Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Contemporary Scholarship and the Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ
Truth: The Journal of Modern Thought ^ | 1985 | Professor William Lane Craig

Posted on 10/13/2001 1:56:56 AM PDT by lockeliberty

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-119 next last
This Post is in response to a challenge by cerunnos to prove the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. This challenge was given in the Thread Jesus Christ: The Sum and Substance of Biblical Prophecy. What surprised me was the Article he used was so easy to overcome. The Author, whose seed was obviously sowed on the rocky ground, main source to disprove the Resurrection was Thomas Paine.
1 posted on 10/13/2001 1:56:56 AM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cernunnos
Case Closed!
2 posted on 10/13/2001 2:00:20 AM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Could you use that Christian bump list?
3 posted on 10/13/2001 2:02:03 AM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
Overnight bump.
4 posted on 10/13/2001 2:30:41 AM PDT by Citizen of the Savage Nation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty; Bonaparte
Very impressive, even though I was already aware of most of these facts. Having them in one relatively short argument is great.
5 posted on 10/13/2001 2:55:16 AM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
GREAT AND WORTHY JOB WELL DONE.

And may the Blood of Jesus shield you from all the tinfoil hat comments that tend to come when folk start breaking out in hives over anything religious or beyond their experience.

6 posted on 10/13/2001 4:07:44 AM PDT by Quix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
Is there any way I could get this in Chinese--in both traditional and simplified characters?
7 posted on 10/13/2001 4:08:43 AM PDT by Quix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
In order to validate this convoluted sophistry, one must believe that Jesus of Nazareth was actually dead when he was place in the tomb. There ought to be an equally tortuous body of thought regrading that, though I, not being scolarly in this regard, have never read one. How is it that the legend of the Roman Soldier and the removal from the cross is not discussed to this extent; that Jesus' body was given up to the woman, by the guard, prior to his actual death?
8 posted on 10/13/2001 4:34:15 AM PDT by Banjoguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
Sorry about the misspellings: regrad= regard scolarly=scholarly
9 posted on 10/13/2001 4:39:14 AM PDT by Banjoguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
Thanks!!
10 posted on 10/13/2001 4:43:47 AM PDT by Ann Archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
As Ronald Reagan once observed-"either Jesus Christ is exactly who he said he was-or he was the greatest liar in all of human history. I choose to accept the former."
11 posted on 10/13/2001 4:49:18 AM PDT by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

To: JHavard; Havoc; OLD REGGIE; Iowegian; PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain; the808bass; is_is...
BUMP for a read and comment!..

Done lock *grin*.Have a Good day all!

13 posted on 10/13/2001 6:51:05 AM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
Liberal theology could not survive World War I, but its demise brought no renewed interest in the historicity of Jesus' resurrection, for the two schools that succeeded it were united in their devaluation of the historical with regard to Jesus.

Let us pray that what remains finds its demise with the Trade Towers..

14 posted on 10/13/2001 7:14:15 AM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Just look at human nature and think about the apostles. Would you die for a lie? They were eye witnesses to the event and died horrible deaths. St. Peter was crucified upside down, St Steven stoned to death and St.Paul was beheaded. They did not seek death, they wanted to preach and share the Gospel of Life. The historical evidence of Christ is in the writings of his disciples. WE today are so mired in the pollution of the gospel of death and destruction. Most individuals reject the Gospel teachings for one simple reason. They know deep down it requires them to change their way of life. It is a challange, but the brave and humble know the joy and peace of knowing Christ. And no one can take it away!!
15 posted on 10/13/2001 7:22:47 AM PDT by bigmamma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: bigmamma
WE today are so mired in the pollution of the gospel of death and destruction. Most individuals reject the Gospel teachings for one simple reason. They know deep down it requires them to change their way of life. It is a challange, but the brave and humble know the joy and peace of knowing Christ. And no one can take it away!!

Amen

The gospel demands a change and men love their sin above everything else ,even their own lives..

Do you want to be on the Christian bump list ..I could sure use another mom *grin*

16 posted on 10/13/2001 7:49:37 AM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mo
As Ronald Reagan once observed-"either Jesus Christ is exactly who he said he was-or he was the greatest liar in all of human history. I choose to accept the former."

Well.... if Ronald Reagan said that, he was quoting C.S. Lewis. That quote originated with him. I think it can be found in Mere Christianity.

17 posted on 10/13/2001 7:55:39 AM PDT by sola gracia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Quix
Is there any way I could get this in Chinese--in both traditional and simplified characters?

And Urdu, Pushtan, Hindi, etc!

18 posted on 10/13/2001 8:05:59 AM PDT by MaeWest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
ALSO READ - "The Case for Christ : A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence" - for Jesus by Lee Strobe

A personal journey recently done down this same path, by a skeptic who became a convert.

19 posted on 10/13/2001 8:22:09 AM PDT by muffaletaman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigmamma
Just look at human nature and think about the apostles. Would you die for a lie?

Did Mohammed Atta?

20 posted on 10/13/2001 8:26:50 AM PDT by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Banjoguy
The best discussion I have read on this theory; "The fainting theory" was from The Case For Christ. Simply put, there is no way that Y'shua of Nazareth was pulled off of the execution stake at Golgotha alive.

The account was reviewed by a Medical Examiner who traced through the trauma inflicted on the person of Jesus. From the beard pulling, beating, being struck with a Roman "flagellum" 39 times, being marched across Jerusalem and back three seperate times, and going without water or food for 18 hours prior to being even nailed on the cross, the conclusion reached is that Christ was in critical condition before even being nailed on the cross.

The crucifiction account itself has no historical flaws. The thieves needed to have their legs broken (to hasten death by suffocation) because they were not bleeding from a massive back trauma and in Hypovolemic Shock. The "Blood and Water" reference in John's account is consistent with Pulmonary Edema, brought on by Hypovolemic Shock and the Carbonic Acid buidup from being unable to properly exhale.

Finally, understand that the Romans that actually did the execution were well schooled in what dead people looked like, and that the usual penalty for a botched execution was replacing the intended victim with your incompetent self. The Romans would have made sure that Jesus was dead; hence the coup de gras administered with a spear driven into the heart.

He was dead alright. See the Case for Christ by Lee Strobel for additional (gory) details...

21 posted on 10/13/2001 8:28:25 AM PDT by L,TOWM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Boru
Actually, not true. Their are six extra biblical accounts of the existence of Christ, as well as a large monument to his existence that can be seen today.

The work of Luke as a historian is actually one of the best in antiquity. Since the Bible has been proven correct by any corraborating archeology, it is an unstable peg to hang your hat on; especially consideration the extra biblical corraboration.

22 posted on 10/13/2001 8:33:41 AM PDT by L,TOWM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Boru
There is no historical evidence that Jesus lived, let alone was resurrected. What about the 500 other people thet were supposedly ressurected along with him? Did they ascend into heaven too, or did they die again?

You're mighty confused. There weren't 500 other people who were resurrected with him. There was an appearance of the resurrected Christ to about 500 people.

The Gospels are the main, but not only, historical evidence that Jesus lived. The historical authority of the Gospels has been verified by a slew of scholars who have examined it by applying the same tests that are used to determine the accuracy of any other historical account.

23 posted on 10/13/2001 8:41:55 AM PDT by lasereye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
Paul seems like a very educated desciple and a man that was far too grounded in reality to allow himself to be crusified for a lie.

Peter was crusified upside down, Paul was crusified, Stephen was bitten half to death then stoned, while the unbelieving Paul held the coats of the men that killed Stephen. James was sawed in half. I would never go through that for a lie, no one would, what would be the point? If these men really believed they were supporting a lie, then they would be well aware that this life is all they get of life and would cling to it. The very manner of their deaths are a testimony to their unshakeable belief in the ressurection of Jesus.

24 posted on 10/13/2001 8:42:25 AM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
Just look at human nature and think about the apostles. Would you die for a lie?

Did Mohammed Atta?

You're missing the point. Mohammed Atta was lied to. If the Apostles died for a lie, it was they themselves who were doing the lying.

25 posted on 10/13/2001 8:45:31 AM PDT by lasereye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Thanks for the help Mom. I'll be back later.
26 posted on 10/13/2001 8:55:19 AM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Though not a mom, please add me to the Christian bump list. Thanks
27 posted on 10/13/2001 8:59:26 AM PDT by Mikerow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mikerow
done :>)
28 posted on 10/13/2001 9:13:39 AM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Quix
Is there any way I could get this in Chinese--in both traditional and simplified characters?

That's beyond my limited capabilities. Do not computers have the capability to translate?

29 posted on 10/13/2001 9:16:17 AM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
To some degree . . . but in something so important, a human is a pretty good priority.

thanks for your response.

30 posted on 10/13/2001 10:40:19 AM PDT by Quix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Comment #31 Removed by Moderator

To: lockeliberty
Mid-day bump.
32 posted on 10/13/2001 12:33:34 PM PDT by Citizen of the Savage Nation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boru
There is no historical evidence that Jesus lived

That is actually one of the easiest contentions to prove. There is secular Roman documents that mention Jesus and I would be happy to provide a link if you desire.

33 posted on 10/13/2001 1:11:12 PM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Middle of the Road
I would be interested in your opinion of this article.
34 posted on 10/13/2001 1:18:00 PM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
good post ...

Bobby

SufferingMessiah.Com
35 posted on 10/13/2001 1:41:07 PM PDT by Bobby777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Thanks so much for the ping. I have read similar evidences/arguments in Evidence that Demands a Verdict and other books by Josh McDowell, as well as in related apologetic works, but this is certainly one of the most succinct and compelling articles I have ever seen. I very much appreciated the opportunity to read it.
36 posted on 10/13/2001 2:45:33 PM PDT by Fantasywriter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Fantasywriter
You are on my Christian ping list..so you will be pinged a lot *grin*
37 posted on 10/13/2001 3:09:02 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
I thought of that too. But the apostles were not murdering thugs either. They wanted to live. The apostles as well as Christ Jesus were murdered by those who did not like what they had to say and believed. Turth has a way of making individuals uncomfortable. Thanks for reply
38 posted on 10/14/2001 2:16:58 PM PDT by bigmamma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Boru
I'm not sure but they were probably like Lazurus. God brought them back but then they died again and are awaiting their final resurrections. Jesus is still bringing back people from the dead even today for his glory.
39 posted on 10/14/2001 3:07:24 PM PDT by marbren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: mo
"either Jesus Christ is exactly who he said he was-or he was the greatest liar in all of human history..."
Well, we now know who was the greatest liar; der slickmeister!
40 posted on 10/14/2001 3:34:12 PM PDT by Ace's Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Boru
There is no historical evidence that Jesus lived, let alone was resurrected.

There most certainly is. Frankly, I doubt you even read the article. If you had, you would have attacked the historical evidence instead of claiming there isn't any.

The evidence of Jesus' life is the fact that Chistianity got started. In Jerusalem at the time the movement started, there were many people who had either seen or not seen the events happen. The apostles would have been laughed at had there been no such person as Jesus. As noted in the article above, the earliest Jewish polemics presuppose Jesus' tomb was empty by saying that the disciples removed the body. That they say there was a body in the first place means that the earliest enemies of Christianity, who had seen the events themselves and cannot be accused of making stuff up to support the very people they were killing, say Jesus existed. Should I believe them, or you?

The article also explains why, not only did Jesus have to have lived, he had to be resurrected. I'll go further and add that He had to fit the requirements for the Messiah, several of which he could not have faked. They include his own execution.

41 posted on 10/14/2001 4:07:39 PM PDT by A.J.Armitage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

To: Boru
Frankly I did read the article

Yet you made an argument as if the points in it had never been made. If you read it, you just made your standard reply.

The author attempts to build his case strictly on biblical sources

And there's nothing wrong with that.

none of the writers of the New Testament were even alive at the time that Jesus allegedly lived.

Any proof of that?

Certainly someone who had done as much as Jesus did would have earned at least a footnote in non-biblical sources besides the passing reference made by Josephus.

That's an unwarrented asumption.

43 posted on 10/14/2001 9:15:40 PM PDT by A.J.Armitage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
Examine "The Jesus Mysteries" by Freake and Gandy for an objective treatment of the origins of Christianity by modern historians. Relying exclusively on the self referential scriptures of any religion for the validation of its historical authenticity is commonplace among the believers. The followers of alternate creeds and the nonbelievers look at the believers and wonder why they persist in purposely deluding themselves.

Pagan resurrecting god/men were common mythical characters dating to Sumerian times. There is no "historical fact" known about Jesus Christ that was not a part of some previous pagan myth. All the miracles, parables, and important events of the gospels are from stories told of previous god/men.

The Christian sect of Judaism was the creation of educated Alexandrian Jews who were steeped in the culture of the Greeks. They melded a popular Pagan Resurrecting god/man myth with the Jewish Messiah concept. The Jews for the most part weren't interested because they wanted their Messiah to be a military conqueror not a spiritual savior. Instead, Christianity found its most enthusiastic followers from among the uneducated slaves and disenfranchised commoners of Rome. The rise of literalist scriptural Christianity was attended in large measure by roving mobs of ignorant fanatical zealots whose primary task was the practically complete destruction of Pagan civilization. They also destroyed Gnostic Christianity in the process. You may have recently noticed that this is the characteristic attitude of certain present day religious fanatics toward Western Civilization.

44 posted on 10/15/2001 7:55:49 AM PDT by Vercingetorix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: marbren
"I'm not sure but they were probably like Lazurus. God brought them back but then they died again and are awaiting their final resurrections. Jesus is still bringing back people from the dead even today for his glory." -- marbren

Lazarismus, as it is called today, is a disease resulting from the consumption of garbanzo beans as the principle ingredient in one's diet. The effect after some weeks of this diet is to render the victim almost completely paralyzed. This was not historically uncommon in the middle east and recently occurred to large numbers of people in P.O.W. camps in that part of the world during WWII. Lazarus' medical chart, had he been visited by a competent modern day physician, would probably indicate a pathological preference for humus.

45 posted on 10/15/2001 8:18:30 AM PDT by Vercingetorix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: bigmamma
Just look at human nature and think about the apostles. Would you die for a lie?

At least four, and possibly up to nineteen (depending on whether or not they were all in on the entire plan) chose to die for a lie on 9/11. So much for that argument.

46 posted on 10/15/2001 8:30:46 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
I'm afraid your argument is too strong for its own good. You're stuck explaining why, if all this is the case, everyone except a tiny minority of the wilfully blind was not immediately converted.
47 posted on 10/15/2001 8:34:15 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Boru
"Certainly someone who had done as much as Jesus did would have earned at least a footnote in non-biblical sources besides the passing reference made by Josephus." -- Boru

The reference by Josephus was a later addition to his writings by a Christian forger. This has been proven by comparing Josephus' writing style with the obviously anachronistic grammar used by the forger in the early copies where the forgery occurred. The earliest copies do not include the reference to Jesus. In addition the reference is out of place with respect to the narrative and was obviously inserted without much thought.

48 posted on 10/15/2001 9:51:17 AM PDT by Vercingetorix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Vercingetorix
Examine "The Jesus Mysteries" by Freake and Gandy for an objective treatment of the origins of Christianity by modern historians.

"Objective" meaning anti-Christian. Instead of simply refering me somewhere else, why don't you make the arguments yourself?

Relying exclusively on the self referential scriptures of any religion for the validation of its historical authenticity is commonplace among the believers.

Christianity obviously got started somewhere. You assert(with no proof whatsoever) that it was invented in Egypt. I could take that on faith, but I won't. The early Christians were often killed for their beliefs. Would you suffer and die for a belief you knew to be false because you invented it? If it were invented in Egypt, they'd have a problem: everyone in Jerusalem would know it was total bunk. Not only that, but some people, such as traveling merchants, would have been there at the time and been in Egypt when Christianity was invented. If it started too late for witnesses to confirm or deny, that in itself would be a problem, because if it were true there would already be Christians. The lack of Christians would ruin the whole thing.

If something like the story in the Gospel didn't happen, there'd be no Christians and thus no Scriptures.

The rise of literalist scriptural Christianity was attended in large measure by roving mobs of ignorant fanatical zealots whose primary task was the practically complete destruction of Pagan civilization.

You're projecting your image of modern fundamentalists, with coloration provided by Islamists, on to ancient Christians. It doesn't fit. Classical civilization was destroyed by geopolitical events, and such of it as did survive was saved by Christians. In the East it didn't fall at all, it simply evolved into a new form(which was destroyed by Turks).

49 posted on 10/15/2001 10:22:26 AM PDT by A.J.Armitage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
At least four, and possibly up to nineteen (depending on whether or not they were all in on the entire plan) chose to die for a lie on 9/11. So much for that argument.

Your argument's been raised already, and answered. You might die for a lie that you believe, but if you are yourself the liar, almost certainly you won't. There might be situations it could happen ("The judge said, 'Son, what is you alibi? If you were somewhere else then you won't have to die.' I said not a word, though it meant my life, for I had been in the arms of my best friend's wife." Long Black Veil, Dave Matthews Band) but not with so many people.

So much for that.

50 posted on 10/15/2001 10:33:47 AM PDT by A.J.Armitage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-119 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson