The Resurrection

[ChetSinger]

I'm hard-pressed to find any reason why the tomb would be subsequently visited by anyone. Because what would they have expected to find?

An empty tomb, that's what.

The disciples were saying that the tomb was empty because Jesus had risen and they had seen him. Their enemies were saying that the tomb was empty because they had stolen the body. But all agreed that the tomb was now empty, ergo there was no reason to subsequently visit it.

 

[mmksparbud]

I'm hard-pressed to find any reason why the tomb would be subsequently visited by anyone. Because what would they have expected to find?

An empty tomb, that's what.

The disciples were saying that the tomb was empty because Jesus had risen and they had seen him. Their enemies were saying that the tomb was empty because they had stolen the body. But all agreed that the tomb was now empty, ergo there was no reason to subsequently visit it.

For crying out loud---why did nobody call in CSI and do DNA testing and slap a lie detector on all those people, somebody had to have a video of it, somebody always does---absolutely deplorably bad forensic police work!! I smell a lawsuit!! Not only did all the people that saw Him after His death lie about it---many of them preferred to be tortured and die rather than to admit they had lied! Psychotic, so abnormal as most people will lie about the truth they've seen in order to get out of dying for it!!

 

[HitchSlap]

Npooooo----it's all you have.

Correct.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yep, "we."

You and nine others.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

And this was the answer:


You answer with this:



Look--if you do not want an answer to your question----then don't bother to ask it!!

1. The disciples were not neutral
2. I'm asking about events AFTER Easter; I believe I made this point clear in the OP

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I'm hard-pressed to find any reason why the tomb would be subsequently visited by anyone. Because what would they have expected to find?

An empty tomb, that's what.

The disciples were saying that the tomb was empty because Jesus had risen and they had seen him. Their enemies were saying that the tomb was empty because they had stolen the body. But all agreed that the tomb was now empty, ergo there was no reason to subsequently visit it.

Well you can look to see if there are bloody footprints or bloody dragmarks. An INVESTIGATION.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

For crying out loud---why did nobody call in CSI and do DNA testing and slap a lie detector on all those people, somebody had to have a video of it, somebody always does---absolutely deplorably bad forensic police work!! I smell a lawsuit!! Not only did all the people that saw Him after His death lie about it---many of them preferred to be tortured and die rather than to admit they had lied! Psychotic, so abnormal as most people will lie about the truth they've seen in order to get out of dying for it!!

You clearly have nothing to contribute so please leave this thread. Bye.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

More importantly, why is there no account of an antagonist visiting the tomb outside the gospels?

Because the event never occurred...?

I see four possibilities if an "antagonist" visited the tomb:

1. He'd find it empty and cease being antagonistic, and record something akin to the gospel accounts;
2. He'd find it empty and record nothing at all because it was adverse to his interest;
3. He'd find it empty and try to lie about it (which if happened was not successful, presumably because the lie was not believable); or
4. He'd find it not empty, in which case we should have at least one mention of that somewhere, but we don't.

Again. Asking why such an event is not recorded IN THE GOSPELS so your 4 points are irrelevant.

 

[AV1611VET]

You clearly have nothing to contribute so please leave this thread. Bye.

He made an excellent point, and it apparently went over your head.

Why didn't the Romans just go get Jesus' body and show that the Resurrection wasn't true?

That would have stopped Christianity in its tracks.

In addition, why would someone allow himself to be martyred for something he knew was a lie?

 

[AV1611VET]

Asking why such an event is not recorded IN THE GOSPELS ...

Author's choice.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

He made an excellent point, and it apparently went over your head.

Why didn't the Romans just go get Jesus' body and show that the Resurrection wasn't true?

That would have stopped Christianity in its tracks.

In addition, why would someone allow himself to be martyred for something he knew was a lie?

He had a point? He was being sarcastic.

With regards to your additions here:

There is not a single documented case of any of the eyewitness disciples willfully being executed for the gospel, so checkmate.

Why didn't the Romans go get the body you ask? You don't seem to understand the premise of my question. I'm assuming for the sake of argument that the resurrection occurred. WHY didn't anyone GO look? That is my question. As for what really happened, Jesus was likely thrown into a common grave.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Author's choice.

Fine. I get it. You don't want to discuss the topic. Are you done?

 

[AV1611VET]

There is not a single documented case of any of the eyewitness disciples willfully being executed for the gospel, so checkmate.

What's this then?

Hebrews 11:36 And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment:
Hebrews 11:37 They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;
Hebrews 11:38 ( Of whom the world was not worthy: ) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.

Why didn't the Romans go get the body you ask? You don't seem to understand the premise of my question. I'm assuming for the sake of argument that the resurrection occurred. WHY didn't anyone GO look?

Assuming for the sake of argument they didn't, maybe they didn't want to believe it?

Truth hurts.

 

[AV1611VET]

Fine. I get it. You don't want to discuss the topic. Are you done?

Nope.

Let's discuss it.

 

[Aelred of Rievaulx]

Why didn't the Romans just go get Jesus' body and show that the Resurrection wasn't true?

That would have stopped Christianity in its tracks.

There's another plausible historical reason why they didn't just go and get Jesus' corpse...

 

[AV1611VET]

There's another plausible historical reason why they didn't just go and get Jesus' corpse...

Let's hear it.

 

[Aelred of Rievaulx]

Let's hear it.

Well, like I said to you earlier. There's a historical argument, I'm not altogether convinced about, that Jesus was never buried or was buried in a mass grave. If he wasn't buried or was buried in a mass grave then no one could point to a corpse and claim it was his. Crucifixion was a punishment which destroyed the body as well as the life of an individual.

 

[AV1611VET]

There's a historical argument, I'm not altogether convinced about, that Jesus was never buried or was buried in a mass grave.

I'm more interested in the argument(s) you are convinced about.

If Jesus was never buried, why was the tomb sealed?

And if He was buried in a mass grave, who did all those miracles afterward?

 

[Aelred of Rievaulx]

I'm more interested in the argument(s) you are convinced about.

If Jesus was never buried, why was the tomb sealed?

And if He was buried in a mass grave, who did all those miracles afterward?

Do you want the historical reply? It's "we don't have enough data to be altogether sure". The theological answer is that God raised Jesus from the dead. The stories of the Tomb are part of the "harrowing of hell" narrative, Christ, in his crucifixion and burial, descended into hell and released the prisoners. In his death he destroyed death, which is why when he gave his spirit the dead saints awoke in true apocalyptic fashion.

 

[mmksparbud]

You clearly have nothing to contribute so please leave this thread. Bye.

Not!---Not my fault my contributions have gone over your head! You do not believe what is written down by those who were there, you do not believe what is obvious, you do want to know the truth, but you do want to prove your ideas and discredit what ancient manuscripts say. You ask questions and when they are answered you say there are not answered, and you don't like the answer.
If you can not understand that the Roman guards, themselves antagonists, would have scoured every inch of the place rather than go to their superiors and say---"We are sorry, but all us were there, awake and alert at our jobs and there was this blinding light and we fell down as though dead and when we came to, this huge heavy rock over the entrance of the cave had been rolled away and the body was missing"----it wouldn't have mattered what story they told--they were supposed to guard a dead body from anyone coming to take it away and failed. They can make no claims that they were attacked by a whole bunch of people and overpowered so they would have been killed by their superiors for not obeying orders. But you do not want to accept any of that because it was written by those who were sympathetic to Jesus, yet you ask why those sympathetic to Jesus did not search for a dead body and when asked why they would search for a dead body when they have the live one in front of them, seen by over 500 people, you refuse to accept the answer!!!----So it is very clear that you do not want a discussion, or answers but wish to just be antagonistic and make foolish pronouncements without any proof of what you say and without any knowledge of the traditions of the culture of either the Romans or the Jews at that time----so again I ask, why bother asking questions you do not want answered??