

Peter Kirby

Do you have any bias?

best,
Peter Kirby

bleubird

I have the greatist respect for your scholarship.Peter.
You be the man.


bleubird

Peter Kirby

Thanks, I like you too.

best,
Peter Kirby