ICinsideU

And the authors of the gospels, being the unbiased reporters that they were, would have diligently quoted all those who denied the ressurection, for the sake of balance...

chrisengland

I believe I have heard some Christians say that if the resurrection did not happen that they could have gone to the tomb and shown them the body.
I don't know how decomposed a body would be after a month.
How reconisable would it be?
Even if it would be only a little bit decomposed I don't see believers giving up beliefs that easily.
There was a cult once which said the world would end or something.
When it didn't not all believers left the cult.
I don't know how many did I might have a look.
Chris

James Brown

Exactly how would an ordinary person debunk resurrection stories in the first century? Write a book? Publish a blog? Grant an interview with an investigative reporter?

I can make a claim just like Josh. People did deny the accuracy of the resurrection accounts, and vociferously, but their denials were not documented, copied, and distributed like the gospels and epistles were. Both my and Josh's claim have exactly the same amount of verifiable supporting evidence.

On the other hand, perhaps there's a reason that the Christian church grew faster in far-off Rome than in Jerusalem. What did the majority of citizens of Jerusalem know that Romans did not?

Toto

I think that the fact that most residents of Jerusalem did not convert to Christianity is an adequate denial of the resurrection accounts.

mountainman

Dear JamesABrown,

One might commence with the archaeological evidence.

The basilicas were built by Constantine first in Rome, then in Jerusalem as a matter of conquest. Prior to these structures I dont seem to be able to find one single recent archaeological report which mentions the existence of any evidence for a "christian church" on the planet Earth. We are well aware of the solid transcendental nature of the universal christian church in the epoch that people like to call "early christian origins" (ie: pre-nicene) however it has yet to appear in the archaeological reports.

Humor. The Romans were a gravitas (Roman seriousness) bunch. Have you ever watched Monty Python's "The Life of Brian"?

Best wishes,


Pete

Splarnst

Joseph Smith and various urban legends are good counter-examples. I thought of Scientology myself because I can't think of anything more absurd than a science fiction writer, who has been quoted as saying the best way to make money is to create a new religion, creating a science fiction religion and having people not only believe it, but spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on it.

Diogenes the Cynic

Unsupported claim, also circular since he assumes a date for the event he wants to assert as historical. He also needs to clarify what he means by "resurrection." Paul could arguably be cited as a source for the claim, but Paul is somewhat less than unambiguous in what he means, and does not clearly define his notion of a resurrection as any more than visionary experiences.

The earliest unambiguous, documented claim for a physical resurrection is Matthew's Gospel c. 80 CE (Mark has an open tomb, but no appearances). That's 50 years after the alleged event, outside the average expected lifespan of anyone who would have been old enough to know what was going on in 30 CE. Another 10-20 years needs to be added for any sort of significant copying and circulation which further shrinks the pool of available witnesses and that pool was already greatly contracted by the destruction of Jerusalem in 70.

It should also be remembered that these Gospels were originally being read to small audiences, mostly gentiles and slaves, outside of Palestine, and that the subject, Jesus (if he existed) would have been an obscure figure even in 30 CE Jerusalem. They were also not written in the native language of these prospective witnesses, and were not exactly on display at chain bookstores. When they were read, they were read in public readings to small and scattered congregations.

The odds of a doddering old Palestinian survivor of the First Jewish War who was not only familiar with an obscure, crucified insurgent preacher from the days of Pilate, but also just happened to know what happened to the body finding himself in the audience of a public reading of Matthew (or even Mark) 60 or 70 years later is not impossible but Asia Minor would not have exactly been crawling with such people.
What would they deny? That they ever saw a guy come back from the dead? What would that prove? Who would that silence? Who would care or listen?
This is not only utterly unsupported by any decent evidence but is actually contradicted by a great deal of both internal and external evidence. In point of fact, the Gospels themselves don't even claim to be either eyewitness accounts or secondhand accounts. McDowell is simply talking out of his ass with this one and is well outside the consensus of mainstream scholarship.
What apostles? What common knowledge? McDowell is just making things up here.
Well, Bruce, as we know, is full of crap with this, not only for the reasons I've stated (there was verey little chance of hostile witnesses), but because even if such witnesseses were present, there was nothing they could say or do to disprove anything. If there was no resurrection, then what was there for these witnesses to have seen? The most they could say is that they never saw a guy come back from the dead. So what?

Doug Shaver

Nothing but question-begging.

James Brown

Yes, one might. Of course I'll have to ask, which archaeological evidence of a resurrected corpse does one have in mind?

Here's a real-world example. Mountainman, provide me with archaelogical evidence to prove that Elvis is not still alive. Do this as if you are an ordinary first-century Palestinian. So remember, you can't use the internet, radio, or television. You don't know how to read or write, and to commission someone to write a book costs the equivalent of tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars--which you don't have. Go ahead.

And you can't assume all of society in this--no responding that the State of Tennessee could inter Elvis' bones. You have to do this--at best you could argue that you yourself could convince the State of Tennessee to dig up Elvis--but remember, you can't broadcast the body over the airwaves. You have to use only first-century methods to convey your message that Elvis is dead. And keeping with the example, remember there is a growing body of organized believers who strongly affirm that Elvis is alive and that one day he will make them all rich and powerful--you have to convince them, not neutral parties or skeptics.

So what archaelogical evidence would you use and how would you do it?

You're asking me to evaluate an historical event based on a 1979 comedy film?

arnoldo

I think that enough residents of Jerusalem believed to spread Christianity far and wide is an adequate proof of resurrection acounts.