spamandham

Keep in mind that the purpose of absurd religious stories like this is to comfort the living. You can try to convince people they will never die...some will buy that crap..., but most won't. It's easier to convince people that death is not "really" death. So if your goal is to fleece people out of their cash to support your ministry of flim flam, then you will probably be more successful by claiming that their bodies will be resurrected, rather than claiming they wouldn't die at all.

The idea of resurrection was invented before the idea of a spiritual heaven as we know in modern times. If the ancients had thought of that scam first, they would never have pitched the resurrection scam.

mountainman

Dont forget that it was common practice for influential people to sponsor the authorship of various literary works in antiquity -- there are plently of citations for this sort of stuff. Therefore, IMO transient, you need to make your statement a little broader to include the publisher of the literary works. Authors may have been trying to pass off fiction as reality because they were sponsored to do so by someone with a great deal of money and influence. See for example the classic case of forgery in the Historia Augusta

Cege

It seems to me, based on the stories in the Bible, that it is not spelled out what is necessary, remains-wise, for a resurrection. The resurrections that Jesus reportedly performed were of newly dead persons, Lazarus being the 'most dead' at 4 days. The resurrections at the time of the crucifixtion (the 'saints' raised from their tombs in Jersualem and recognized walking the streets) aren't described in detail, but may have been long-dead-only-bones-remaining resurrections. Those would have been more spectacular resurrections (involving all flesh restored, brains and hearts included) than any Jesus performed or that of Jesus himself.

Jesus' resurrection is described differently from those of others recorded in the NT. His body, which the NT claims was all man-all God, was unique before and after he was resurrected.

The stories in the gospels about the resurrection, empty tomb, etc provide various details meant to be convincing that Jesus was and is God, and that he was resurrected from the dead in a way and significance that no one before or after him could be.

Transient

It seems that you are approaching this from the perspective that the stuff in the bible is true. I am not restricted by that perspective.
I look at the human body with today's knowledge of it and realize that those poor old authors were lacking - they have been measured and found wanting.
A god would not need old bones and rotten flesh and vile organs to try to reconstruct a body. There would be nothing useful left of the brain so that that god would need to start from scratch anyway - a very easy task for such a powerful god
The sad thing is that many many people have been assaulted and abused and murdered by the catholic church and other fanatical groups because of these faulty stories. Very sad indeed.
This world can not afford to allow any religion to get too much power - they can be very dangerous groups.

Johnny Skeptic

If you are implying that the emtpy tomb of Joseph of Arimathea is an important issue, please read my post #12 in a thread at http://freeratio.org/showthread.php?...13#post6393813. I believe that I made reasonable arguments that guards were not posted at the tomb.

In your opinion, why did Jesus make personal appearances after he rose from the dead, and why did he limit his appearances?

What evidence do you have that Jesus made some post-resurrection appearances in a group setting?

Johnny Skeptic

As I showed in my post #12 in a thread at http://freeratio.org/showthread.php?...13#post6393813, there is not sufficient evidence that guards were posted at the tomb.

In your opinion, why did Jesus make personal appearances after he rose from the dead, and why did he limit his appearances?

What evidence do you have that Jesus made some post-resurrection appearances in a group setting?

Cege

I approach this from the perspective that the people who wrote the stuff in the bible believed it was true. I don't agree with their perspective on lots of things. I don't believe the Adam & Eve story, the flood story, that there was an exodus as described in the OT, that Saul's emotional swings were caused by an evil spirit sent by God, that demon possession caused a young man to fling himself into fire, or lots of other examples. I believe that ancient peoples struggled to explain what they saw happening around them as well as what was already established in their world, like oceans, sky, mountains, death, disease, etc.

I think people of a Jewish persuasion in the 1st century did (and maybe still do) believe that God was all powerful and could resurrect a dead person to a continued life on earth, whether that person was still a warm corpse or reduced to crumbling bone fragments or somewhere inbetween. Even today, many Christians believe exactly that, based not on what they know to be true but on what the bible stories record.

It would not matter that God could start from 'scratch' to reconstruct a human body to its previous life or cause whatever smelly remains to regenerate. The bigger the miracle the better, the more it confirmed that God was GOD and could do anything and everything.

I agree with you that it is tragic that both Judaism and Christianity have been responsible for horrendous assaults, abuses, and murders. Ultimately, I find people responsible rather than the entire religions; misinformed, fanatical, religious people.

Cege

Guards posted at a tomb that held a crucified Jew named Jesus? The only evidence is what is recorded in the NT, and it is not sufficient evidence that would hold up in a court of law today.

Jesus made personal appearances, according to the NT writings, in order to confirm to his friends, followers, and disciples that he was alive again. That he was alive because he was the fulfillment of OT prophecy. To further teach the apostles the message of salvation they hadn't understood during 3+ years of personal training.

The evidence of Jesus' post-resurrection appearances in group settings are only what's contained in the gospels, the book of Acts, and some Pauline epistles. There are no photographs, no video, no notarized accounts. There are only the stories recorded in the canonized NT.

But you already knew all that, didn't you.

Transient

Your approach differs a little from mine then because I don't assume that the authors always believed what they wrote, maybe sometimes perhaps.
My experience in life, including many churches has taught me not to trust those in leadership positions much at all. They usually have their own interests at heart and not those that they lead, altho sometimes they will appear to care for them.
Therefore I have learned not to trust the writings of people that I cannot interrogate and verify their claims.
If "Jesus" did indeed appear to people after he supposedly rose from the dead then he must also do the same for every living human on this planet individually. There is no reason why anyone should trust the writings of humans. Otherwise we would all be mormons, muslims etc.
Requests for living proof is scorned and laughed at by christians but I maintain that it is essential if there is such a thing as a god.
Writings are not proof.
But then humans are stupid - why are there so many mormons when Joseph Smith was clearly a fraud?

Johnny Skeptic

Are you arguing for or against the credibility of the Bible? Do you believe that Jesus rose from the dead, and made some personal appreances to the disciples and some other people in group settings, and engaged in verbal conservations with people in those group settings?