Richard Carrier

Historian of antiquity Richard Carrier will debate Christian apologist Michael Licona (of www.risenjesus.com) on whether Jesus Christ was raised from the dead. The UCLA Veritas Forum (in Los Angeles, California) is sponsoring this event Monday evening, April 19. Details should be announced soon at www.laveritas.com/

Toto

Richard - do you have an organization supporting you? I saw a veritas debate involving Robert Price, and the Center for Inquiry had a literature table there that I though was useful.

Layman

Hey, why don't we get a group together to go? We could go see The Passion of the Christ afterwards!

Vinnie

I'll be right next to Sanfrancisco for a week in June (23-30). If anything is happening in Kali then, let me know!

Not in the case of Mt, Mk and Luke

His treatment of the empty tomb was mostly empty. Though in fairness his responses look purposefully short given the format.

How do the skeptics respond to the woman at the tomb scenario? If creative why woman?

Personally, I could find clear literary purpose for the creation of this. Mark spends his whole Gospel thrashing the apostles and he clearly portrays the women negatively as well at the end.

The woman mistakenly go to annoint Jesus. Notice that they go too late. Given Jesus' constant predictions in Mrk of his Rez. Like the male disciples, they should have known better as well. They should have known Jesus would be risen when they go to annoint him.

Mark portrays them negatively, and the disciples exceptionally negatively. This portrait is extremely implausible as history unless Jesus followers all had IQs of four. Plus Mt and Lk tone it down.

Obviously the treatment of the disciples and woman must be related somehow or stem from the same motivation. This motivation cannot be history remembered as its very implausible.

Plus we know women were prominent in the early Church.

That would be my response (even if incomplete) on the women in Mark.

Even if John is indepdnent of Mark, given the popularity of the passion, resurrection appearances and the existence of a passion narrative, John can hardly be said to "independently document woman at the cross and tomb. There is a general story here that was well known. Some form of indirect dependence would probably be needed. Though if Mark created the Joseph story John must be dependent upon this.

I think the most reasonable position is that there was no tomb (a common grave prohably), Jesus' death came by surpise (the followers fled), Christians didn't know where the body was (maybe it was eaten by dogs ala Crossan ?)and some of them had visions and became convinced he rose. I think the visions are a MUST. Paul had one too.

Other than that scenario there are some issues that deserve serious consideration (e.g. why not produce the body?). Deliberate lie is of course ruled out.

Vinnie

Vinnie

How would one identify, say a year old corpse, even if it were presented? I mean, wouldn't it be too badly deteriorated to be recognized and DNA evidence wasn't around yet

Vinnie

Vorkosigan

Shit, Vinnie, we don't have anything to argue about.

Vorkosigan

Vorkosigan

LOL. Yes, like the way that modern higher criticism has been so successful in shattering the faith of fundies.....and the Jewish faith was so completely shattered by the loss of their Temple, and the followers of Sabbatai Zevi were shattered by the conversion of their Jewish messiah to Islam, and the way Lubavitchers gave up their messianic beliefs about Rebbe Schneerson after he had a stroke, and later died, and still hasn't come back.....

...really, some people need an education in the way human nature really works.

Vorkosigan

Vinnie

There is always tomorrow

His uncritical dismissal of visions made me think the same thing. People report seeing all sorts of things and religious experiences are very common and can be explainable without resorting to supernatural claims.

One guy on rapture ready was saying Jesus spoke to him through a cloud or somethng. I can't remember the specifics. I just remember it being funny!

Wll I decided to dig it upo:

:notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

WinAce

Personally, if I was Pilate and learned of some nutjobs running around saying the guy I just had crucified came back from the dead, the *last* thing I'd be concerned with is debunking that nonsense. I'd probably just order them to be hunted down and made an example of, too.

Failing that, I might realize who I'd killed and convert, like in that 3rd century and up Christian literature

Which makes me curious--how do apologists explain the fact that Pilate (not to mention the Sanhedrin) continued to be an ass for years afterwards till his atrocities finally caught up with him? You'd think all those earthquakes and all hell breaking loose would have an impact on his behavior.

Toto

Are the last five posts on the right thread??