I am assuming most people here are familiar with the Resurrection claim and the evidence supporting the claim. For the sake of argument, let us suppose a skeptic came along and made these assertions.
#1 - The disciples came and stole Jesus body.
#2 - They were probably on drugs.
#3 - Jesus body was eaten by dogs.
#4 - Wrong tomb.
#5 - Swoon theory.
#6 - The Resurrection was a copy from pagan religion.
#7 - Embellishment
Please explain how to defend counter these claims. I know these aren't new alternative theories, but they make interesting and fanciful points that sometime people find it difficult to counter. There is no evidence to support any of these claims but let just suppose it did happen. What are the factors that we must look into all this in order to tell if did happen or not. I know this is alot of explanation but explain to best of your knowledge as you can.
I am assuming most people here are familiar with the Resurrection claim and the evidence supporting the claim. For the sake of argument, let us suppose a skeptic came along and made these assertions.
#1 - The disciples came and stole Jesus body.
#2 - They were probably on drugs.
#3 - Jesus body was eaten by dogs.
#4 - Wrong tomb.
#5 - Swoon theory.
#6 - The Resurrection was a copy from pagan religion.
#7 - Embellishment
Please explain how to defend counter these claims. I know these aren't new alternative theories, but they make interesting and fanciful points that sometime people find it difficult to counter. There is no evidence to support any of these claims but let just suppose it did happen. What are the factors that we must look into all this in order to tell if did happen or not. I know this is alot of explanation but explain to best of your knowledge as you can.
I would have to say it's all about faith in the veracity of what was written. This is written evidence. If you believe it's true, then it is true, and much of the world believes it. Even Muslims believe a lot of it. And there is independent evidence of the events in question.
But there is absolutely no evidence of any of the above.
__________________ See my profile to visit my blogs:
The God who made you without your cooperation will not save you without your cooperation.--St. Augustine
Wise men STILL find Him with His mother...
God uses Mary as bait to capture the hearts of men. -St. Theresa of Avila
I am assuming most people here are familiar with the Resurrection claim and the evidence supporting the claim. For the sake of argument, let us suppose a skeptic came along and made these assertions.
#1 - The disciples came and stole Jesus body.
That's the explanation from the Sanhedrin (Jewish body of elders) some 2000 years ago. This explanation would make #2, #3, #4 all moot. IOW, even the authorities knew the body from the right tomb was gone.
#2 - They were probably on drugs.
#3 - Jesus body was eaten by dogs.
#4 - Wrong tomb.
#5 - Swoon theory.
The swoon theory has been shown numerous ways to be impossible. Do you really think the Roman soldiers incompetent?
#6 - The Resurrection was a copy from pagan religion.
#7 - Embellishment
Please explain how to defend counter these claims. I know these aren't new alternative theories, but they make interesting and fanciful points that sometime people find it difficult to counter. There is no evidence to support any of these claims but let just suppose it did happen. What are the factors that we must look into all this in order to tell if did happen or not. I know this is alot of explanation but explain to best of your knowledge as you can.
There is no pagan religions that have a physical man dying and being resurrected (that I know of).
Embellishment? Not sure what you mean.
__________________ For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: (1 Cor. 15:3-4)
I am assuming most people here are familiar with the Resurrection claim and the evidence supporting the claim. For the sake of argument, let us suppose a skeptic came along and made these assertions.
#1 - The disciples came and stole Jesus body.
#2 - They were probably on drugs.
#3 - Jesus body was eaten by dogs.
#4 - Wrong tomb.
#5 - Swoon theory.
#6 - The Resurrection was a copy from pagan religion.
#7 - Embellishment
Please explain how to defend counter these claims. I know these aren't new alternative theories, but they make interesting and fanciful points that sometime people find it difficult to counter. There is no evidence to support any of these claims but let just suppose it did happen. What are the factors that we must look into all this in order to tell if did happen or not. I know this is alot of explanation but explain to best of your knowledge as you can.
I don't try to convince them, I plant a seed. Salvation is by grace through faith. No faith, no salvation.
Joh 3:16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Heb 11:1Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Heb 11:2 For by it the elders obtained a good report. Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. Heb 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh. Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
The swoon theory does not take into account the spear thrust into Jesus' side in order to ensure that he was indeed dead. This spear thrust would have pierced his pericardium and his heart, dealing him a coup de grace that would negate any thought of his still being alive when his body was removed from the cross. The roman soldiers were specialists in killing, and knew exactly how to wound their victims so that death was assured.
As for the tomb itself, it was already on record as being the tomb where Joseph of Arimathea and his family would be placed following their own deaths. As such a record of its exact location would have had to be kept in order to ensure that their bodies would be placed in the proper tomb.
As well, the custom of that time was to lay the body on a shelf, wait about 1 year until it had skeletonized, and then go back to the tomb. At that time they would gather the bones into an ossuary box, thereby freeing the shelves for other members of the family. Again, in order for people to return to the correct tomb, there would have had to be an accurate record of where that tomb was located.
As for the apostles' stealing Jesus' body, they were more concerned with being killed themselves rather than taking the body of their dead teacher. And their fears were not that exaggerated. It was not at all unusual for the authorities to kill those who followed the teachings of someone whom they had declared as an enemy of Rome along with the teacher. Guilt by association was a punishable offense.
Also, why would they want to steal his body? It is generally accepted that in their secular work before they walked with Jesus they were fairly wealthy men. So if they wanted wealth their logical choice would have been to return to their original work, rather than become missionaries scattered over the known world. Also Jesus' resurrection didn't negate the power which the Sanhedrin and the high priest of the temple in Jerusalem had, and it was well known that they were implacable enemies of anyone who promoted the teachings of Jesus Christ.
As well, the way in which Jesus' resurrection was discovered gives credibility to its having been a factual happening rather than a myth concocted years later. Who found the empty tomb? Women found it. And where were Jesus' closest disciples? They were hiding behind locked doors. In that day women weren't even permitted to testify at a trial. To have them as the first people to discover that Jesus was alive makes sense only if the authors of Jesus' resurrection were writing down the events as they actually occurred, rather than as the optimum telling of a story would have them occur.
I would have to say it's all about faith in the veracity of what was written. This is written evidence. If you believe it's true, then it is true, and much of the world believes it. Even Muslims believe a lot of it. And there is independent evidence of the events in question.
But there is absolutely no evidence of any of the above.
Originally Posted by [URL="http://www.christianforums.com/users/288218/
ptomwebster[/url]"]I don't try to convince them, I plant a seed. Salvation is by grace through faith. No faith, no salvation.
Joh 3:16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Heb 11:1Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Heb 11:2 For by it the elders obtained a good report. Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. Heb 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh. Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
I'm sorry guys, but this is the apologetics forum. Would it be Christ-like for some "it's all about love" Christians to go to the systematic theology forum, and type random posts like this? We apologetics guys don't go to Fidiesm forums and type these kinds of messages.
I dont know if #3 is a joke or is actually a theory. for those who need the revelation of the resurrection. That is what I will advise believers. Christianity is based on faith.
I'm sorry guys, but this is the apologetics forum. Would it be Christ-like for some "it's all about love" Christians to go to the systematic theology forum, and type random posts like this? We apologetics guys don't go to Fidiesm forums and type these kinds of messages.
I dont know if #3 is a joke or is actually a theory. for those who need the revelation of the resurrection. That is what I will advise believers. Christianity is based on faith.
HGA
It was the theory put out by atheist former Catholic priest John Dominic Crossan.
It would be a typical kind of burial for a condemned criminal abandoned on the cross, and it is a big part of the reason that crucifixion was was such a terrorizing death in the ancient Middle East.
Jesus body was eating by dogs? 
for those who need the revelation of the resurrection. That is what I will advise believers. Christianity is based on faith.
Linear Mode
