- + New Debate
- Debate News
- About
- Debra AI More
frame
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.
Communities
- 9K All Communities
- 276 Technology
- 2K Politics
- 790 United States
- 635 Global
- 69 Immigration
- 2.1K Religion
- 282 TV SHOWS
- 66 Movies
- 94 History
- 50 Work Place
- 507 Philosophy
- 425 Science
- 66 Earth Science
- 17 Books
- 106 Economy
- 35 Investments
- 17 Europe
- 13 Tea
- 9 Coffee
- 61 Sports
- 47 Products
- 291 News
- 13 Airplanes
- 36 Cars
- 887 General
- 10 Mafia Games
- 24 Art And Design
- 21 Space
- 54 Military
- 3 Premium Member
DEBATE NEWS BREAKING NEWS
U.S. farm workforce threatened by Trump's deportation plan
About 42% of U.S. farm workers are undocumented, and Trump's plan to deport millions of migrants could uproot the industry's...
In this Debate
Is there good evidence for the resurrection of Jesus?
Debate Information
I think there is good evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. Even atheistic historians such as Bart Ehrman will acknowledge that he believes that the apostles and other believers genuinely believed that thead seen Jesus resurrected. What is some of the evidence?
1. Early attestation from a Christian Creed (1 Corinthians 15:3-7).
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. (1 Corinthians 15:3-7 ESV)
Professor James Gunn says that he is confident that the creed dates to no later than 18 months after the resurrection of Jesus.
"Despite uncertainties about the extent of tradition which Paul received, there is no reason to doubt that this information was communicated to Paul as part of his introductory catechesis. He would have needed to be informed of precedents in order to make sense of what had happened to him. When he says, ‘I handed on (paredoka) to you as of first importance (en protois) what I also received (parelabon)’, he assuredly does not imply that the tradition became important to him only at some subsequent date. More likely he indicates the importance of the tradition to himself from the start; that was why he made sure to pass it on to the Corinthians when they first believed (15.1-2). This tradition, we can be entirely confident, was formulated as tradition within months of Jesus' death. [Jesus Remembered (Eerdmans, 2003) 854-55.]
The creed says Jesus was raised on the 3rd day, same as the gospels, and it identifies witnesses of his resurrection such as Cephas (Peter), James, and the 12 apostles. That early of a historical record to the actual event is rare in antiquity. For perspective:
1. Early attestation from a Christian Creed (1 Corinthians 15:3-7).
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. (1 Corinthians 15:3-7 ESV)
Professor James Gunn says that he is confident that the creed dates to no later than 18 months after the resurrection of Jesus.
"Despite uncertainties about the extent of tradition which Paul received, there is no reason to doubt that this information was communicated to Paul as part of his introductory catechesis. He would have needed to be informed of precedents in order to make sense of what had happened to him. When he says, ‘I handed on (paredoka) to you as of first importance (en protois) what I also received (parelabon)’, he assuredly does not imply that the tradition became important to him only at some subsequent date. More likely he indicates the importance of the tradition to himself from the start; that was why he made sure to pass it on to the Corinthians when they first believed (15.1-2). This tradition, we can be entirely confident, was formulated as tradition within months of Jesus' death. [Jesus Remembered (Eerdmans, 2003) 854-55.]
The creed says Jesus was raised on the 3rd day, same as the gospels, and it identifies witnesses of his resurrection such as Cephas (Peter), James, and the 12 apostles. That early of a historical record to the actual event is rare in antiquity. For perspective:
Such an early date of confirmation for a historical event is rare in antiquity. For comparison:
- Plutarch- 'Life of Caesar' Written about 150 years after Caesar's death.
- Suetonius' 'he Twelve Caesars": Composed about 160 years after Caesar's assassination.
- Appian's "Civil Wars": Written approximately 170-180 years after the events it describes.
- Cassius Dio's "Roman History": Compiled about 250 years after Caesar's time.
All of these sources are considered generally reliable - but notice how much closer to the event the evidence for Jesus' resurrection is.
2. Multiple eye witnesses
Matthew, Peter, James, Jude, and John wrote gospels or epistles and mention Jesus' resurrection. Further, books such as Mark, whom Peter is said to have dictated to Mark what to write, and Luke, who states emphatically that he interviewed eye witnesses, also identify the same account.
Paul confirms that Peter, James, and John all saw the resurrection and believed in it in Galatians 2;1-10. So, Paul specifically asked them about the resurrection and they said that Paul was correct in what he had heard, that Jesus had physically bodily resurrected the 3rd day after his crucifixion.
In addition to these direct eye witnesses, there are several attestations from people who heard the apostles talk about the resurrection: Evidence from early Christians and Church Fathers supports the claim that the apostles
Church Fathers such as Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Papias all have said that the apostles that they knew claimed to see Jesus physically resurrected.
3. Enemy supporting evidence
One wouldn't think that non-Christian or enemy sources would provide supporting evidence of the resurrection, but that is exactly what we find.
Thallus (52AD) - confirms an eclipse of the sun at the time of Jesus' crucifixion. Tacitus (56-120AD) confirms that Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate and that a 'mischievous superstition' had broken out among Christians about Christ. Phlegon (80-140AD) said of Jesus resurrection: “Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59). He, a non-Christian acknowledged that Jesus arose from the dead and showed others where the nails had pierced him. Pliny the Younger (61-113AD) acknowledged that Christians had switched to observing Sunday as a day of worship and that they sang to Jesus as to God. Suetonius (69-140AD) claimed that Nero punished Christians because of "a new and
So do you think the evidence for the resurrection is credible or not?
2. Multiple eye witnesses
Matthew, Peter, James, Jude, and John wrote gospels or epistles and mention Jesus' resurrection. Further, books such as Mark, whom Peter is said to have dictated to Mark what to write, and Luke, who states emphatically that he interviewed eye witnesses, also identify the same account.
Paul confirms that Peter, James, and John all saw the resurrection and believed in it in Galatians 2;1-10. So, Paul specifically asked them about the resurrection and they said that Paul was correct in what he had heard, that Jesus had physically bodily resurrected the 3rd day after his crucifixion.
In addition to these direct eye witnesses, there are several attestations from people who heard the apostles talk about the resurrection: Evidence from early Christians and Church Fathers supports the claim that the apostles
witnessed the resurrected Jesus Christ.
Acts of the Apostles
- Peter, in his sermon on Pentecost, states: "This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses" (Acts 2:32). This declaration emphasizes the collective testimony of the apostles regarding the resurrection.
Church Fathers such as Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Papias all have said that the apostles that they knew claimed to see Jesus physically resurrected.
3. Enemy supporting evidence
One wouldn't think that non-Christian or enemy sources would provide supporting evidence of the resurrection, but that is exactly what we find.
Thallus (52AD) - confirms an eclipse of the sun at the time of Jesus' crucifixion. Tacitus (56-120AD) confirms that Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate and that a 'mischievous superstition' had broken out among Christians about Christ. Phlegon (80-140AD) said of Jesus resurrection: “Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59). He, a non-Christian acknowledged that Jesus arose from the dead and showed others where the nails had pierced him. Pliny the Younger (61-113AD) acknowledged that Christians had switched to observing Sunday as a day of worship and that they sang to Jesus as to God. Suetonius (69-140AD) claimed that Nero punished Christians because of "a new and
mischievous religious belief.” Lucian of Samosata: (115-200 A.D.) says that Jesus was crucified, and that his followers believe that they too are immortal.
Josephus (c. 93-94 AD)
Non-redacted version from Arabic manuscript (This is not the Christianized version)
"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders."
4. The transformed lives of the apostles
The apostles immediately broke from several Jewish traditions. They worshiped on a different day, they stopped keeping kosher laws. They began to teach and preach and spread throughout the known world. This was a radical change in behavior that is not explainable if Jesus did not rise from the dead. Several of the apostles were martyred for their faith such as James, Peter, and Paul. They endured persecution from Jewish people as well as the Roman government. It is hard to explain their behavior if they did not genuinely believe in Jesus death and resurrection.
5. The conversion of Paul
Paul was a scholar of the Jewish law and had been someone who tracked down Christians and killed them. For him to convert to Christianity in such a powerful and dramatic fashion suggests that the evidence was compelling to him. Paul was beaten, stoned, arrested, and ultimately beheaded for his belief in the resurrection. Such a radical change for someone so opposed to Christianity initially is not easily explained, unless the evidence Paul saw as convincing to him.
6. The empty tomb
If the tomb of Jesus was not empty, the easiest way of stopping the movement would have been to drag the body through the street.
7. The specificity of the resurrection details.
Throughout the story of Jesus resurrection, specific eye witnesses are named. Jewish and Roman officials are named. Members of the Jewish Sanhedrin are named such as Joseph of Arimaethea and Nicodemus. The person who carried Jesus' cross is named. And a number of women are named as eye witnesses of the resurrection
8. Embarrassing details
If someone is creating a fake story, especially in that time period, they would have omitted that Jesus was crucified. This was considered a humiliating criminal like way to die. They would not have mentioned that the first witnesses were women because in that culture, women were not seen as reliable witnesses. Peter would not have wanted his denial of Jesus included, and the apostles would not have wanted people to know that they had run away when soldiers had come to the garden. These details give credence to the story and suggest that Jesus actually rose from the dead.
4. The transformed lives of the apostles
The apostles immediately broke from several Jewish traditions. They worshiped on a different day, they stopped keeping kosher laws. They began to teach and preach and spread throughout the known world. This was a radical change in behavior that is not explainable if Jesus did not rise from the dead. Several of the apostles were martyred for their faith such as James, Peter, and Paul. They endured persecution from Jewish people as well as the Roman government. It is hard to explain their behavior if they did not genuinely believe in Jesus death and resurrection.
5. The conversion of Paul
Paul was a scholar of the Jewish law and had been someone who tracked down Christians and killed them. For him to convert to Christianity in such a powerful and dramatic fashion suggests that the evidence was compelling to him. Paul was beaten, stoned, arrested, and ultimately beheaded for his belief in the resurrection. Such a radical change for someone so opposed to Christianity initially is not easily explained, unless the evidence Paul saw as convincing to him.
6. The empty tomb
If the tomb of Jesus was not empty, the easiest way of stopping the movement would have been to drag the body through the street.
7. The specificity of the resurrection details.
Throughout the story of Jesus resurrection, specific eye witnesses are named. Jewish and Roman officials are named. Members of the Jewish Sanhedrin are named such as Joseph of Arimaethea and Nicodemus. The person who carried Jesus' cross is named. And a number of women are named as eye witnesses of the resurrection
8. Embarrassing details
If someone is creating a fake story, especially in that time period, they would have omitted that Jesus was crucified. This was considered a humiliating criminal like way to die. They would not have mentioned that the first witnesses were women because in that culture, women were not seen as reliable witnesses. Peter would not have wanted his denial of Jesus included, and the apostles would not have wanted people to know that they had run away when soldiers had come to the garden. These details give credence to the story and suggest that Jesus actually rose from the dead.
So do you think the evidence for the resurrection is credible or not?
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
Not.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Human myths do not disprove God.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Sources for Jesus:
Now I could have easily have divided up some of those sources such as the 7 epistles of Ignatius or the epistles of Paul and counted each one, and gotten a lot higher number. For Tiberius Caesar here is the list of sources I found for him, for comparison:
That's all I could find. My AI says that some more were found and that the number is probably in the mid-teens. So, to be generous, let's say 20 sources mention Tiberius Caesar within 150 years of his death. So, from a pure numbers perspective, there is more evidence that Jesus lived than the most famous man of that time lived. just sayin
Historians very rarely knew their subject. Tactius wrote about Tiberius Caesar too, but never met him. In fact, none of the historians who wrote about Tiberius Caesar knew him. If you want to reduce the number of references to only those who actually knew the guy, then Tiberius has zero references, well, 1 possible one, his death announcement - but it isn't certain if the guy who wrote it knew Tiberius Caesar. So, Jesus has a lot more sources who actually met him writing about him, than the most famous person of his day had writing about him.
While Tiberius mentions Nerthus, he doesn't provide any information that confirms her existence. Tacitus confirms that Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate. That's not myth, but history.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Human myths do not prove god.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Paul stressed that Jesus was a real historical person. If the resurrection was not real then Christianity would be falsified.
Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. 15 We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied. 20 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead - 1 Corinthians 15:12-20 ESV
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
There is no historical records of Christ.
Nonsense.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
People today confuse their wives with their twin sisters, but 2,000 years ago everyone could tell Jesus in the crowd without having seen the guy before... please.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
What a dumb pronouncement by Paul. By your logic we have evidence Ra was real. If his unification with Horus the sky god was not real then Egyptian pantheons would be falsified. But since you can't prove they didn't unite Ra must be the one true god. LOL Fairytales are silly no matter how badly you wish they weren't.
If there was a resurrection of the dead there would be tangible physical evidence from the blood lines of those who according to bible walked through town after coming out of their graves when Jesus supposedly did. If there was a race of giants formed when the angels fu*cked human women dna evidence of the Nephilim would be present demonstrating the presence of angelic beings, but you have no such evidence. If the earth were held in place by pillars there would be evidence of the pillars and the earth wouldn't be moving and quite rapidly I might add. If zombie Jesus was alive and his spirit whispering in your ear in a mystical relationship you would be able to produce him and would have a truthful reason why it whispers different thing to different Christians and denominations that contradict what it says to each?
So disappointing how I patiently taught you what evidence was yet you remain stagnant in a miserable self willed stupendous state of ignorance because of some silly phobia of a mythical hell.
Unlike Jesus, Harry Potter is discussed as a 'real person' and has more manuscripts that are originals. Not translations from transliterations, revised publications to reflect the contemporary culture of the times, and only existing in the form of copies of copies of copies of copies... LOL there is no reason accept your elf god as true or evidence of your god which is why you haven't produced any. Sure you have internet stories though as you've admitted in the past that if it's on the internet and it supports your narrative it must be true, right? I'm asking, not insulting.
I'm just too happy, healthy, successful and contented by reality to aimlessly follow indoctrination and be a dumb theist sheepishly trying to explain why their elf book of "truth" claims the sun was created after the earth was already covered with plants.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
That some people from 2,000 years ago made a bunch of claims about something that violates basic principles of physics and biology is evidence of nothing more than that.
Science has never disproven anything in the Bible.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Science has never disproven anything in the Bible.
Fact: The Earth moves around the sun at a speed of approximately 67,000 miles per hour (or 107,000 kilometers per hour). https://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/ask/60-Why-don-t-we-feel-Earth-move-
Science disproved the earth is held in place by pillars and it isn't remaining in place as the bible says...
Job 9:6:
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Science has disproven Biblical analogies only if those analogies were never meant to be anologies.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
It is not God's job to prove Himself or prove He created the universe instead of some other ignorant entity with no power or ability.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
ChatGPT
Scholars widely accept the idea that Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure due to the convergence of evidence from multiple independent sources and the general principles of historical investigation. However, the resurrection is a theological claim with a fundamentally different nature, and that’s why it generates more division. Here’s a breakdown of the reasoning:
Why Scholars Accept Jesus as a Historical Person
Independent Historical Sources: Accounts of Jesus appear in various sources, including non-Christian writers such as Tacitus and Josephus, and early Christian writings like the Gospels and Paul’s letters. The consistency of his mention in multiple, independent texts supports his historicity.
Criterion of Embarrassment: Details like Jesus being crucified—a method of execution reserved for criminals and considered shameful in Roman times—are unlikely to have been invented by his followers, strengthening the case for his historical reality.
Archaeological and Social Context: The descriptions of 1st-century Judea in the Gospels align with what historians know about the time and place, lending credibility to the context in which Jesus is placed.
Consensus Among Scholars: While not unanimous, the vast majority of historians and scholars of antiquity (including secular ones) agree that Jesus existed, even if they disagree on theological interpretations.
Why Scholars are Divided on the Resurrection
Nature of the Claim: The resurrection is a supernatural event, and historians, operating within the constraints of methodological naturalism, can only evaluate historical claims based on evidence of what typically happens. The resurrection, by definition, is not typical and cannot be verified by historical methods.
Subjectivity of Evidence: The primary evidence for the resurrection comes from the testimony of Jesus' followers, as recorded in the New Testament. Critics argue that such evidence reflects theological conviction rather than dispassionate observation.
Diverging Worldviews: Belief in the resurrection often depends on prior philosophical or theological commitments. Those with a naturalistic worldview are less likely to accept miraculous claims, while those with a theistic or Christian perspective may find the resurrection plausible or even necessary.
Interpretation of Experiences: Scholars acknowledge that Jesus' followers experienced something that led them to believe he had risen. However, interpretations vary:
Historical Methodology vs. Faith: Historical methods rely on probability and evidence, while the resurrection claim is a matter of faith and theology, making it difficult to evaluate within the same framework used for other historical events.
Conclusion
The general agreement about Jesus' historicity stems from standard historical evidence and methodology. However, the resurrection is a theological claim that transcends the tools and assumptions of historical analysis, leading to division among scholars based on their approach to evidence, philosophical outlook, and the limits of historical inquiry.
End ChatGPT
No evidence of a guy named Jesus being resurrected. Sorry.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
No evidence of a guy named Jesus being resurrected. Sorry.
The truth is there is indeed evidence, it is just you choose to ignore or dismiss it.
Did the apostle's believe Jesus was resurrected. Yep, the did. Why do you think that is the case? The reason they say they believe, is because they saw it. It certainly transformed their lives - it changed their religious practices, it cost them financially, and in some instances, it cost them their lives. So, their religious behavior is certainly in keeping with their experience of seeing Jesus resurrected.
Those who reject the resurrection do so because of their personal belief that there are no miracles. However 100 percent of the evidence about Jesus suggests that he performed miracles. The disciples record several miracles. They name individuals such as Mary Magdalene, Bartimaeus, Lazarus, Jairus' daughter, and specific locations where miracles occurred. They obviously believed Jesus performed miracles, including the resurrection. But even Jesus' enemies and non-Christian historians claim Jesus did miracles.
Flavius Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian, describes Jesus as a wise man and a doer of startling deeds, suggesting that he was perceived as a miracle worker among his followers. Josephus states, "For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly". This acknowledgment indicates that Josephus recognized Jesus's reputation for performing miracles.
Celsus, a second-century Greek philosopher, offers a critical perspective on Jesus in his work The True Word. He does not deny the occurrence of miracles but attributes them to sorcery, arguing that Jesus performed his miracles through magical means. Celsus states, "Jesus performed his miracles by sorcery". Important to note, is that an enemy of Christianity does not deny any miracle of Jesus.
Phlegon of Tralles, a second-century historian, also provides interesting references related to Jesus. His writings mentioned significant events occurring around the time of Jesus, including an eclipse during the crucifixion and an earthquake. Phlegon notes an "eclipse of the sun" that coincides with the death of Jesus, stating that it obscured the day "from the sixth hour to the ninth". This association with extraordinary phenomena further adds to the context of miraculous events surrounding Jesus's life and death.
The Babylonian Talmud refers to Jesus being executed for practicing sorcery and misleading the Jewish people, which indirectly confirms that he was known for performing miraculous deeds, even if these were attributed to evil sources.
The Toledot Yeshu (compiled about 1000 AD, but with sections that date much earlier - such as those that talk about Jesus). Says: They therefore, brought to him (Jesus) a lame man, who had never walked. Yeshu spoke over the man the letters of the Ineffable Name, and the leper was healed. Thereupon, they worshipped him as the Messiah, Son of the Highest. ". It goes on to say Jesus healed others also. It attributes Jesus supernatural powers to sorcery, but it never denies any miracles attributed to Jesus.
It seems unlikely that non-Christian sources, and especially enemy sources would acknowledge that Jesus performed miracles, even if they attribute them to evil means, if they did not believe Jesus performed miracles. Do you claim your enemy has supernatural power? I doubt it. And neither would they, if there wasn't overwhelming evidence for them. They would instead claim that stories about miracles where made up and lies.
So, there is zero evidence that says that Jesus didn't perform miracles from eye witnesses, and historians who wrote about Jesus within 100 years of his life. And every single piece of evidence about Jesus and miracles, claims he performed them. So, you are just engaged in special pleading when you claim there is no evidence of the resurrection. There multiple eye witness accounts from people whose lives were radically different after that event.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
So he's here today but you can't produce him or dna evidence, medical history of zombie blood, nothing from a supposed ressurected Jesus itself? Thought not. Nothing but "the bible says" and others saying "the bible said", with authors not 100% verified where the bible is concerned? The same bible that some 500 years after this Jesus guy lived was pieced together by clergy deciding what contemporary cultures should be reflected and how the narrative should read when it was canonized? That's the sum total of your "evidence"? LOL.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
I think you will find that Ehrman is not an atheist, he is a Christian scholar.
Anyway, I am an atheist, and I believe that the apostles and other believers genuinely believed that they had seen Jesus resurrected. But so what? They were no doubt deluded which made them make up and believe such crap which is reasonable to believe.
The events from Corinthians in the Bible is 100% unverified. But never the less "he was raised on the third day" means no more than some dudes came along 3 days later and dug up his body which was not unusual in those days anyway.
The writings you quoted from Plutarch and others is not reliable as you said because they were written more than 150 years after the event and even that was hundreds of years ago. They could not have been and were not confirmed at all.
Matthew, Peter, James, Jude, and John are not reliable witnesses because anything we know about them is hear tell and only recorded in myths third hand thousands of years ago.
All the rest of your evidence is just speculations on the same hear tell third hand evidence.
There was never any such thing as Jesus "rising" from the dead. So, all of your thread is total made up delusionary, wishful thinking crap.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
No one ever needs to disprove anything that has never been proven in the first place. So what?
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Yes it is God's effing job to prove himself and that he created the universe because nobody believes in such crap anyway and what we have found out for real just does not cut the mustard so far as the truth stakes go.
So, given that the almighty one has such immense powers why doesn't he simply get off his lazy ace and do a bit of PR himself. Sending his illegitimate son down 2000 years ago backfired like a cowboy eating beans and all his subjects are becoming unruly again. That Noah episode was a horribly gross over reaction to put it mildly. So why doesn't he just stop all this elusive stuff and come clean about the hole thing?
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
I think you will find that Ehrman is not an atheist, he is a Christian scholar.
Ehrman is indeed an atheist. You can read his own words on his own blog here: https://ehrmanblog.org/why-i-am-not-a-christian/
They were no doubt deluded which made them make up and believe such crap which is reasonable to believe.
They claim to have seen, talked to and touched Jesus alive after his crucifixion. Are you claiming there was mass delusion? That doesn't seem like a scientific thing. Delusions are private things. Mass groups do not have the same delusion.
The events from Corinthians in the Bible is 100% unverified.
Its pretty universally accepted by historians that 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 is an early Christian creed. It follows the long/short pattern of a creed. It must be very early, because Paul's conversion was between AD 30 and 33. And he claims to have received the creed that was already in circulation on his first visit to meet the apostles in Jerusalem.
But never the less "he was raised on the third day" means no more than some dudes came along 3 days later and dug up his body which was not unusual in those days anyway.
He was buried in a tomb, the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, so there would have been no 'digging'.
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, - 1 Corinthians 15:3-7
But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. - 1 Corinthians 15:12-20
These verse make it clear Paul means that Jesus was resurrected physically alive.
The writings you quoted from Plutarch and others is not reliable as you said because they were written more than 150 years after the event and even that was hundreds of years ago.
Plutarch did not write about Jesus, he wrote a lot of biographies (called 'lives' then). In fact Plutarch wrote about 2/3rds of the known Grecco-Roman biographies within 150 years before Jesus and 150 years after his life on earth. Plutarch is considered one of the best historians of his day.
Matthew, Peter, James, Jude, and John are not reliable witnesses because anything we know about them is hear tell and only recorded in myths third hand thousands of years ago.
We have the epistles of Peter, James, and Jude - written by themselves. Matthew and John wrote their gospels. So says 7 different church fathers within 100 years of their writing - several who were the personal disciples of John who knew him personally. No one in antiquity claimed any of the 4 gospels was written by anyone other than whom we say wrote them today. Every existing copy of any of the 4 gospels that has the first part of the gospel has the inscription 'The Gospel of ___________________" with the name of either Matthew, Mark, Luke or John. None have anyone else's name. You are making a claim without any evidence.
All the rest of your evidence is just speculations on the same hear tell third hand evidence.
Paul mentions in Galatians that he personally asked James, Peter, and John if there was anything in his message that was not correct, this included the physical resurrection of Jesus. They said there was nothing in his message that they disagreed with. Church father's who knew the apostles claim they talked about the physical resurrection of Jesus and that they saw it such as Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, and Papias, This confirms their gospel accounts.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
I’m claiming that what was reported was anecdotal and third hand. In any case it is not uncommon to see mass delusion, especially with religious groups since each member is usually deluded any way.
And consider this.. a service in a Catholic Church is most definitely “mass delusion” don’t you reckon.
And so far as that Earman nit goes…. In that article he is making out that he doesn’t know whether he’s coming or going. But he can call it tomato or any other name but he ain’t no atheist.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
No. And the "evidence" suggesting Jesus even died in the first place is ambiguous.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Mass groups do not have the same delusion.
Then explain the mass delusion of people thinking they talk to spirits, have special spirit buddies who if it were not for them they'd think it ok to rape children? Because they don't know it's a sin unless their invisible friend is telling them so from an objective view point? You have said things like that. Humans wouldn't have morals without some elf gods existence. And you know that's delusional because when you ask one of these loons what information does your special elf god friend tell you that no one could possibly know unless they personally knew some claimed god?... they never have any unknowable secrets, just promises of what humans find valuable in this life, in the afterlife? Why do so many believe that the "holy spirit" talks to them but tells different people and denominations differing criteria for believing in an elf god? Why no matter what, these elf god spirit bonds never produce clear concise criteria that they can insure doesn't get mispresented or misinterpreted despite the times or the culture of when the manuscripts were first scribed? Why must apologists of these elf god things first, exist (?), and number two, why couldn't a god with all its attributes that include the notion nothing is impossible for it, why can't it create the perfect message no one can misunderstand, misrepresent or twist despite supposed freewill? If it isn't all the same delusions people are sharing on a mass scale, then explain these facts rationally without speculation and inuendo. In your words please as ai is useless in these conversations as they can be manipulated to generate any response desired by what people want to believe.
Purposely indoctrinated people commonly suffer from mass delusion so why would you make such a foolish assertion? Ever hear of Jonestown?
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Nobody has proven or disproven that the universe just miraculously appeared without God.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
After Jesus' death, the act of the Roman soldier piercing his side and the subsequent flow of blood and water indicate a buildup of fluid in the pericardial cavity and lungs, thus highlighting the physical effects of extreme trauma and possible cardiac failure. Medical examinations suggest that Jesus likely suffered cardiac rupture due to the stress placed on his heart during the crucifixion, a scenario supported by various analyses in medical literature.
All the evidence - all of it, shows Jesus really did die.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
I can't think of anyone that I know that's pagan that needs some sort of evidence or proof to believe what they believe. Totally based on personal experience and the fact that Christians don't have that says to me that they're simply believing because they're told to.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied. 20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead - 1 Corinthians 15:12-20 NIV
You are correct in saying most religions are not dependent upon a historical event for their validity. However, Christianity from its inception, has been based on a historical event.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Christianity is very much rooted in a historical event - the resurrection of Jesus.
Alleged historical event. You have no tangible proof as has been explained and you have failed to refute.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
And nobody with any sense has ever said that either. However there are many deluded nits out there who claim that the universe just miraculously appeared with God and that concept has been disproven. I don't know how the eff the little seed got there but I'm not prepared to say it was by a creator just because we don't know the answer.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Totally based on personal experience and the fact that Christians don't have that says to me that they're simply believing because they're told to.
Who told you it's possible to talk to spirits and perform witchcraft? As those aren't innate revelations, they're introduced to us via superstitions from an era when things were explained imaginatively.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
No one told me. As I began to do research on things I experienced I found verification through other people's personal experience. You mean superstitions. It don't give a crap what you think about them. I'm not asking you to practice.
Yes I did, thanks.
You're contradicting yourself. First, some outside influence had to initiate your search, no one has an inherent knowledge of spirit worlds and witchcraft. Whatever things you "experienced" you are attributing to what has been inputted to your brain via external sources. Second, you clearly state other people told you what it was you experienced so people did tell you.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
No that's not what I said but like I said you can think whatever you want to because I'm not asking you to practice. I'm not asking you to believe anything. Not forcing anything on you. You are here of your own accord if you don't want to listen to it find somewhere else to spend your time. Whining about how awful it is to listen to us when you're here by your own choice is insincere at best.
I'm pointing out your logical flaws and fallacies because this is a debate site. You get that right? That's not whining, this response you just posted is however, to the extreme. It is what you said, that's why you cower away from your remarks. If you don't want your silly notions criticized then why are you here? Go post on some social site and stop crying about being challenged.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
@Factfinder
The human being is such, for no known reason.
We can speculate more or less abstractly.
Though always lurking, there is a general notion of something greater.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Here in the real world, we tend to call that sort of notion "delusion", and we normally refer the victim to the appropriate mental health specialist.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
1) Eye witnesses said they saw, touched and talked to Jesus after his resurrection
2) The eye witness accounts are confirmed by indirect witnesses who heard those who saw and talked with Jesus, discuss what they had seen
3) Non-Christian and enemies of Christianity like Josephus, Tacitus, Phlegon, Celsus, the Jewish Talmud, the Toledot Yeshu all confirm that Jesus was crucified, and that he performed miracles, and that his disciples believed he rose again.
4) The tomb was empty shortly after Jesus death
5) The disciples of Jesus were radically changed - they abandoned their previous faith practices, left family, risked death, and were sometimes martyred for their refusal to deny that Jesus had rose from the dead
6) Enemies of Jesus, who murdered Christians, such as Paul, found the evidence compelling and became Christians
7) The evidence has early attestation, multiple eye witnesses, supporting indirect evidence, embarrassing details in the accounts, and credible witnesses from all walks of life.
There is no alternative theory that can explain why the disciples believed Jesus had risen from the grave. The only explanation that explains their incredible devotion and behavior is that they genuinely saw the resurrected Jesus. The resurrection is a historical event, and as a historical event of ancient times, it has a tremendous amount of diverse evidence for it.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Tell me, what kind of friend would give his thirsty and dying friend vinegar to drink?
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Musings of unbelievers do not disprove the Biblical record.
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra
Considerate: 100%
Substantial: 100%
Sentiment: Negative
Avg. Grade Level:
Sources:
Relevant (Beta): 100%
Learn More About Debra