Was the resurrection a supernatural event?

[brinny]

Understandable. I just remember I never wanted to visit Haiti.

it's so odd....one of the places i have a heart for is Haiti......perhaps because of the abject poverty....

 

[Davian]

The OP question deals with an event that is exclusively addressing that which pertains to Jesus. The Lord of the Christians faith. It is relevant then to speak in such terms as those which further the discussion about the event.

You said:There are more parsimonious explanations.
parsimonious -Adjective 1.characterized by or showing parsimony; frugal or stingy.
Parsimony-noun 1.extreme or excessive economy or frugality; stinginess; niggardliness.

"Occam's razor (also written as Ockham's razor and in Latinlex parsimoniae, which means 'law of parsimony') is a problem-solving principle devised by William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347), who was an English Franciscan friar and scholastic philosopher and theologian. The principle states that among competing hypotheses that predict equally well, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove to provide better predictions, but—in the absence of differences in predictive ability—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

Take, for example, magicians Penn & Teller cutting a woman in half every night on stage. I could give that they have found a large number of volunteers for this position, and found a way to skirt the charges of murder, and avoid the wrath of angry family members, or I could hold back - be more stingy about what I give - and presume that the act is only an illusion, and no one actually is injured. The latter explanation is more parsimonious.

Likewise, when it comes to "supernatural" events like the resurrection, I could give you that there is a god that allegedly walked and talked in a garden that has no evidence of having existed, poofed people and animals into existence, and later, in a manner contrary to the modern understanding of genetics, populated the planet with a tiny group of individuals and animals that survived a global flood in an unbuildable boat, a flood that killed the dinosaurs in a manner that only *appears* to be 65 million years ago, because the Earth is really only somehow 6000 years old, yet remains, by every object measure to date indistinguishable from nothing, but could still implant a copy of himself in a virgin teenager, that would then be born and grow up to be sacrificed to himself to save us all from himself... or I can go with "it's just a story". Call me stingy if you like.

 

[Lazy_Proverb]

Thank you for your detailed explanation.

 

[Lazy_Proverb]

it's so odd....one of the places i have a heart for is Haiti......perhaps because of the abject poverty....

It is a heartbreaking site to behold I grant you. However, like all poor countries, third world or otherwise, there you'll notice the president and those below his office live like kings. While the people they oversee live impoverished.
This is largely why the native religions and magic is employed there.

I once knew a Haitian high priest of Voodoo who had migrated to Florida where we resided at the time. Lovely man and full of amazing stories of his people and traditions.

Of course all this was well after watching the movie which did no justice to the people of that land given the overall theme of the film.

 

[brinny]

It is a heartbreaking site to behold I grant you. However, like all poor countries, third world or otherwise, there you'll notice the president and those below his office live like kings. While the people they oversee live impoverished.
This is largely why the native religions and magic is employed there.

I once knew a Haitian high priest of Voodoo who had migrated to Florida where we resided at the time. Lovely man and full of amazing stories of his people and traditions.

Of course all this was well after watching the movie which did no justice to the people of that land given the overall theme of the film.

The oppression and suffering there IS heartbreaking...

 

[LuisMarco9]

Indeed according to the URANTIA epochal divine revelation; indited by celestial beings for humanity & published 1955 in Chicago, US. 'URANTIA' is the name of our world, which meaning you can find here & elsewhere.
This is part of what its celestial authors said in reply to your query:

http://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-189-resurrection
Paper 189: The Resurrection
Paper:section.paragraph (Page.paragraph)
189:0.1 (2020.1) SOON after the burial of Jesus on Friday afternoon, the chief of the archangels of Nebadon, then present on Urantia, summoned his council of the resurrection of sleeping will creatures and entered upon the consideration of a possible technique for the restoration of Jesus. These assembled sons of the local universe, the creatures of Michael, did this on their own responsibility; Gabriel had not assembled them. By midnight they had arrived at the conclusion that the creature could do nothing to facilitate the resurrection of the Creator. They were disposed to accept the advice of Gabriel, who instructed them that, since Michael had “laid down his life of his own free will, he also had power to take it up again in accordance with his own determination.” Shortly after the adjournment of this council of the archangels, the Life Carriers, and their various associates in the work of creature rehabilitation and morontia* creation, the Personalized Adjuster of Jesus, being in personal command of the assembled celestial hosts then on Urantia, spoke these words to the anxious waiting watchers:
189:0.2 (2020.2) “Not one of you can do aught to assist your Creator-father in the return to life. As a mortal of the realm he has experienced mortal death; as the Sovereign of a universe he still lives. That which you observe is the mortal transit of Jesus of Nazareth from life in the flesh to life in the morontia. The spirit transit of this Jesus was completed at the time I separated myself from his personality and became your temporary director. Your Creator-father has elected to pass through the whole of the experience of his mortal creatures, from birth on the material worlds, on through natural death and the resurrection of the morontia, into the status of true spirit existence. A certain phase of this experience you are about to observe, but you may not participate in it. Those things which you ordinarily do for the creature, you may not do for the Creator. A Creator Son has within himself the power to bestow himself in the likeness of any of his created sons; he has within himself the power to lay down his observable life and to take it up again; and he has this power because of the direct command of the Paradise Father, and I know whereof I speak.”

* me here: the new terms in The URANTIA Book are explained within its pages, for example 'morontia' is defined in its very first pages, & its etymology here too.
URANTIA even affirms indirectly that the shroud of his dead body is the Turin shroud, read this human Report if you will it:
http://ubthenews.com/topics/ShroudTurin.htm
.lm., 31, Mexico City

 

[LuisMarco9]

I finish this response by posting this that URANTIA also claims in relation to your query, 'ActuallyThinking' (among other many statements thereof):

189:2.9 (2024.2) The true evidences of the resurrection of Michael are spiritual in nature, albeit this teaching is corroborated by the testimony of many mortals of the realm who met, recognized, and communed with the resurrected morontia Master. He became a part of the personal experience of almost one thousand human beings before he finally took leave of Urantia.

.lm.

 

[Lazy_Proverb]

Blavatsky? Here?

 

[LuisMarco9]

Blavatsky? Here?

FALSE. Blavatsky has nothing whatsoever to do with The URANTIA Papers.
Not even URANTIA's Wikipedia entry has Blavatsky in there.
But Wikipedia is not to be trust whatsoever in relation to its URANTIA entry: it has many falsities & errors too!. (...)
.lm.

 

[Lazy_Proverb]

That's correct. My error.
Urantia has multiple unseen authors and while no more credible than Blavatsky's whacky fiction is not authored by her. Again, my mistake.

 

[LuisMarco9]

Or that's what you say.
Let people judge by themselves the great astounding credibility of URANTIA:
http://UBtheNews.com/

.lm.

 

[bhsmte]

FALSE. Blavatsky has nothing whatsoever to do with The URANTIA Papers.
Not even URANTIA's Wikipedia entry has Blavatsky in there.
But Wikipedia is not to be trust whatsoever in relation to its URANTIA entry: it has many falsities & errors too!. (...)
.lm.

Isn't that the book that was said to be written by some dude in his sleep?

 

[LuisMarco9]

Isn't that the book that was said to be written by some dude in his sleep?

he was called 'the sleeping subject' & wasn't the author whatsoever, but celestial invisible beings through him & through other means:
'To not fall into bias: History of the URANTIA 5th epochal divine Revelation's origins. (!!!) The 4th one being JESUS of Nazareth. (VIDEOS too)...'
.lm.

 

[Tree of Life]

Do you guys think that the resurrection and ascension to heaven was a supernatural event (ie does it defy natural laws)? Or, could god have caused the resurrection (and ascension to heaven) to happen via natural laws?

And even more importantly, do you have any sources to professional philosophers/theologians who agree with you?

This post is intended mainly for information gathering. I may ask follow up questions but I'm not looking to argue with anyone.

Thanks

I don't believe there are such things as natural laws so the resurrection does not violate any laws of creation.

It is certainly an unusual event and a significant event. God was intimately involved in the resurrection but he was not more involved than he is in other events. By the resurrection God tangibly showed that we have the forgiveness of sins and that we, too, will return from exile.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Do you guys think that the resurrection and ascension to heaven was a supernatural event (ie does it defy natural laws)? Or, could god have caused the resurrection (and ascension to heaven) to happen via natural laws?

If it happened through natural laws, then a supernatural deity can't be the cause of it.
It's self-contradictory.

 

[KWCrazy]

Likewise, when it comes to "supernatural" events like the resurrection, I could give you that there is a god that allegedly walked and talked in a garden that has no evidence of having existed, poofed people and animals into existence, and later, in a manner contrary to the modern understanding of genetics, populated the planet with a tiny group of individuals and animals that survived a global flood in an unbuildable boat, a flood that killed the dinosaurs in a manner that only *appears* to be 65 million years ago, because the Earth is really only somehow 6000 years old, yet remains, by every object measure to date indistinguishable from nothing, but could still implant a copy of himself in a virgin teenager, that would then be born and grow up to be sacrificed to himself to save us all from himself... or I can go with "it's just a story".

Considering that I have more evidence for God's existence than I do for yours; considering that you could just be words on a page auto-generated by a contrivance that doesn't cross check for grammar; considering that there are no scientifically viable theories of origination- either for life or for matter, the logical conclusion is that God is real and you are not.

Regarding the OP, anyone who knows anything about the Roman soldiers know that they were authorities on death. They knew what death was because they killed people for a living. It wasn't likely that a Roman soldier could thrust a spear into the side of a man and not know whether blood was pumping out or seeping out. It is a fantasy to pretend that Jesus was not dead. As for violating natural law, the resurrection ABSOLUTELY violated natural law. The same can be said for most of the other 332 miracles listed in the Bible. God didn't use card tricks to validate His existence to us. He chose the impossible because only God could do the impossible.

 

[Davian]

Considering that I have more evidence for God's existence than I do for yours;

Really? Can you trot any of that evidence out here to inspect, without having the thread closed for apologetics? No? I didn't think so.

considering that you could just be words on a page auto-generated by a contrivance

At least I (or my programmer) could rise to the challenge of creating an account here on thise site. Let's see your hypothetical "god" do that.

that doesn't cross check for grammar;

I was speaking informally; feel free to appeal to the appropriate authority to reference what grammatical blunder you believe I have committed.

considering that there are no scientifically viable theories of origination- either for life or for matter,

I don't care. None of that means "goddidit".

the logical conclusion

That is a use of the word "logical" that I was not previously aware of.

is that God is real and you are not.

So, if there were scientifically viable theories of origination, you might consider me real?

Regarding the OP, anyone who knows anything about the Roman soldiers know that they were authorities on death. They knew what death was because they killed people for a living. It wasn't likely that a Roman soldier could thrust a spear into the side of a man and not know whether blood was pumping out or seeping out. It is a fantasy to pretend that Jesus was not dead.

I do not dispute that Jesus is dead, if he existed at all.

As for violating natural law, the resurrection ABSOLUTELY violated natural law.

You can't even demonstrate that it happened.

The same can be said for most of the other 332 miracles listed in the Bible.

What do you mean, "most"? Are some of them hoaxes as well?

God didn't use card tricks to validate His existence to us.

From what I have gathered from rather circuitous logic used by religionists on this site, it is our minds that trick us into believing such things.

He chose the impossible because only God could do the impossible.

Or, Biblical-style gods are impossible, and are simply imagined, relegating you to simply being argumentative in an internet forum.

 

[SkyWriting]

Saying that something could deceptively mimic resurrection has nothing to do with whether resurrection from the dead is a supernatural event.
Yes, of course it is supernatural. We have no natural reason to believe that death is a temporary state.

It's called the "swoon theory" that Jesus had only passed out for a few days.

 

[SkyWriting]

Do you guys think that the resurrection and ascension to heaven was a supernatural event (ie does it defy natural laws)? Or, could god have caused the resurrection (and ascension to heaven) to happen via natural laws?

And even more importantly, do you have any sources to professional philosophers/theologians who agree with you?

This post is intended mainly for information gathering. I may ask follow up questions but I'm not looking to argue with anyone.

Thanks

The No-God but decent history theory is that He fainted.

 

[HondaMan]

supernatural