Posted on 06/06/2006 11:58:40 AM PDT by dukeman
A Debate between
William Lane Craig and Bart D. Ehrman
On March 28, 2006, Dr. Craig, Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology in La Mirada, California, and Dr. Ehrman, James A. Gray Distinguished Professor and Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, debated the status of the Christian claim to Jesus' resurrection from the perspective of historical data. The debate was sponsored by the Center for Religion, Ethics and Culture and the Campus Christian Fellowship.
Thank you for your reply but I do not embrace the LDS doctrine.
People back then were ignorant of many of the possibilities in this world, yes.
In a way that *most* modern people are not. Is that really a controversial point?
I'm not sure how much of a history buff you are, but this is not exactly a idea that is any dispute.
Most people back then were completely uneducated. Now unless you're going to claim that education is useless, you must concede this point.
Thank you so much for the kudos! Hugs!
Do you suggest that logic and reason, cause and effect no longer serve usefully when we're examining the most important questions there are?
That doesn't make any sense.
When trying to determine the truth of something, like was Jesus the son of god, or was Jesus resurrected, I must apply logic and reasoning.
I must ask myself, do I see the same thing around me today?
And since I do, I must ask myself, do I believe the people saying it today?
No, I do not. Therefore . . .
People around me believe the most amazingly untrue things. Half the country apparently believes that John Kerry and Al Gore are heroes.
Does that mean they are correct???
Whatever. Not interested in what writings I don't consider to be inspired tell us.
Most people today are completly uneducated. Where have you been since mass education proved to be an oxymoron?
However, that you are even arguing this point indicates to me that you have a desire to hear. But perhaps there is noise in the channel?
IMHO, Spiritual “interference” is usually the result of a person’s self-will or confidence in what they “know”. Doubting Thomas for instance, was more confident in sensory perception than in the testimony of the other apostles.
Others are only confident in sensory perception plus logic, to them all that exists is that which can be observed – microscope to telescope. These do not even allow consciousness or the mind as existents but call them “epiphenomenons” – secondary phenomenons of the physical brain which can cause nothing to happen.
But lacking the desire to understand at all is unfortunate. As Einstein said:
When one is a part of the very thing he wishes to observe, he by definition cannot obtain objectivity.
God however is beyond all of space/time, before physical causality and all geometries. He sees and knows everything, thus God is Truth. There is no other rationale source for "objective truth".
Likewise, there is only one way to know Jesus and that is personally, by being born again. All other paths are academic and do not lead to Life, Light, Love, Truth, Spiritual understanding and power.
Reason with me. Our vision and minds are "tuned" to four dimensional things, three of space and one of time. And yet through geometric physics we accept relativity and the likely existence of more spatial and temporal dimensions.
Does our inability to “sense” such things mean that they cannot possible exist?
Certainly we have already shown by empirical evidence that our inability to “sense” quantum fields does not mean that they do not exist. The same can be said for wave/particle duality, quantum entanglement and the ilk. As another example, physics allows that massless particles may exist but go undetected for lack of technology to observe them by inference – and that the 1080 particles of this four dimensional block may be as little as a single particle in a fifth time-like dimension, multiply-imaged.
In sum, how do you know what you know and how sure are you that you actually know it?
Anyone can claim anything. Jesus asserted he was speaking truth from God. Critics reasonably ask for proof when someone makes such a lofty claim. Jesus said He would give them a sign- His resurrection.
Such a historical test of truth is unique to Christianity. It demands more then a subjective judgment. Jesus’ test leaves no room for ambiguity: either He rose from the dead confirming His claims to divinity or He was a fraud.
Before I go any further it is helpful to talk about methodology and what it is that historians do. The process of evaluating historical evidence does not aim for absolute historical certainty. That standard is simply not realistic.
Think of proof as occupying a position on a continuum of reliability which runs from left to right like: Very Doubtbul___Quite Doubtful___Somewhat Doubtful___Uncertain___Somewhat Certain___Quite Certain___Very Certain. Historians inquire to see what we can know with reasonable historical certainty when principles of historical inquiry are applied. “Reasonable historical certainty” falls to the right of “Somewhat Certain” on the continuum. The standard for belief that something was really said or truly happened in the past is set at the point when the reasons for accepting it significantly outweigh the reasons for rejecting it. If no reasonable opposing theories are raised, a finding of historicity is the default position. This leaves open the possibility that new discoveries may affect the reliability of the subject saying or event.
Historians apply principles of evaluation to data they encounter. These principles are important because data, such as archaeological finds, documents, and eyewitnesses are all we have to tell us of events that occurred and people who lived in antiquity. The principles include:
1. Multiple, independent sources; When an event or saying is attested by more than one independent source, there is a strong indication of historicity.
2. An admission by an “enemy” supports historical claims; If testimony affirming an event or saying is given by a source who does not sympathize with the person, message, or cause that profits from the account, then there is an indication of authenticity.
3. Embarrassing admissions support historical claims; An indicator that an event or saying is authentic is present when the source would not be expected to create the story, because it tends to embarrass his cause and weakens his position in arguments with opponents.
4. Eyewitness testimony supports historical claims; Eyewitness testimony is usually stronger than a secondhand account.
5. Early testimony supports historical claims; The shorter the time between the event and testimony about it, the more reliable the witness, since there is less time for exaggeration, and even legend, to creep into the account.
Since the historian does not have a certified video record of what occurred in antiquity, these principles are common sense guides for evaluating the record of something that is alleged to have happened. It’s a weighing process where the forgoing principles (and others) are applied to a piece of data in an effort place it on its proper point on the continuum of historical reliability.
Okay, now on to your reply to the first fact—Jesus’ death by crucifixion. You wrote:
There is no contemporary reference to this outside of the bible. Josephus would not be evidence -- he's relating stories he heard from others about something that happened before he was born. You would not consider this evidence of something today, so when you claim it's evidence back then I can't help but question your credibility.
Based on the principles discussed above, your dismissal of Josephus’ Testimonium about Jesus as “not evidence” is simply not good historical practice.
Josephus was a Jewish aristocrat, a priestly politician, and a commander of rebel troops in Galilee during the First Jewish Revolt against Rome (67-73 A.D.). Captured by the Romans in 67, he served them as mediator and interpreter during the rest of the revolt. Brought to Rome, he composed two great works: The Jewish War (early 70’s) and the Jewish Antiquities, finished about 93, 94.
Josephus is a source independent of the Bible and we may say he was an “enemy” to the account of Jesus’ death by crucifixion (i.e., he was “on the other side”). Now, I believe Josephus was born around 30 A.D., so he couldn’t have personally witnessed Jesus’ crucifixion, but he could have easily spoken with eyewitnesses to the event before the revolt against Rome. And in the scheme of things when studying antiquity, a person writing an account a little more than fifty years after the alleged event is “contemporary.”
As an aside, in an earlier post on this thread I discussed the general consensus among scholars that the Testimonium was tampered with much later—probably by an overzealous Christian scribe. Still, there is adequate information within the original, unaltered Testimonium to say that Josephus, writing a little more than 50 years after Jesus’ life and crucifixion, attests to the truth that Jesus’ life and death were not figments of the church’s imagination.
Your reply to fact #1 focused only on Josephus as an extra-Biblical source for the fact of Jesus’ death by crucifixion. There are others.
Cornelius Tacitus (c. A.D. 55-120) was a Roman historian who lived through the reigns of over a half dozen Roman emperors. He has been called the greatest historian of ancient Rome. His moost acclaimed works are the Annals (covers period from Augustus’ death in 14 A.D. to that of Nero in 68 A.D.) and the Histories (from Nero’s death and proceeds to that of Domitian in 96 A.D.).
Writing of the reign of Nero and the burning of Rome, Tacitus reported:
“…he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius; but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also.” (Annals, XV,44)
Lucian of Samosata (c. mid-2nd century) was a Greek satirist who spoke scornfully of Christ and the Christians, never assuming or arguing they were unreal:
“The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day- the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account…” (The Death of Peregrine, 11-13)
Mara Bar-Sarapion ( writing sometime after A.D. 70) was a Syrian and probably Stoic philosopher. He wrote a letter to his son from prison, encouraging him to pursue wisdom. He compares Jesus to the philosophers Socrates and Pythagoras:
“What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burning Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their Wise King? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: The Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion. But Socrates did not die for good; he lived on in the teaching of Plato. Pythagoras did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Hera. Nor did the Wise King die for good; He lived on in the teaching which He had given.” (c. late 1st-century; letter located in the British Museum).
Mara Bar-Sarapion was certainly not a Christian since he puts Jesus on equal footing with Socrates and Pythagoras; He has Jesus living on in His teaching rather than His resurrection; and in another portion of the letter he expresses a belief in polytheism. But his reference to Jesus indicates that he did not question whether Jesus lived or not and that He was executed.
It is also interesting to note that Jewish writing of antiquity never denied the existence, miracles, and execution of Jesus. For example, the Babylonian Talmud reads “It has been taught: On the eve of Passover they hanged Yeshu.” Sanhedrin 43a (probably late 2nd century). Another version of the text reads, “Yeshu, the Nazarene.” The word “hanged” is a way of referring to crucifixion in antiquity. Deut. 21:23; Gal. 3:13
Dominic, what makes these sources compelling is that they are independent of one another, are statements made by “enemies”, and statements made close in time to the event of Jesus’ crucifixion. True, none of the writers claim to be direct eyewitnesses, but that simply relates to one of the principles of data evaluation discussed above.
Finally, even the highly critical scholar of the Jesus Seminar, John Dominic Crossan, has written, “That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can be.” Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography, 145.
These sources, taken together, present a strong argument for the historicity of Jesus’ death by crucifixion—Fact #1.
Very well AG another witness is not needed to see there are two distinct doctrines being discuss by Jesus in Matt 19 & Matt 22!
1-Those who live under the Law of Moses as in Matt 22
2-Those who choose to embrace The New Covenant of Jesus Christ as in Matt. 19
How may are aware which law is being embraced, the Law of Moses or the New Covenant?
Matt 22
1-The instructions given here are for those living the Law of Moses “until death do we part”.
2- Jesus also said in verse 29 ye do err not knowing the scripture, nor the power of God!
3- Jesus also say under this Law of Moses that they neither marry nor given in marriage but are angles,
4- Nor will angels be joint heirs!
Rom. 8
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
In Matt 19 and Mark 10 the Lord talks touch on Marriage!
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
Matt. 16:
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Matt. 18:
18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
2 Cor. 6
18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
When Jesus was resurrected he was resurrected as a man not "NO Gender" we too are promis that our bodies will be resurrected body of Flesh and Bone!
In Matt 27 here the saint rose from their graves in their resurrected bodies they were not Angels!
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.
Sorry, Dominic. I meant to thank you for your reply #188. My goof!
I must ask myself, do I see the same thing around me today?
And since I do, I must ask myself, do I believe the people saying it today?
No, I do not. Therefore . . .
You make me think of a child who is unable see over the crowd, but if a parent lifts them they will be able to see more!
Yes you still can use your reasoning, but if one don't allow themselves to be Spiritually lift they will not be able to see!
I see what you meant now.. Strange logic though.. very strange.. Gender is for reproduction completely.. What would a spirit any spirit need with reproduction.. Seems to me a very carnal(fleshly) look at things..
Education increases humility, because the more you know, you know of more things, you don't know.. Faulty education creates arrogance.. Possessing facts and skills is NOT education.. its indoctrination.. and rote.. As any "old master" of any skill knows well.. facts need to age like wine.. What has the "old master" learned that eludes the novice?.. Wisdom.. Wisdom is ageless, rare, and precious..
Many of the educated are not wise.. Wisdom has been present with a few for thousands of years.. Defaming your progenitors is not wise.. d;-)~',',
Resurrected body are different from the ones we have here on earth!
Our earth bodies of flesh and blood are temporal, but the resurrected body is of Flesh and Bone. As how Jesus showed
us when he was resurrected his Body was Flesh and Bone
It would be good to read again chapter 1 cor 15 with your eyes of understanding!
1 cor 15
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.
57 But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.
What a beautiful, insightful post! Thank you hosepipe!
Is a spiritual body.... a body(flesh)... or something else?..
You know, something that does not really need air, water, food, gender, clothing.. and a plethora of other earthy things.. but can "mask" a physical body.. So that fleshly humans don't get freaked out?.. Scripture don't give detailed analysis.. Nez Pas..
Is a spiritual body.... a body(flesh)... or something else?..
You know, something that does not really need air, water, food, gender, clothing.. and a plethora of other earthy things.. but can "mask" a physical body.. So that fleshly humans don't get freaked out?.. Scripture don't give detailed analysis.. Nez Pas..
Jesus Christ was the first person to be resurrected on this earth (Acts 26: 23; Col. 1: 18; Rev. 1: 5).
The New Testament gives ample evidence that Jesus rose with his physical body: his tomb was empty, he ate fish and honey, he had a body of flesh and bones, people touched him, and the angels said he had risen (Mark 16: 1-6; Luke 24: 1-12, 36-43; John 20: 1-18).
The reuniting of the spirit body with the physical body of flesh and bones after death.
After resurrection, the spirit and body will never again be separated, and the person will become immortal. Every person born on earth will be resurrected because Jesus Christ overcame death (1 Cor. 15: 20-22).
16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
You do love that body don't you?.. That filthy needy weak body..
Must hamper you're vision of the Spirit/spirit.. Does God have or need a physical body?..
What Jesus did/was before and after that body(his body) in no way determines what will be for us or even for him.. For before Jesus even had a physical body he had a spiritual body.. The physical body is a metaphor of the spiritual.. Some worship Jesus physical Body others worship his Spirit.. its a matter of vision.. No flame.. its true.. What is Jesus Body?.. The metaphor of "The Body of Christ".. is a pregnant metaphor..
Just as the church is not a physical building, we are not a physical body.. The metaphor holds.. I see what I see, you see what you see.. Thats the way its supposed to be.. ;)
Christ was in the beginning (John 1) - everything was created by Him and for Him (Colossians 1). He did not first exist when He became enfleshed in Mary. He precedes all of physical creation, including space/time, matter/energy, the cosmos, and "flesh" and "bone".
Likewise Christ appears in form according to His own will. At once in the midst of the apostles in a room in the form of a mortal man, again in a different and unrecognized mortal form with the disciples on the road, again in the Light which overcomes Paul, again as the form of conqueror in Revelation, again as the suffering lamb in Revelation, again in the Word - and so on.
The form does not define Him, He defines the form.
Hi.
I'm not sure how much you know about the time period, but most folks could not read or write, and received no formal education.
Today, people at least can read and write, and know the basics of chemistry, math, etc.
If you think it's bad now, you can't *believe* how bad it was back then.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.