Did Jesus commit suicide? | INFJ Forum

Did Jesus commit suicide?

Discussion in 'Philosophy and Religion' started by efromm, Apr 11, 2014.

Share This Page

Watchers:
This thread is being watched by 9 users.
More threads by efromm
  1. efromm

    efromm Truth... Is Painful....
    Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Threads:
    39
    Messages:
    3,247
    Featured Threads:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,149
    Trophy Points:
    782
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    InFj


    So why buck the system. Piss off a whole bunch of people. And eventually get nailed to a cross? When you know that that is exactly what will happen to you. But you do it anyway? What is it you call that? It sounds like suicide to me. We have suicide by cop. I give you suicide by crucifixion....

    Now I know the whole story. I heard it all the time at church. It just never added up for me. Other people were getting crucified. It was no secret. The bible admits this much. From the way I see it, it's suicide. Some are going to get angry that I even said it. Or even thought it. But I still wonder if he wanted to end it. ​

     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
    #1 efromm, Apr 11, 2014
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2014
    Jeffrei and say what like this.
  2. muir

    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Threads:
    39
    Messages:
    11,092
    Likes Received:
    1,238
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    One theory goes that he was in fact trying to spark some sort of rebellion against the romans

    Personally i am not convinced that the story is true due to the obvious death and rebirth god aspects to the story. Here Jesus represents the sun as it dies each day and is reborn

    The cross as well as the tau symbol represents the penis and the sun is treated by the mystery schools as the male penis writ large

    Just as the penis emits sperm which then fertilises women the sun emits its life giving rays which then fertilises the land (seen by the old folk as the mother goddess who then gives birth to natures bounty of crops, fruit, grass and so on)

    Jesus is the dying and rising sun. His sun aspect is represented by the halo and the crown of thorns representing the suns rays and also in the ritual of drinking wine and eating bread which are both the product of the union of the suns rays with the land

    Churches depict this sex magick process by having rose windows which represent the female yoni with the male sun shining through it illuminating the interior of the church representing the female womb

    The mystery of conception is a powerful part of the human story and humans see the same process in sympathetic terms occuring to the very land around us...a strong link showing that we are a part of nature and visa versa

    If there was indeed an actual man called Jesus i think we can be pretty sure that he did not die and come back to life. Many traditions have him not actually dying. Some say he faked his death by taking a potion and so on. His brother james was said to have been the first bishop of the true church and was murdered on the steps of the temple in jerusalem by the jealous priests. After this came the jewish uprising that saw the romans smash the temple

    Jesus said that the kingdom of heaven is within us. This points to the spiritual process being a personal internal one not an external one. In the qabalistic system jesus represents the sphere of tiphereth which is the solar heart chakra. For a person to rise to spiritual union with their higher self represented in the higher sephiroth they must pass through the heart chakra which is why jesus says that the only way to god is through him

    The bible is an allegorical story...a spiritual road map which has been altered and edited by the hierophants to lead the initiate away from the internal spiritual journey because the hierophants/priests wanted to place themselves between the initiate and the ineffable in order to empower themselves at the expense of the initiate

    The person who recognises no authority between themself and the ineffable is a threat to the powers that be here on this earthly realm

    The powers that be here on earth worship saturn. Saturn is the furthest away planet visible to the eye so it was used by the old folks as a clock to measure time. Through this process of measuring time the priests imposed their control over humanity. A perception of chronological time is what roots us into their matrix of control

    Behind all the major religions is concealed saturn worship because all the major religions do not teach that the initiate has direct access to god; they teach that people must access god through the priests and the teachings of the priests

    Saturn is represented symbolically as a black cube. The muslims worship this at mecca, the christians worship the cube through the cross which is a cube unfolded and the jews worship the cube as the tephilin which they wear on their foreheads

    if you want to be rooted in the concrete world of the hierophants then worship time and follow their instructions; worship jesus as an external entity that you must give your power away to and seek to emulate his supposed passive acquiescance to the system

    if you want to develop your own relationship with the ineffable then abandon time and follow your own heart and intuition; see jesus as part of yourself and as part of the process of spiritual growth
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  3. LucyJr

    LucyJr Well-known member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2013
    Threads:
    52
    Messages:
    2,412
    Featured Threads:
    1
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    622
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    I think this is the battle of ingenious theories. One theory smarter than the other...
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  4. Rcs6r

    Rcs6r Must be the feeling~
    Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2012
    Threads:
    30
    Messages:
    3,419
    Featured Threads:
    4
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    877
    MBTI:
    (⌐■_■)
    He was a martyr. He died for what he believed in. By definition, as I understand it, he did not commit suicide because it was the Romans who killed him, not his own hands. Maybe it could be considered assisted suicide? But that's just silly because the Romans were executing him for claiming to be king of the Jewish people and essentially being a threat to the empire.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  5. Lerxst

    Lerxst Well-known member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2010
    Threads:
    122
    Messages:
    2,381
    Likes Received:
    739
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    It's hard to even prove whether or not Jesus existed, but why make up an entire person and base a religion around that? After all, the best lies have hints of truth thrown in.

    One theory I've heard that I agree with more than most is that Jesus really did live, but not the way we think. Every picture paints him as being white... Caucasian. Look at the area he lived, really... pale-skinned?? Without saying, "well, the pictures are wrong" we can look deeper into that and also relate it to the immaculate conception story.

    The Middle East was controlled by Rome. Roman soldiers stationed miles away from home for years on end tended to act on some... err... desires. Back then, being raped and adultery were about the same, either way Mary would have been the one at fault in her society. Instead of admitting to being raped and shamed for life, the story of immaculate conception came about... and Jesus' white skin.

    Now imagine Jesus as a child. There's almost nothing written about him until he's 30. What would life be like as a bastard child of a home invader, especially if his looks were very different from his parents. Joseph knew, Mary knew and they were reminded each time they saw him. You think he grew up in a household that had much love for Rome?

    Now from there, you can take 2 directions; Jesus either shunned Rome and decided to live a peaceful life on his own accord, ignoring the Roman system or, he grew up with a strong hatred of Rome and decided to actively rebel against them when he was older, leading to an intentional crucifixion in order to strengthen his cause.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  6. cvp12gh5

    cvp12gh5 What a lovely way to burn...

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Threads:
    86
    Messages:
    4,025
    Featured Threads:
    2
    Likes Received:
    5,458
    Trophy Points:
    465
    Gender:
    Female
    MBTI:
    Intui
    Enneagram:
    Thinking
    Others were crucified during that time, but maybe he was hoping for a different outcome? All I know is that it was not suicide. He felt that his message was worth putting his life on the line. He was standing up for his beliefs and was murdered as a result. Maybe a predictable result, but that doesn't make it suicide.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  7. Rcs6r

    Rcs6r Must be the feeling~
    Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2012
    Threads:
    30
    Messages:
    3,419
    Featured Threads:
    4
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    877
    MBTI:
    (⌐■_■)
    [​IMG]

    Oh.....
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
    say what likes this.
  8. cvp12gh5

    cvp12gh5 What a lovely way to burn...

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Threads:
    86
    Messages:
    4,025
    Featured Threads:
    2
    Likes Received:
    5,458
    Trophy Points:
    465
    Gender:
    Female
    MBTI:
    Intui
    Enneagram:
    Thinking
    image.jpg

    And to stay on topic, it wasn't suicide.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  9. Eventhorizon

    Eventhorizon Permanently relocated
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Threads:
    251
    Messages:
    16,553
    Featured Threads:
    31
    Likes Received:
    10,234
    Trophy Points:
    2,187
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    INTJ
    Interesting question. Can you commit suicide by knowing your future and making no attempt to avert it? But by attempting to avert it your are moving toward the same outcome anyway?

    Matt 16:21 “From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day.”

    Sounds to me like it wasnt a guess, it was going to be a known outcome.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
    Sandie33 likes this.
  10. La Sagna

    La Sagna Trying to become a butterfly

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2013
    Threads:
    85
    Messages:
    5,858
    Likes Received:
    1,566
    Trophy Points:
    782
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    Enneagram:
    9 with 1 wing
    Just a few points on this topic and the comments made:

    Most historians believe that there was an actual historical figure named Jesus, whether he was the Son of God that is a matter of religion and faith:

    The only reason that we think of Jesus as 'white' is because of the art created by Western cultures and therefore he was created in the likeness of the 'white' people that were the norm in the culture. We have no image of Jesus and no physical description of Jesus. If the historical Jesus would have appeared significantly different than the people in his culture I'm quite certain that that would have been mentioned somewhere. In all likelihood Jesus looked like the people who surrounded him. Jesus was a Jew who lived in the Middle East. In all likelihood he looked very similarly to people who live in the Middle East right now.

    In Christian belief Jesus has to fulfil the prophecies about the Messiah http://christianity.about.com/od/biblefactsandlists/a/Prophecies-Jesus.htm
    Which means that he had to die the way he did. I wouldn't personally call it suicide but you could say that he had a 'mission' to fulfil.

    In Christianity it is believed that He had to die so Christians could be saved:
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  11. muir

    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Threads:
    39
    Messages:
    11,092
    Likes Received:
    1,238
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    In a bizarre coincidence this story about a parchment talking about jesus's wife was in the papers today:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...t-is-not-a-fake-scientists-claim-9253395.html

    A Harvard professor is claiming a fragment of papyrus seemingly mentioning that Jesus had a wife is an ancient document and not a forgery, following a series of tests.

    The text is written in Coptic and contains a dialogue in which Jesus refers to "my wife."
    Karen King, a professor at the Harvard Divinity School, writes in the Harvard Theological Review that the papyrus is almost certainly a product of ancient Christians and probably dates to eighth-century Egypt, based on carbon dating and chemical tests on the ink.
    None of the testing has produced any evidence that the fragment is a modern fabrication or forgery, Prof King and her team concluded.
    The fragment, which has some legible lines on the front and on the back, contains the words: “Jesus said to them, ‘My wife …. She will also be my disciple.”
    James Yardley from Columbia University, and Alexis Hagadorn from Columbia University Libraries, used a technique called micro-Raman spectroscopy to determine that the carbon character of the ink matched samples of other papyri that date from the first to eighth centuries CE.
    Malcolm Choat from Macquarie University examined the fragment at HDS and offered an independent assessment of the handwriting.
    Prof King first announced the existence of the fragment in September 2012, at the International Coptic Congress in Rome, where she dubbed it "The Gospel of Jesus's Wife."
    The use of the word "gospel" refers to the fragment's most distinctive claim that Jesus was married.
    Her announcement caused controversy among Christians and religious scholars, many of whom believe the document may be a forgery because of the poor grammar, shape of the handwriting and the ink's colour and quality.
    The Vatican newspaper also released an editorial after the announcement declaring it a fake.
    However, Prof King has stressed the text does not prove Jesus actually had a wife, but suggests ancient Christians wrote about this possibility.
    "The main topic of the fragment is to affirm that women who are mothers and wives can be disciples of Jesus—a topic that was hotly debated in early Christianity as celibate virginity increasingly became highly valued," Prof King said.
    "This gospel fragment provides a reason to reconsider what we thought we knew by asking what the role claims of Jesus's marital status played historically in early Christian controversies over marriage, celibacy, and family."
    But Brown University Professor Leo Depuydt, in an analysis also published Thursday by the Harvard Theological Review, remains unconvinced and argues the text contains grammatical errors that a native Coptic speaker would not make.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  12. muir

    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Threads:
    39
    Messages:
    11,092
    Likes Received:
    1,238
    Trophy Points:
    0
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    I don't think scientology is really about jesus is it?

    I think it is saying in its higher degrees that we are descended from aliens and that we are often possessed by the spirits of aliens who were killed in a nuclear war in the distant past

    They say we can free ourselves of these entites if we undergo auditing to find out what things buried in our psyche are affecting us emotionally

    It grew out of the occult with roots in the OTO of aleister crowley via a disciple of his called jack parsons
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  13. Eventhorizon

    Eventhorizon Permanently relocated
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Threads:
    251
    Messages:
    16,553
    Featured Threads:
    31
    Likes Received:
    10,234
    Trophy Points:
    2,187
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    INTJ
    Related to the topic of Jesus. I have to ask and I am sorry but I suspect it will cause offense. I have found that when asking any questions concerning the existence of certain aspects of this can and often does do this. However I know of no other way to ask a question without asking it.

    To this end.

    Were someone to go to a physiologist and tell them they believed there was an invisible being watching over all the world, that this force among other things demanded to be worshiped or if you did not it would send you to a place where you would be tortured for all time etc..and they called it by any other name than "God", would this person not be defined as having delusions?

    Now, this is a serious question. Here is why. Growing up my mother taught me about God and Jesus. She was catholic though not devout in the way many are. I would ask questions and she would say, "Because thats the way it is." Growing up, trying to contemplate God was difficult for me. It was contradictory to everything I knew of the world. It was so contradictory and I thought about it so much that at some point I realized I had a less then stable mind because of it. I saw the potential for demons to inhabit human bodies, after all this one of the things they want you to believe. I saw the potential for invisible things to hurt or help you. Looking back and knowing what I know of human psychology now, I believe I was delusional and living in a fantasy world. My mind fought against this and eventually I won using logic and reason. However it honestly almost had dire consequences for me.

    So, where was the error here? Was the error in thinking about it incorrectly to begin with? Was the error in my mind alone? Was my mind the thing that failed not in that it was trying to believe in God but that it was never able to resolve the question correctly as some people would see it?
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  14. LucyJr

    LucyJr Well-known member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2013
    Threads:
    52
    Messages:
    2,412
    Featured Threads:
    1
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    622
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    What if you right now, by calling religious people delusional and living in a fantasy world, are yourself in a delusional world? there is this possibility, have you thought of it? We call illusion a false perception and understanding of reality. You say God doesn't exist. What if He exist? Aren't YOU deluded then?
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  15. LucyJr

    LucyJr Well-known member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2013
    Threads:
    52
    Messages:
    2,412
    Featured Threads:
    1
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    622
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    Well, irrespective of wether Jesus commited suicide or not, he was raised from the dead. How would this match with his supposed suicide?
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  16. Eventhorizon

    Eventhorizon Permanently relocated
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Threads:
    251
    Messages:
    16,553
    Featured Threads:
    31
    Likes Received:
    10,234
    Trophy Points:
    2,187
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    INTJ
    Anything is possible but just because it is, that shouldnt be cause to say that everything is.

    My story is real. I am not calling religious people delusional. Only noting that I was having a hard time functioning in the real world for a while believing in the possibility demons and angels were fighting all around me as well as about me.

    And...Ill also note that priests, pastors etc are completely fine with you thinking this until you do something that has real world consequences. Not that I ever did but you know exactly what I am talking about.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
    #16 Eventhorizon, Apr 11, 2014
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2014
  17. LucyJr

    LucyJr Well-known member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2013
    Threads:
    52
    Messages:
    2,412
    Featured Threads:
    1
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    622
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    By the way guys...did you knew there is another theory, not that Jesus commited suicide, but that He facked and pretend His own death, in order so He can claim that was raised from the death???
    In my opinion, this theory make much more sense. The ones who invented the theory try to escape the fact that a small community of over 500 hundreads people at that time believed that Jesus the man Christ, has raised from the death after three days of His crucifixion.
    In Bible are accounted for over 500 first eye witness who saw this and testified to this. This was Christianity at its beginnings. A handful of man begin to testify that jesus Christ was raied from the death. So how in the world would you explain this fact if it was a myth???
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  18. Eventhorizon

    Eventhorizon Permanently relocated
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Threads:
    251
    Messages:
    16,553
    Featured Threads:
    31
    Likes Received:
    10,234
    Trophy Points:
    2,187
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    INTJ
    I am amazed. Good for you asking questions!
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  19. LucyJr

    LucyJr Well-known member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2013
    Threads:
    52
    Messages:
    2,412
    Featured Threads:
    1
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    622
    MBTI:
    INFJ
    There are four historical facts which must be explained by any adequate historical hypothesis:

    o Jesus’ burial
    o the discovery of his empty tomb
    o his post-mortem appearances
    o the origin of the disciples’ belief in his resurrection.

    Now, let’s look at that first contention more closely. I want to share four facts which are widely accepted by historians today.

    Fact #1: After his crucifixion Jesus was buried by Joseph of Arimathea in a tomb.

    Historians have established this fact on the basis of evidence such as the following:

    1. Jesus’ burial is multiply attested in early, independent sources.

    We have four biographies of Jesus, by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, which have been collected into the New Testament, along with various letters of the apostle Paul. Now the burial account is part of Mark’s source material for the story of Jesus’ suffering and death. This is a very early source which is probably based on eyewitness testimony and which the commentator Rudolf Pesch dates to within seven years of the crucifixion. Moreover, Paul also cites an extremely early source for Jesus’ burial which most scholars date to within five years of Jesus’ crucifixion. Independent testimony to Jesus’ burial by Joseph is also found in the sources behind Matthew and Luke and the Gospel of John, not to mention the extra-biblical Gospel of Peter. Thus, we have the remarkable number of at least five independent sources for Jesus’ burial, some of which are extraordinarily early.

    2. As a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin that condemned Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea is unlikely to be a Christian invention.

    There was an understandable hostility in the early church toward the Jewish leaders. In Christian eyes, they had engineered a judicial murder of Jesus. Thus, according to the late New Testament scholar Raymond Brown, Jesus’ burial by Joseph is “very probable,” since it is “almost inexplicable” why Christians would make up a story about a Jewish Sanhedrist who does what is right by Jesus. 1

    For these and other reasons, most New Testament critics concur that Jesus was buried by Joseph of Arimathea in a tomb. According to the late John A. T. Robinson of Cambridge University, the burial of Jesus in the tomb is “one of the earliest and best-attested facts about Jesus.” 2

    Fact #2: On the Sunday after the crucifixion, Jesus’ tomb was found empty by a group of his women followers.

    Among the reasons which have led most scholars to this conclusion are the following:

    1. The empty tomb is also multiply attested by independent, early sources.

    Mark’s source didn’t end with the burial, but with the story of the empty tomb, which is tied to the burial story verbally and grammatically. Moreover, Matthew and John have independent sources about the empty tomb; it’s also mentioned in the sermons in the Acts of the Apostles (2.29; 13.36); and it’s implied by Paul in his first letter to the Corinthian church (I Cor. 15.4). Thus, we have again multiple, early, independent attestation of the fact of the empty tomb.

    2. The tomb was discovered empty by women.

    In patriarchal Jewish society the testimony of women was not highly regarded. In fact, the Jewish historian Josephus says that women weren’t even permitted to serve as witnesses in a Jewish court of law. Now in light of this fact, how remarkable it is that it is women who are the discoverers of Jesus’ empty tomb. Any later legendary account would certainly have made male disciples like Peter and John discover the empty tomb. The fact that it is women, rather than men, who are the discoverers of the empty tomb is best explained by the fact that they were the chief witnesses to the fact of the empty tomb, and the Gospel writers faithfully record what, for them, was an awkward and embarrassing fact.

    I could go on, but I think enough has been said to indicate why, in the words of Jacob Kremer, an Austrian specialist on the resurrection, “By far most exegetes hold firmly to the reliability of the biblical statements concerning the empty tomb.”3

    Fact #3: On different occasions and under various circumstances different individuals and groups of people experienced appearances of Jesus alive from the dead.

    This is a fact which is virtually universally acknowledged by scholars, for the following reasons:

    1. Paul’s list of eyewitnesses to Jesus’ resurrection appearances guarantees that such appearances occurred.

    Paul tells us that Jesus appeared to his chief disciple Peter, then to the inner circle of disciples known as the Twelve; then he appeared to a group of 500 disciples at once, then to his younger brother James, who up to that time was apparently not a believer, then to all the apostles. Finally, Paul adds, “he appeared also to me,” at the time when Paul was still a persecutor of the early Jesus movement (I Cor. 15.5-8). Given the early date of Paul’s information as well as his personal acquaintance with the people involved, these appearances cannot be dismissed as mere legends.

    2. The appearance narratives in the Gospels provide multiple, independent attestation of the appearances.

    For example, the appearance to Peter is attested by Luke and Paul; the appearance to the Twelve is attested by Luke, John, and Paul; and the appearance to the women is attested by Matthew and John. The appearance narratives span such a breadth of independent sources that it cannot be reasonably denied that the earliest disciples did have such experiences. Thus, even the skeptical German New Testament critic Gerd Lüdemann concludes, “It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’ death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ.” 4

    Finally,

    Fact #4: The original disciples suddenly and sincerely came to believe that Jesus was risen from the dead despite their having every predisposition to the contrary.

    Think of the situation the disciples faced following Jesus’ crucifixion:

    1. Their leader was dead.

    And Jewish Messianic expectations had no idea of a Messiah who, instead of triumphing over Israel’s enemies, would be shamefully executed by them as a criminal.

    2. Jewish beliefs about the afterlife precluded anyone’s rising from the dead to glory and immortality before the general resurrection of the dead at the end of the world.

    Nevertheless, the original disciples suddenly came to believe so strongly that God had raised Jesus from the dead that they were willing to die for the truth of that belief. But then the obvious question arises: What in the world caused them to believe such an un-Jewish and outlandish thing? Luke Johnson, a New Testament scholar at Emory University, muses, “Some sort of powerful, transformative experience is required to generate the sort of movement earliest Christianity was.” 5 And N. T. Wright, an eminent British scholar, concludes, “That is why, as an historian, I cannot explain the rise of early Christianity unless Jesus rose again, leaving an empty tomb behind him.” 6

    In summary, there are four facts agreed upon by the majority of scholars: Jesus’ burial, the discovery of his empty tomb, his post-mortem appearances, and the origin of the disciples’ belief in his resurrection.

    Now in his early published work Dr. Ehrman expressed skepticism about these facts. He insisted that we cannot really affirm these facts. 7 Why not? Well, he gave two reasons:

    First, he said, historians cannot say that a miracle probably occurred. But here he was obviously confusing the evidence for the resurrection with the best explanation of the evidence. The resurrection of Jesus is a miraculous explanation of the evidence. But the evidence itself is not miraculous. None of these four facts is any way supernatural or inaccessible to the historian. To give an analogy, did you know that after Abraham Lincoln was assassinated, there was actually a plot to steal his body as it was being transported by train back to Illinois? Now the historian will obviously want to know whether this plot was foiled or not. Was Lincoln’s body missing from the train? Was it successfully interred in the tomb in Springfield? Did his closest associates like Secretary of War Stanton or Vice-President Johnson claim to have seen appearances of Lincoln alive after his death, and so on? These are questions any historian can investigate. And it’s the same with the four facts about Jesus.

    But Professor Ehrman had a second reason why he thought the historian cannot affirm these facts: the Gospel accounts of these events are hopelessly contradictory. But the problem with this line of argument is that it assumes three things: (i) that the inconsistencies are irresolvable rather than merely apparent; (ii) that the inconsistencies lie at the heart of the narrative rather than just in the secondary, peripheral details; and (iii) that all of the accounts have an equal claim to historical reliability, since the presence of inconsistencies in a later, less reliable source does nothing to undermine the credibility of an earlier, more credible source. In fact, when you look at the supposed inconsistencies, what you find is that most of them—like the names and number of the women who visited the tomb—are merely apparent, not real. Moreover, the alleged inconsistencies are found in the secondary, circumstantial details of the story and have no effect at all on the four facts as I’ve stated them.

    So most historians haven’t been deterred by these sorts of objections. And in fact Dr. Ehrman has himself come to re-think his position on these issues. Inconsistencies in the details notwithstanding, he now recognizes that we have “solid traditions,” not only for Jesus’ burial, but also for the women’s discovery of the empty tomb, and therefore, he says, we can conclude with “some certainty” that Jesus was in fact buried by Joseph of Arimathea in a tomb and that three days later the tomb was found empty. 8

    When I discovered that Professor Ehrman had reversed himself on this question, my admiration for his honesty and scholarly objectivity shot up. Very few scholars, once they’ve gone into print on an issue, have the courage to re-think that issue and admit that they were wrong. Dr. Ehrman’s reversal of his opinion on these matters is testimony, not merely to the force of the evidence for these four facts, but also to his determination to follow the evidence wherever it leads. What this means is that my first contention is not an issue of disagreement in tonight’s debate. The whole debate will therefore turn upon Dr. Ehrman’s response to my second contention, namely:

    (II) The best explanation of these facts is that Jesus rose from the dead.

    This, of course, was the explanation that the eyewitnesses themselves gave, and I can think of no better explanation. The Resurrection Hypothesis passes all of the standard criteria for being the best explanation, such as explanatory power, explanatory scope, plausibility, and so forth. Of course, down through history various alternative naturalistic explanations of the resurrection have been proposed, such as the Conspiracy Hypothesis, the Apparent Death Hypothesis, the Hallucination Hypothesis, and so on. In the judgment of contemporary scholarship, however, none of these naturalistic hypotheses has managed to provide a plausible explanation of the facts. Nor does Dr. Ehrman support any of these naturalistic explanations of the facts.

    So why, we may ask, does Dr. Ehrman not accept the resurrection as the best explanation? The answer is simple: the resurrection is a miracle, and Dr. Ehrman denies the possibility of establishing a miracle. He writes, “Because historians can only establish what probably happened, and a miracle of this nature is highly improbable, the historian cannot say it probably occurred.” 9 This argument against the identification of a miracle is an old one, already refuted in the 18th century by such eminent scholars as William Paley and George Campbell, and is rejected as fallacious by most contemporary philosophers as well. Now I’ve promised to say more about this later; but for now, let me simply say that in the absence of some naturalistic explanation of the facts, Dr. Ehrman’s hesitancy about embracing the resurrection of Jesus as the best explanation is really quite unnecessary. Dr. Ehrman would be quite within his rational rights to embrace a miraculous explanation like the resurrection—and so would we.

    In conclusion, then, I think that there is good historical evidence for Jesus’ resurrection. Specifically, I’ve staked out two basic contentions for discussion tonight:

    I. There are four historical facts which must be explained by any adequate historical hypothesis: Jesus’ burial, the discovery of his empty tomb, his post-mortem appearances, and the very origin of the disciples’ belief in his resurrection, and

    II. The best explanation of these facts is that Jesus rose from the dead.

    Read more: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/is-t...ction-of-jesus-the-craig-ehrman#ixzz2yacIrrAP
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
    cptawesome likes this.
  20. Eventhorizon

    Eventhorizon Permanently relocated
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 19, 2013
    Threads:
    251
    Messages:
    16,553
    Featured Threads:
    31
    Likes Received:
    10,234
    Trophy Points:
    2,187
    Gender:
    Male
    MBTI:
    INTJ
    @LcuyJr Your facts arent facts. Its not considered history, its from a story. Remember, "The Greatest Story Ever Told?"

    Even history cant really be considered fact. History is written by the victors.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
Loading...

Share This Page