It certainly didn't require blind belief since there were hundreds of witnesses to the FACT of the resurrection. Eyewitness testimony counted back then, just as it does today. They were telling TRUE stories BACKED with facts.
Is that an "explanation?" Or is it a profound mystery that requires blind belief? Or that with His Blood He paid for our sins? Or that by being dunked into the water we are mysteriously "born-again" and the "elect" of God?
The Apostles never taught that dunking had anything to do with salvation or being of the elect. That was added later by the men of your Church. More power for them, etc.. :)
And don't tell me that being told that all your past, present and future sins have been forgiven because you call on the name of the Lord, and that your salvation is assured no matter what you do for the rest of your life is not a "feel-good" notion that appeals to our human nature!
I think it IS, but we do not believe what you have said above, so it doesn't apply to us. Somehow, I do not see your future holding a bare bones basic understanding of Reformed theology. :)
Hundreds? Even the Apostles didn't recognize Him. And even at the Pentecost, some of His closest disciples still doubted Him!
None of the Apostles, save for one were there when He died. Who verified that He was dead? A Roman soldier who became a convert, or who was a convert? Or who was bribed? Besides, dead people don't bleed.
All this doubt shows that nothing is certain and that we accept Christ's Incarnation, Death and Resurrection on blind faith.
The only witness we have are the Gospels and they have a vested interest. Besides, in order for them to be "convincing" one already must already be convicted that they are true! What proof is that?
However, we do know from variety of sources without the vested interest that something profound happened after the Pentecost, and that the Apostles who were scared and doubtful, became fearless advocates of Christ even unto death.
They all became believers.
It wasn't for the miracles He performed, it wasn't for what He taught, it wasn't even for Him appearing among them afterwords (cf Mat 28:17), even of sending them the Spirit (cf John 2:22) before the Pentecost (how could some of the eleven still doubt Him, according to Matthew, if they received the Spirit, according to John?!? John's statement also contradicts Acts 1 (v. 5), where Jesus promises the disciples that He will send them the Spirit in a few days if they already received the Spirit according to John?!?).
There is plenty of contradictory evidence here as to what happened and when, but something happened at the Pentecost that made all of the eleven and the rest of the people present into believers. There was no understanding involved, just blind faith, just as the New Testament tells us happened to Paul on the way to Damascus.
There were no hundreds of people witnessing His Resurrection for sure. The Gospels don't even agree how many women witnessed the empty tomb. No one has seen Him get up from where He was laid and come back to life. There is simply no evidence even in the Gospels to that. Christ Resurrected is a Christian belief based on pure faith, period.
The Apostles never taught that dunking had anything to do with salvation or being of the elect
O really? How about
And from Acts we learn that Peter said that those who are baptized shall receive the Spirit. In Greek, baptiso means "to dunk."
FK: I think it IS, but we do not believe what you have said above, so it doesn't apply to us. Somehow, I do not see your future holding a bare bones basic understanding of Reformed theology. :)
How is what I said above not what you believe? Namely that "all your past, present and future sins have been forgiven because you call on the name of the Lord, and that your salvation is assured no matter what you do for the rest of your life?"