The Resurrection

[AV1611VET]

Whether sympathetic, antagonistic, or merely fascinated as a neutral observer, there was plenty of motivation to go and see for oneself that the tomb was empty.

The Roman empire tried hard to quell Christianity before it ever got started.

So if Jesus was still in the tomb, why didn't the Romans just go and get His body?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

David Blaine has produced illusions that we do not know how to duplicate. He has also accomplished physically extreme feats, such as fasting for 44 days and holding his breath for 17 minutes.

Suppose he were to die and that three days later some of his fans claimed his grave was empty. Don't you think someone would bother to go check if it actually happened? Couldn't it be an illusion or perhaps some other extreme physical feat in which he has feigned death?

So why is it that Jesus, who apparently performed more miracles than all of the books in the whole world could record, was said to have risen from the dead and yet no one bothered to go look? Whether sympathetic, antagonistic, or merely fascinated as a neutral observer, there was plenty of motivation to go and see for oneself that the tomb was empty. And yet there is no record of anyone visiting the tomb after Easter Sunday, and there was certainly no record of a neutral party making the trip.

Or did skeptics actually go visit? Why would it be the case that skeptics actually did visit the tomb, and yet the gospels did not record this? That would seem to cut against the narrative of the gospels, since everyone - including the disciples - were always skeptical of Jesus, and the gospels were always making a point of this.

The complete lack of an investigation for a miraculous event is in fact evidence that no miracle occurred in the first place.

And if those guarding his tomb were subject to death, would you still feel the same way? The punishment for a Roman soldier falling asleep at post in that time was crucifixion. Bother to go look? The Roman's stationed guards just to prevent anyone stealing his body because he said he would rise in three days.

Why would non-Christians write about an event that would oppose their beliefs? If those that didn't believe in David Blane were to write the history - they would leave out any mention of his tomb being empty. How easily people forget that history is written to support those in charge, not the opposition.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

To the first two questions I answer "yes". To the third I will ask you to provide evidence for the truth claim you made, namely, that no one checked the tomb. What evidence do you have to support that knowledge claim?

OK. If you want to play like that, what evidence do you have for God's existence? None.

You see, you make arguments and appeals to reason to conclude that God exists. I am appealing to reason, and when you say that it's like I'm plowing with a donkey.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

What do you expect that such evidence would look like? A legal document from Pontus Pilate saying that the tomb was investigated?

I'm asking why it's not part of the story. Not asking for physical evidence, although that would be great.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

People who were sympathetic or merely fascinated would have told the truth, which is the record we have. So if an antagonistic person investigated and found an empty tomb, what do you think they would do? Report the truth which was against their interest? Are you disappointed that no antagonist was able to successfully lie about the resurrection?

I am cross-examining the GOSPELS. Why is there no account of an antagonist visiting the tomb in the gospels?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

The empty tomb would not be very interesting. Not even the women who discovered the empty tomb saw this as evidence of anything supernatural. They needed to see the resurrected Jesus to understand that the empty tomb was the result of a miracle.

One of those books mentions Jesus appearing to a group of several hundred followers before ascending to heaven from a mountain top. I assume those followers gathered in expectation of seeing Jesus.

So if you saw a guy resurrecting the dead, walking on water, multiplying food, healing the blind, etc, and then you were told his grave was empty a day and a half after his execution, you'd just be like, "Oh, whatever, nothing to see here..."?

 

[Nihilist Virus]

The Roman empire tried hard to quell Christianity before it ever got started.

1. The Romans had Paul under their control
2. Paul wrote letters to the churches to direct their activities
3. The Romans made no attempt to intercept or falsify these letters
4. ????
5. The Roman empire tried hard to quell Christianity before it ever got started

So if Jesus was still in the tomb, why didn't the Romans just go and get His body?

That is what I'm asking you.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

And if those guarding his tomb were subject to death, would you still feel the same way? The punishment for a Roman soldier falling asleep at post in that time was crucifixion. Bother to go look? The Roman's stationed guards just to prevent anyone stealing his body because he said he would rise in three days.

Why would non-Christians write about an event that would oppose their beliefs? If those that didn't believe in David Blane were to write the history - they would leave out any mention of his tomb being empty. How easily people forget that history is written to support those in charge, not the opposition.

Please answer the question in the OP.

 

[anonymous person]

OK. If you want to play like that, what evidence do you have for God's existence? None.

Shifting the burden. Implies that I am playing games.

That's about what I expected.

Carry on.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why is there no account of an antagonist visiting the tomb in the gospels?

What are you talking about?

Antagonists hung around the tomb for three days and three nights.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

What are you talking about?

Antagonists hung around the tomb for three days and three nights.

I'm asking why no one went to the EMPTY tomb. Kinda the whole point and why I'm talking about David Blaine.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Shifting the burden. Implies that I am playing games.

That's about what I expected.

Carry on.

I'm not shifting anything. You ask me to provide evidence that no one visited the tomb. That's not what the discussion is about. Refer to the OP:

Or did skeptics actually go visit? Why would it be the case that skeptics actually did visit the tomb, and yet the gospels did not record this? That would seem to cut against the narrative of the gospels, since everyone - including the disciples - were always skeptical of Jesus, and the gospels were always making a point of this.

The complete lack of an investigation for a miraculous event is in fact evidence that no miracle occurred in the first place.

I suspect you have no response to this whatsoever.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm asking why no one went to the EMPTY tomb.

I'm sure Romans were all over that tomb like a shrewdness of scientists on a pig's tooth.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I'm sure Romans were all over that tomb like a shrewdness of scientists on a pig's tooth.

Why are you sure of this? Based on what exactly?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why are you sure of this? Based on what exactly?

Based on the opposite being true.

It's much easier to be sure they went there, than to be sure they didn't.

Wouldn't you go there to check it out, if you were a Roman?

The tomb was a sealed tomb.

I'm sure the Romans at least went there to check their seal.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Please answer the question in the OP.

I'm answering your question. Don't want your questions answered, don't ask any.

And already did.

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/the-resurrection.7924822/page-2#post-69062601

 

[Justatruthseeker]

OK. If you want to play like that, what evidence do you have for God's existence? None.

You see, you make arguments and appeals to reason to conclude that God exists. I am appealing to reason, and when you say that it's like I'm plowing with a donkey.

Ok, since you want to play - what evidence do you have He doesn't exist? None.

You see, you make arguments and appeals to reason to conclude that God doesn't exists. That fallacy of argument works both ways.

But you can start by showing me one single celled organism that has ever become anything other than what it started as in the lab, then you might have something besides religious belief yourself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexual_reproduction
"Asexual reproduction is a type of reproduction by which offspring arise from a single organism, and inherit the genes of that parent only"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloning
"In biology, cloning is the process of producing similar populations of genetically identical individuals that occurs in nature when organisms such as bacteria, insects or plants reproduce asexually."

 

[cloudyday2]

So if you saw a guy resurrecting the dead, walking on water, multiplying food, healing the blind, etc, and then you were told his grave was empty a day and a half after his execution, you'd just be like, "Oh, whatever, nothing to see here..."?

I would assume somebody took the corpse. That's what the women assumed according to one of the stories. Even if somebody said "here is the resurrected Jesus", I would be suspicious unless I had been close enough during his life to know for certain that it was truly him.

 

[anonymous person]

I would assume somebody took the corpse. That's what the women assumed according to one of the stories. Even if somebody said "here is the resurrected Jesus", I would be suspicious unless I had been close enough during his life to know for certain that it was truly him.

Some people just dont like the idea of Jesus rising from the dead. For them there is always an explanation that can be had to explain it away. "The man claiming to be the risen Saviour is just an identical twin of Jesus."

So on and so forth.

 

[mmksparbud]

It was against Jewi9sh practice to touch a dead body. Those whi did have touch one were then considr4d unclean:

Lev_5:2 Or if a soul touches any unclean thing, or the unclean dead body of an animal, or the unclean dead body of livestock, or the dead body of unclean swarming things, it being hidden from him that he is unclean and is guilty,
Lev_11:25 And anyone who lifts up their dead body shall wash his garments and shall be unclean until the evening;

There are over 20 verses about this---it was the Roman guards themselves who went to the authorities about Jesus being gone and the authorities would have been the ones to go looking for the body. The guards were facing death if it was proven they fell asleep on duty. Unfortunately, CSI was not around at the time for DNA testing and so forth--and there is no way in the world that the Romans would have admitted that they couldn't find him so they had to tell everybody that the Jews took the body. Defeats were not recorded, either in battle, or otherwise. In fact, the records of battles could be quite the opposite of what actually happened as others would record what actually happened and there are records where the kings would say they fought a victorious battle and the records of others would indicate otherwise. Face saving. There were no cameras recording everything that happened so what makes you think that the Romans didn't move heaven and earth to try and find that body?? They would have loved to announce to the whole world that it was all a lie and the best they could do was try to shut the whole thing up---didn't work.