Zone1 The Best Evidence For The Resurrection

[ding]

The point being the distance in time. And the references in those later texts are a mere handful of scattered and somewhat ambiguous passages that some have suggested indicate a hostile and/or polemical allusions to early Christians and the figure of Jesus of Nazareth. However, scholars disagree as to whether those various passages are reliably describing a historical figure or are merely reflecting later Jewish responses to a burgeoning and rival religion.

None of that matters. The only thing that matters is when the belief in the divinity of Christ first occurred and why. It began with the apostles immediately after Jesus rose from the dead because they witnessed the resurrection first hand.

After Jesus' resurrection, the apostles, especially Peter, immediately began preaching the Gospel, notably starting with Peter's sermon on Pentecost (Acts 2), which led to thousands of conversions, with all the apostles dispersing to preach globally, including Paul (an apostle to the Gentiles) and Thomas (to India). They all became witnesses to the resurrection, traveling widely, establishing churches, and facing martyrdom to spread the message of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection.

Key Apostles & Their Post-Resurrection Ministry:

• Simon Peter: Preached the first sermon after Pentecost, leading thousands to Christ, and ministered to Jews and Gentiles, eventually martyred in Rome.
• John: A key leader alongside Peter and James, he also wrote significant parts of the New Testament.
• James, son of Zebedee: Part of Jesus' inner circle, he was martyred early.
• Matthew: The evangelist, he preached in various Mediterranean communities before his martyrdom in Ethiopia.
• Thomas (Doubting Thomas): Known for his missionary work in India, where he established churches and was martyred.
• James, brother of Jesus: Became the first bishop of Jerusalem and a major leader in the early church.
• Paul: Though not one of the original twelve, he became a prominent apostle, chosen to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, emphasizing the resurrection message.

The Apostolic Mission:

• Witnessing the Resurrection: Their primary role became bearing witness to Jesus' resurrection, as seen in Peter's powerful sermon in Acts.
• Dispersion: After Jesus' ascension, the apostles scattered to different parts of the world, fulfilling the command to preach the Gospel everywhere.
• Martyrdom: Most apostles, including Peter, Paul, and Matthew, faced persecution and were martyred for their faith, solidifying their commitment to the resurrected Christ.

In all Jesus appeared a dozen different times over forty days to more than 515 individuals. He appeared to women and to men, He appeared to individuals and to groups, He appeared indoors and outdoors, He appeared to people who were skeptics and people who were believers, He appeared to people who were hardhearted and people who were tenderhearted. And He talked with people, He ate with people, He even invited Thomas - the skeptic, the doubter - to put his finger in the nail holes in His hands, put his hand in the spear wound in His side - to see and touch the evidence himself. Then what was Thomas's reaction? To say, "My Lord and my God!" He became convinced by the evidence that Jesus had returned from the dead. And what does history tell us about Thomas? He spent the rest of his life declaring Jesus did return from the dead, He is the Son of God, even to the point of being put to death for his faith in southern India.

Here's a breakdown of some of the groups Jesus appeared to:

• Mary Magdalene: She was the first person to see the resurrected Jesus.
• Other women at the tomb: Other women who had come to the tomb also witnessed the risen Christ.
• Two disciples on the road to Emmaus: Jesus walked and talked with them, revealing himself later.
• The eleven apostles: They saw Jesus in the upper room and later on a mountain in Galilee.
• More than 500 brethren: One scripture passage mentions Jesus appearing to over 500 people at once.
• James, the brother of Jesus: This was a special appearance to his half-brother, who was initially a skeptic.
• Seven disciples on the Sea of Galilee: Jesus appeared to them while they were fishing.
• Apostle Paul: Paul himself claims to have seen the risen Christ.

All four canonical Gospels make a concerted and central effort to portray that Jesus rose from the dead, presenting it as a physical, historical, and transformative event. While the narratives differ in specific details—which scholars often interpret as complementary, independent eyewitness accounts rather than contradictions—they consistently agree on the core truth that the tomb was empty and Jesus appeared to his followers.

Key Evidence of a Concerted Effort

The Gospels employ several strategies to assert the reality of the resurrection:

• The Empty Tomb & Early Witnesses: All four Gospels record that women were the first witnesses to the empty tomb on Sunday morning, an detail that would have been unlikely to be fabricated in 1st-century Jewish culture where a woman's testimony was often not accepted.
• Physicality of the Risen Jesus: To combat early notions that Jesus only rose spiritually, the Gospels emphasize a physical resurrection. Luke 24:39-43 describes Jesus eating fish and showing his "flesh and bones," while John 20:24-29 features Jesus inviting Thomas to touch his wounds.
• Post-Resurrection Appearances: The Gospels record multiple appearances to individuals and groups, including Mary Magdalene, other women, the disciples in locked rooms, and on the road to Emmaus, designed to prove he was alive.
• The Great Commission: The Gospel narratives culminate in Jesus appearing to his disciples to authorize their mission, cementing the resurrection as the foundation of the Christian faith.

Thematic Differences in the Narratives

While the message is consistent, the authors emphasize different aspects:

• Matthew (28): Highlights the earthquake, the guarding of the tomb, and Jesus' appearance to the women.
• Mark (16): Originally ends abruptly with the empty tomb and fearful women, though the longer ending (16:9-20) adds later,, traditional post-resurrection appearances.
• Luke (24): Focuses on the road to Emmaus appearance and the physical, touchable nature of Jesus, emphasizing the fulfillment of Scripture.
• John (20-21): Provides detailed accounts of Mary Magdalene at the tomb and the doubting Thomas scene, placing strong emphasis on the personal, intimate nature of the interactions.

The consistent, albeit varied, reporting of these events suggests a deliberate effort by the gospel writers to affirm that the resurrection was not a myth or legend, but a concrete event.

 

[ding]

Word Salad

No. Science. Google is your friend.

 

[San Souci]

Insufficient evidence. The Bible has lots of people coming back from the dead but I've never seen it nor has anyone else I know.

My old Man did--Put a curse on me. I usta kid him about his Stomack getting big-- Now MINE is. He warned me! (hehe)

 

[Hypatia415]

Absolutely. So that when people like you question the unfairness, he can say I paid that debt already.

The idea of Jesus being a sacrifice to atone for the "sin" of humankind is Paul's idea.

You are welcome to provide verses from the Hebrew that refer to the requirement of a human sacrifice to atone for sin.

It is highly uncommon for so many men and women to see them that their contemporaries could not counter their accounts effectively. AND then, for that number of people to go on to die horrid deaths for their testimony.

Unlikely that the direct followers of Jesus suffered "horrible deaths for their testimony" as we have no idea what happened to any of them, apart from James, who was stoned to death on the order of the High Priest who appears to have acted ultra vires. See Josephus on that.

The stories of Christian martyrdom have been wildly exaggerated. In the first half of the first century the Jesus Movement was a small sect within Judaism.

Following the events of the First Jewish War however, anything with known Jewish antecedents was viewed with hostility and suspicion.

Why would anyone, let alone dozens of eyewitnesses?

We do not know that there were "dozens of eyewitnesses". We only have Paul's word on that.

 

[ding]

You cant handle the truth

Says the guy who dismisses science from renowned physicists because it challenges his perception of reality.

 

[ding]

It is not uncommon for the bereaved to imagine seeing their recently departed loved one in particular situations.

Supposition: an idea, belief, or hypothesis that is assumed to be true or taken for granted, often without concrete proof or conclusive evidence. It represents the act of guessing, conjecturing, or putting forward a premise for the sake of argument.

 

[GLASNOST]

I would also point out again that were the crimes of Jesus of Nazareth entirely religious he would have been stoned to death.

See my earlier reply to you.

 

[ding]

You have a very black and white viewpoint.

Sometimes.

If I'm not pro-Christianity I must be anti-Christianity?

No. My opinion is based upon many conversations with you on religion.

I don't think I've ever said anything about Christianity that Christians have not already said.

And has nothing to do with your bias against Christians which I believe is motivated by their political positions. Specifically, abortion, gay marriage, transgenderism, etc. and their general support of the Republican Party. Am I wrong?

 

[Hypatia415]

That some did not worship Jesus as God is a red herring.

No it is historically attested fact. Even today Christianity remains widely diverse, compare a strict Presbyterian or Pentecostalist with a Roman Catholic or a Greek Orthodox. While Christians share common ground they are also widely different in their beliefs and practises.

Thus was the case, and indeed even more so, in the early centuries of the Christian religion. If we look back to the mid second century CE there were various groups that called themselves Christians but their beliefs differed enormously. Some held that there were two different Gods, some believed the Hebrew texts were inspired by an evil deity, other Christians believed that God did not create the world and has never been involved with it. Some Christians maintained that Jesus never had a human body, or a human soul, or that he did not die, or that he was never born.

Irenaeus writing in the late second century CE was the ante-Nicene ECF particularly concerned with what he deemed to be "heresies". However, these heresies were simply beliefs held by different Christian groups.

Christianity began by the ones that did.

No. It was the ideas of the proto-Orthodox Christians that gained ascendancy and of course once the religion was granted toleration in the early fourth century those ideas became dominant and could be enforced via Imperial edicts.

 

[ding]

I would also point out again that were the crimes of Jesus of Nazareth entirely religious he would have been stoned to death.

The gospels addressed this. The Gospels explain that Jesus avoided being stoned for blasphemy because the Jewish authorities lacked legal authority to execute Him, and on occasions when angry mobs attempted stoning, Jesus simply eluded them. Ultimately, the religious leaders had to hand Jesus over to the Romans and change the charge from blasphemy to political treason to secure the death penalty. The Gospels address this historical and legal reality through several specific mechanisms. Under Roman occupation, the Jewish Sanhedrin did not possess the legal authority (jus gladii) to execute capital sentences without Roman approval. As the Jewish leaders explicitly stated to Pontius Pilate in John 18:31, "We have no right to execute anyone."

The idea of Jesus being a sacrifice to atone for the "sin" of humankind is Paul's idea.

The idea of Jesus being an atoning sacrifice for the sins of humankind was not Paul’s original invention. Historical, textual, and biblical evidence shows that this concept existed among the earliest followers of Jesus and was taught by Jesus himself before Paul ever converted to Christianity. While Paul heavily developed, systematized, and popularized this theology across the Greco-Roman world, he was passing down an existing tradition. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Evidence That Atonement Preceded Paul [1]

• Jesus’ Own Words: During the Last Supper, Jesus explicitly framed his upcoming death in sacrificial terms. In Matthew 26:28, he states, "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." He also referred to his life as a "ransom for many" (Mark 10:45). [1, 2, 3, 4]
• Paul’s Own Admissions: In 1 Corinthians 15:3, Paul explicitly states that he is passing on an inherited tradition: "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures." The phrasing "delivered" and "received" represents the standard rabbinic formula for passing along established historical tradition. [1, 2]
• Pre-Pauline Creeds: Biblical scholars have identified several "pre-Pauline creeds" embedded within Paul's letters. Passages like Romans 3:25—which describes Jesus as a "sacrifice of atonement"—use distinctive linguistic styles that show Paul was quoting hymns or statements already used by the earliest Jerusalem church. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• Agreement with Other Apostles: In Galatians 2:2, Paul notes that he met with the original leaders in Jerusalem (including Peter and James) to ensure his preaching aligned with theirs. If Paul had invented a radical new concept of a blood-atoning Messiah, it would have caused a massive rift with the original Jewish disciples, but the New Testament records general consensus on this core point. [1, 2]

The Jewish Context of Atonement
The concept did not emerge in a vacuum. The earliest Christians were Jewish and interpreted Jesus' death through the lens of the Hebrew Bible: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

• The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 (written centuries before Jesus) describes a prophetic figure who was "wounded for our transgressions" and bore "the sin of many." Early Christians immediately connected Jesus' crucifixion to this text. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
• The Sacrificial System: Levitical law relied heavily on animal sacrifices to ritually cleanse the community of sin. The earliest Christians viewed Jesus as the ultimate, permanent fulfillment of these temporary temple rituals. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
• Jewish Martyr Theology: Intertestamental Jewish writings, such as 2 and 4 Maccabees, already contained the theological idea that the deaths of righteous martyrs could serve as an "atoning sacrifice" or "ransom" to cleanse the sins of the nation. [1]

What Paul Actually Contributed
While Paul did not invent the concept, he vastly expanded its scope. The earliest Jerusalem church primarily viewed Jesus' atonement through a Jewish lens focused on the restoration of Israel. Paul took this localized concept and built a global theology, arguing that Jesus' sacrifice completely bypassed the need for the Mosaic Law, making salvation directly accessible to non-Jewish Gentiles worldwide. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

 

[ding]

You are welcome to provide verses from the Hebrew that refer to the requirement of a human sacrifice to atone for sin.

Isaiah 53

 

[ding]

No it is historically attested fact. Even today Christianity remains widely diverse, compare a strict Presbyterian or Pentecostalist with a Roman Catholic or a Greek Orthodox. While Christians share common ground they are also widely different in their beliefs and practises.

Thus was the case, and indeed even more so, in the early centuries of the Christian religion. If we look back to the mid second century CE there were various groups that called themselves Christians but their beliefs differed enormously. Some held that there were two different Gods, some believed the Hebrew texts were inspired by an evil deity, other Christians believed that God did not create the world and has never been involved with it. Some Christians maintained that Jesus never had a human body, or a human soul, or that he did not die, or that he was never born.

Irenaeus writing in the late second century CE was the ante-Nicene ECF particularly concerned with what he deemed to be "heresies". However, these heresies were simply beliefs held by different Christian groups.


No. It was the ideas of the proto-Orthodox Christians that gained ascendancy and of course once the religion was granted toleration in the early fourth century those ideas became dominant and could be enforced via Imperial edicts.

Addressed here.

 

[alang1216]

And has nothing to do with your bias against Christians which I believe is motivated by their political positions. Specifically, abortion, gay marriage, transgenderism, etc. and their general support of the Republican Party. Am I wrong?

Christians are far from homogeneous politically, theologically, or socially. You have a very black and white viewpoint, either you are Christian and believe the same as every other Christian, or you are anti-Christian.

Got any examples of my 'bias' against Christians or is that just an easy way to dismiss my values?

 

[Bad Bob]

Insufficient evidence. The Bible has lots of people coming back from the dead but I've never seen it nor has anyone else I know.

Medical science has improved over the past few centuries. Before embalming...which really makes sure a person is D-E-A-D, coffins of rich people had a little window and a bell incase they woke up from a coma.
Lazarus was probably in a coma.

What many ancient peoples considered "miracles" are often just beating the odds. In WWII, a German fighter slammed into the fuselage of a B-17. The tailgunner felt the hit, and was thrown about his gun position as the plane spiraled out of control when he felt the plane right itself and landed in a forest. Excited to great his crewmates, he exited the tailgunner compartment only to see the rest of the plane was missing. Most died in the crash while the tail section "miraculously" landed itself. Miracle or just beating the odds?

Eugene Moran: WW2 Tail Gunner Who Fell to Earth & Survived

Moran was flying as tail gunner in a B-17, serial 42-30359, recorded under the nickname “Rikki Tikki Tavi”, from RAF Snetterton Heath

controltowers.co.uk

Consider the Air India crash which killed 241 people with one survivor. Miracle or just beating the odds?

Air India Flight 171 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

People "coming back from the dead" appear to be miracles, but are most likely someone beating the odds and surviving an injury or a coma.

 

[Hypatia415]

None of that matters.

Yes it does matter given that you have cited the Babylonian Talmud as proof of your beliefs.

The only thing that matters is when the belief in the divinity of Christ first occurred and why

The divinity of the Christ or Son was not a foregone conclusion in the early years, as my previous post illustrated.

While by the third century most believed him to be a divine or semi-divine figure there remained numerous questions about the extent of his divinity and of his humanity.

What was the nature of Jesus' divinity while he was on earth?
Was it somehow suspended at the moment of birth to be taken up again post Resurrection?
Or did it persist throughout his ministry on earth?
Could he have a divine soul yet inhabit a human body?
Did Mary give birth to a god or a man?
Did he switch back and forth from divine when performing miracles back to human when or eating and drinking?
What died on the cross?
Can God be killed?
If Jesus did not suffer what was the purpose of the crucifixion?

All the above and much much more was thrashed out in Greek with all the attendant nuances that may be found in that language.

 

[ding]

Christians are far from homogeneous politically, theologically, or socially.

I know.

You have a very black and white viewpoint, either you are Christian and believe the same as every other Christian, or you are anti-Christian.

No. I butt heads with lots of Christians here... sometimes. I even oppose the Catholic Church... sometimes. I side with God over religion... always. I'm all about truth and reality because God is truth and reality. So if you put forth well thought out logical arguments in a methodical and systematic manner, I'm more than happy to change my mind because then I have learned something new that is true.

Got any examples of my 'bias' against Christians or is that just an easy way to dismiss my values?

I'm not dismissing your values. I'm making an observation and stating my opinion. So, no. I don't have any examples. It's my intuition which is usually right but not always.

 

[ding]

Yes it does matter given that you have cited the Babylonian Talmud as proof of your beliefs.

The divinity of the Christ or Son was not a foregone conclusion in the early years, as my previous post illustrated.

While by the third century most believed him to be a divine or semi-divine figure there remained numerous questions about the extent of his divinity and of his humanity.

What was the nature of Jesus' divinity while he was on earth?
Was it somehow suspended at the moment of birth to be taken up again post Resurrection?
Or did it persist throughout his ministry on earth?
Could he have a divine soul yet inhabit a human body?
Did Mary give birth to a god or a man?
Did he switch back and forth from divine when performing miracles back to human when or eating and drinking?
What died on the cross?
Can God be killed?
If Jesus did not suffer what was the purpose of the crucifixion?

All the above and much much more was thrashed out in Greek with all the attendant nuances that may be found in that language.

You aren't getting it. Christianity didn't begin later. Christianity began immediately after Christ rose from the dead. If Christianity began later, you'd be able to walk me through how it began and why. Just like I have been able to walk you through how Christianity began and why.

And by Christianity, I mean to say worshipping Jesus as God because he rose from the dead and did a whole bunch of other things and said a whole bunch of other things.

 

[toobfreak]

It's pretty simple actually. I REALLY want to see the atheists response to this question.

Well, I do not qualify as an atheist by any measure, still, the report of Jesus missing after reopening the cave where his body was stored (not sure why it wasn't buried nor why they put it there and went back later to check on it) is purely anecdotal. I mean, other than it being claimed in one book of the Bible, there is no objective test or independent report of verification I know of to lend further weight to the story.

Also, if Jesus was spiritual as he surely was, then why was his body also missing? After the crucifixion, Jesus' spirit was separated from his body. So, did it come back to his body? And if he took the body of Christ, what did he do with it? Where did it go? Why was it never discovered? Did his body somehow transcend ordinary matter and transport to Heaven along with his soul?

Lastly, the fact that they took the extraordinary action of just not burying Christ after his death and leaving his body in the cave, then going back to reopen it is suspicious on the surface as it is not customary to do that, and on the surface, appears to be done as a means and excuse to create the Resurrection story as, had they not done that, had they just buried him outright as was customary to do, there would be no evidence, no way to have noted the body missing nor discovered the stains on the shroud which covered the body, so, in that vein, their putting his body in that cave then going back to check on it seems conveniently suspicious on those grounds.

Now, you can disagree or argue the point, I'm just telling you these would be the arguments of any atheist logician-skeptic, and their grounds to dismiss the resurrection as proof of his holiness.

 

[BreezeWood]

Absolutely. So that when people like you question the unfairness, he can say I paid that debt already.

what unfairness would that be than the immaturity to wear diapers ...

... mary were they being deceived by what you worship.

jesus followed in their footsteps, did not fear moses or judaism as their mother guided them in repudiation of judaism not included in 4th century christianity - or the entire episode is a charade of deception culminating in the christian bible the heavens would not ascribed to per their exemplar jesus.

 

[Lockback]

You cant handle the truth

The fact that you can't handle the Shroud of Turin is proof the truth escapes you.