Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jesus is right here man, we die daily that Jesus can live within us, and all those who love others and change from their evil ways are proof of Jesus living in them.
Valid question.
He did appear to over 500, remember...I can't imagine they were all 'disciples'...some curious, some dragged there by a friend, in other words, some doubters...1 Cor 15:6
There could be a case for ...he only had 40 days...why waste time with unbelievers...
strengthen the ones who needed strength? I dunno. I'm no Christian theologian.
The problem with the "appeared to over 500" story, is that it is brought to you by a guy, Paul, who was not present for the event in question. Paul did not become a convert until years after Jesus was executed, and was not present for ANY of the events detailed in the Gospels. Including post execution "appearance" claims. Paul says that Jesus appeared to "above 500" of his followers on one particular occasion. But Paul was not there personally. Can you think of any reason to be skeptical of a claim of 500 individuals communing with a man who had died, provided by a guy who wasn't there, given that NONE of the supposed 500 left any such accounts themselves?
The cross of Jesus Christ , Jesus raised from the dead , and then the promise fulfilled of Pentecost gift of the Holy Spirit , ...So the only one of these that Christians experience and have a witness is the Pentecost gift of Holy Spirit ....... Were the cross of Christ could be witnessed as God only judgment for sin which God gives His grace to the redeemed ....... Were Jesus raised from the dead or this empty tomb is the hope of Christ were faith can be exercised as the miracles of Father God , so to believe is to believe also that Jesus said He will raise up His people at the last day ......
This is all well and good if one has decided that being gullible and naive is a virtue. Not everyone is inclined to receive the story of a corpse coming back to life and flying away entirely on faith, however. For those NOT inclined to to be resolutely wide-eyed and innocent, the story of a corpse coming back to life and subsequently flying away seems unrealistic to the point of being silly. And of course if the corpse DID NOT come back and fly away, then everything else you have stated above is totally meaningless.
Are there firm reasons for you to believe as you do that are not essentially based on, "well that's what I heard?"
Right off the bat the OP shows how accurate Bible critics are:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr5150
Paul says in Romans 6:5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection.
Paul knew about the empty tomb. Resurrection = empty tomb.
Paul believed in the resurrection of Jesus, this is true. But Paul seems to have known nothing of Joseph's empty tomb. Is the story of Joseph's empty tomb crucial to Christian doctrine? And must the answer for the reason that the tomb was empty be a supernatural one? If the reason that the tomb was empty can be explained for perfectly natural reasons, does that change anything?
Last edited by Tired of the Nonsense; 05-30-2017 at 03:24 PM..
The problem with the "appeared to over 500" story, is that it is brought to you by a guy, Paul, who was not present for the event in question. Paul did not become a convert until years after Jesus was executed, and was not present for ANY of the events detailed in the Gospels. Including post execution "appearance" claims. Paul says that Jesus appeared to "above 500" of his followers on one particular occasion. But Paul was not there personally. Can you think of any reason to be skeptical of a claim of 500 individuals communing with a man who had died, provided by a guy who wasn't there, given that NONE of the supposed 500 left any such accounts themselves?
Oh....good point...however, someone there could have left an account...but we'll never see it!
You don't know how bad my coffee is and I don't use Jam -I toast fruit bread slathered with salted butter to bring out the tang. I rather do not fall for the Unsalted product which somehow always seems to cost more..
Anyhoo, while I'd appreciate a verse ref to check the context (with Paul, checking the context - often half the chapter -is needful. But with Jesus he is talking about receiving holiness or divine glory through Faith which will save them all when, in the Last Days, the bodily resurrection will happen with descending Messiah, clouds, trumpet, opening graves etc.
We seem to be in potential agreement that this get up and walk resurrection is not what Paul is talking about with the spiritual transformation of faith which was supposed to make his converts die to sin and turn them all into plaster saints. When in fact (he was appalled to discover) it just made they feel they could do what they liked. And plenty of it
So Paul - I love this bit and it is the thing that can be guaranteed to bounce off the mental screen of the faithful - modified his original belief (not the only time he did that) of conversion to Faith making one forever saved, to arguing that too much sinning can lose you that salvation - even if you still believe (1).
Works in addition to faith, you see. Anyway that shows that it is all about the condition of the spirit, not about something that was resurrected as distinct from the body, but something that would enable the resurrected bod + spirit to be one of the fortunate elect and not one of the rejected (2).
Of course, this still leaves room for a solid Jesus having risen, but the rest of Paul rather implies the idea of a messianic (Adam) spirit that came down to inhabit a suitable messiah (line of David, for example). And it was the spirit that went back to heaven and would descend again. Either to rule as a spirit (after all God in the Temple sanctuary was a spirit, not a solid body) or to inhabit another messianic body. It's not quite clear, but then Paul did suffer from ad hocdness.
Where this gets us is we possibly agree that the Jesus resurrection Paul believed and which for sure he got from the disciples (even though he made sure he got his own vision and message from the Jesus-in -his -head - I Cor.12.2-4-, not from them) was of a risen spirit rather than a solid bod.in heaven.
Thus he doesn't have to know or believe in a risen solid body Jesus and neither do they, and since he never refers to the empty tomb (or not that I can recall) or any evidence of the body having got up and walked, I think we might be thinking on he same lines of Paul's resurrection -talk not doing a thing to support the empty tomb or a solid body resurrection, but rather suggesting that - if so -the disciples didn't know of or believe any such thing, and the appearances Paul refers to (I Cor15 3 -8) are all appearances in the head and not the ones in the gospels - which n.b. do not match the appearances related by Paul.
Which brings us back to that very cornerstone empty tomb. While all the FIVE gospels (3) agree on it, that makes it only original Christian Gospel story. It does not make it true. Though it could be.
I am happy o leave you o a metaphorical reading. For me:
(a) the circumsantian accounts in the gospels convince me that the writers intended it to be taken as literal
(b) in my Theist = English dictionary, "Metaphorical" translates as "Not true"
But perhaps a discussion is best left until later of why - if it is true - it is left hanging as though having ended with a big hint that the actual body had risen (as a proof that the followers would be raised in their bodies, too) was a bi lame, but the writer had neither the story nor the cojones to make one up at that time to show Jesus walking around.
The synoptics (not found in John - a tacit debunking of that addition) added (4) an angel saying that Jesus' solid body had gone back to Galilee where they would see him. And they leave it there; safe enough. If it was true, you'd expect some story of their going back to Galilee where they saw him.
Well, Matthew rectified that omission with as bald a summary with as fabricated an exhortation as you could wish at 28.14, which story is totally contradicted (as usual ) by Luke who alters the angelic message (24.6) from going to Galilee to what he said in Galilee, because (having Paul's letters to hand) he doesn't want the disciples to go to Galilee at all, but to stay in Jerusalem founding the Community of the elect. John does have a return to Galilee as required but it is quite different from Matthew's and is (I postulate) based on a couple of 'floating stories' doing the rounds in his day (the miraculous draft of fish and Jesus had a bite to eat, and Jesus appeared and showed his war wounds as proof.) Anyhoo, you see the hypothesis of the revision of the original story to fiddle in an increasingly circumstantial solid body resurrection, added to an original risen spirit -resurrection.
Bu, as i said, discussion of that is best left for another time.
(1) so, believers, rest easy, you won't have to banquet at God's table siting next to Hitler after all. That should be worth a rep or two?
(2) whether than meant gentiles slaving in the Hebrews' cotton -fields or simply being slung onto a blazing rubbish -heap.
(3) Peter
" 50 Now early on the Lord's day Mary Magdalene, a disciple of the Lord-which, being afraid because of the Jews, for they were inflamed with anger, had not performed at the sepulchre of the Lord those things which women are accustomed to do unto them that die and are 51 beloved of them-took with her the women her friends and 52 came unto the tomb where he was laid. And they feared lest the Jews should see them, and said: Even if we were not able to weep and lament him on that day whereon he was 53 crucified, yet let us now do so at his tomb. But who will roll away for us the stone also that is set upon the door of the tomb, that we may enter in and sit beside him and perform 54 that which is due? for the stone was great, and we fear lest any man see us. And if we cannot do so, yet let us cast down at the door these things which we bring for a memorial of him, and we will weep and lament until we come unto our house. XIII. 55 And they went and found the sepulchre open : and they drew near and looked in there, and saw there a young man sitting in the midst of the sepulchre, of a fair countenance and clad in very bright raiment, which said unto them: 56 Wherefore are ye come? whom seek ye? not him that was crucified? He is risen and is departed; but if ye believe it not, look in and see the place where he lay, that he is not here: for he is risen and is departed thither whence he was sent. 57 Then the women were affrighted and fled."
(4) that is the original synoptic edition which the three (separately) adapted in their own ways.
Oh, yeah....fruit bread and butter....NOW we're talking. I make pumpkin with English walnuts, banana with black walnuts, caramel apple with pecans, and strawberry and blueberry with almonds, in season. People are not as fond of the blueberry, because I process them, and so the batter is slightly grey looking from the blue juice color, but oh, well, once you get past that....it's heavenly, lol....
Ok to the verse addition, will get time to do that eventually....anyway, until then, let me just add that in Paul's Damascus road experience, it says he saw NO MAN (not even one with the marks), yet the LIGHT rebuked him for persecuting HIS BODY.
Also, remember that the two men didn't recognize who was speaking to them either, UNTIL their hearts BURNED WITH FIRE within them. Fire produces two things; heat and LIGHT. I propose the difference between the two was that Paul was not a believer yet, therefore did not have that light WITHIN, and the other two were, and so perceived that light within, and not without. Point being, the LIGHT, not a physical body, was what made the difference in perception, and what Paul is talking about re a resurrection while still in the body.
Note also it's not THEIR resurrection (the 2 men) then, per se, but rather HIS, IN THEM, and then they didn't perceive Him as flesh anymore. So how is this any different from what Paul admonished, "Hereafter we'll not know Him after the flesh, but after the Spirit?"
Thanks for considering these things with me, without hostility. Peace
Oh....good point...however, someone there could have left an account...but we'll never see it!
Someone could have written an account that said that the followers of Jesus planned to relocate the body of Jesus and then spread the rumor that he had risen from the dead. And in fact some DID write just such an account.
Matthew 27:
[62] Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,
[63] Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
[64] Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.
The tomb proved to be empty. Six weeks later his disciples began spreading the rumor that Jesus had arisen from the dead.
Oh....good point...however, someone there could have left an account...but we'll never see it!
Could'a, Would'a, Should'a sort of thing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Proven? By whom? By some internet guy?
) by Luke who alters the angelic message (24.6) from going to Galilee to what he said in Galilee, because (having Paul's letters to hand) he doesn't want the disciples to go to Galilee at all, but to stay in Jerusalem founding the Community of the elect. John does have a return to Galilee as required but it is quite different from Matthew's and is (I postulate) based on a couple of 'floating stories' doing the rounds in his day (the miraculous draft of fish and Jesus had a bite to eat, and Jesus appeared and showed his war wounds as proof.) Anyhoo, you see the hypothesis of the revision of the original story to fiddle in an increasingly circumstantial solid body resurrection, added to an original risen spirit -resurrection. 
I make pumpkin with English walnuts, banana with black walnuts, caramel apple with pecans, and strawberry and blueberry with almonds, in season. People are not as fond of the blueberry, because I process them, and so the batter is slightly grey looking from the blue juice color, but oh, well, once you get past that....it's heavenly, lol....
Peace
