Book Plunge: Can Christians Prove The Resurrection?

[Gary]

But those links do the same as the previous ones: they show the problems in eyewitness identification of criminals. No problem with that. But to what point can we legitimately extend those conclusions?

I remember reading this study on the evaluation of eyewitness reliability (or lack thereof) behind the Gospel stories: http://www.christianthinktank.com/mqfx.html but I don't have the time to make particular points from it. As one who reads the links you provide here, I say you might want to check it out, it won't cost you money like Keener's book.

The stories in the Bible even say that the entity that the disciples "saw" did not, at first, look like Jesus to all the disciples, and some of the disciples didn't believe it was him at all. These stories don't say that these guys saw the same Jesus they had known before his death. The stories claim that the disciples saw someone (or something) that kind of looked like Jesus but had a supernatural glow and aura to him. That's a ghost, folks!

[Bisto]

The stories in the Bible even say that the entity that the disciples "saw" did not, at first, look like Jesus to all the disciples, and some of the disciples didn't believe it was him at all. These stories don't say that these guys saw the same Jesus they had known before his death. The stories claim that the disciples saw someone (or something) that kind of looked like Jesus but had a supernatural glow and aura to him. That's a ghost, folks!

But doesn't it occur to you that if the Resurrection stories tell how some of them believed the Jesus they saw was a ghost at first, or some disciples said the women were just telling nonsense idle tales, or that their first thought upon seeing an empty tomb was to think someone moved the body, etc., this implies that maybe the Disciples and the early Church itself did consider all the theories you have put forth so far, BEFORE they concluded the Resurrection was the best explanation for what they believed had happened?

All I'm saying here is that there's nothing new under the sun; the Gospel stories tell that those eyewitnesses first thought of the same things you have thought. If you're gonna say those passages are "later embellishments" and the witnesses didn't say those things, the point still stands, since whoever "made up" the stories still considered those theories before arriving at their conclusion.

Why not take the bold route and make up a NEW alternative theory that doesn't come from the Gospels?

[Gary]

But doesn't it occur to you that if the Resurrection stories tell how some of them believed the Jesus they saw was a ghost at first, or some disciples said the women were just telling nonsense idle tales, or that their first thought upon seeing an empty tomb was to think someone moved the body, etc., this implies that maybe the Disciples and the early Church itself did consider all the theories you have put forth so far, BEFORE they concluded the Resurrection was the best explanation for what they believed had happened?

All I'm saying here is that there's nothing new under the sun; the Gospel stories tell that those eyewitnesses first thought of the same things you have thought. If you're gonna say those passages are "later embellishments" and the witnesses didn't say those things, the point still stands, since whoever "made up" the stories still considered those theories before arriving at their conclusion.

Why not take the bold route and make up a NEW alternative theory that doesn't come from the Gospels?

I think that SOMEONE sincerely believed that she or he had seen the resurrected Jesus...in some form...very soon after Jesus' death. However, the stories of people sticking their fingers into his gaping wounds and the resurrected body eating a broiled fish sandwich are most likely later embellishments. What exactly that first person or persons saw, or thought they saw, is anyone's guess. My point is: Even the Bible indicates that the disciples weren't sure at first what they saw and we know that they were uneducated and superstitious (they believed in ghosts), so odds are, they didn't see a real, flesh and blood, reanimated/resurrected body, but a figment of their imagination, a shadow, or a vision/vivid dream.

[psstein]

Did you read any of my posts?

Yes, and I found them as content-free as expected. At least Gary occasionally makes an interesting, though misguided point.

[Gary]

Yes, and I found them as content-free as expected. At least Gary occasionally makes an interesting, though misguided point.

I'm blushing!

[lilpixieofterror]

It's a shame people can remain so deluded when they've seen all the evidence to the contrary to their superstitious nonsense.

Predispositional atheism is always amusing to watch.

[lilpixieofterror]

You did not correctly state my position. I ignore the metaphysical until someone presents good evidence in support of a particular metaphysical claim. If I completely ignore evidence for the metaphysical as you claim, I wouldn't be reading Keener's book! That is the difference between me and Hume. Hume excluded miracles a priori from consideration. I ignore the "hundreds of millions" of metaphysical claims until someone shows me good evidence for ONE of them.

Nah, you're just proving that you're a presuppositional atheist that automatically rejects anything he doesn't want to believe. I know you're 'ignoring me' for daring to point out how you left out parts of an article that proved you wrong, but perhaps you should start on defining what 'good evidence' is and why somebody should automatically reject any metaphysical claim.

[lilpixieofterror]

I don't believe in virgin Mary apparitions, faith-healings and exorcisms pony-boy.

So, have you learned what countries are in South America yet or will you keep making up claims you can't back up and running away when you're claims are challenged?

[One Bad Pig]

I'm still reading chapter seven. It mentions one "miracle" of a woman in a Third World country dying from pneumonia. A white missionary (from a Christian tradition of which healing is not an emphasized teaching), was asked to pray for the woman's healing. He prayed and she was better for one evening. The next day she was back near death. That day, only the local Christians prayed for her healing; they did not invite the missionaries to attend the healing prayer service. The woman allegedly immediately rose from her bed and was completely well!

The next day the native Christians apologized to the white missionaries for not inviting them to the healing service. Their excuse was, "We knew it wouldn't work if you were present because you don't really believe in healings."

You're not very good at accurately relaying what you read, Gary. Here is the actual text:

Source: Keener page 230

Thus, for example, one anthropologist recounts the experience of a fellow anthropologist named Jacob Loewen, who was doing Bible translation among the Choco people in Panama. The wife of his host, Aureliano, was dying fromwhat was obviously pneumonia; Loewen sent to a nearby town for relevant medicine, only to discover that none was available. While Loewen had translated the promise of healing in Jas 5:14-15, he knew that he did not have faith to pray. Nevertheless, reading this passage, the local believers prayed with him for her healing, and she rallied slightly. By the next morning, she was dying again, so the local believers anointed her with oil, without inviting Loewen, and this time she rose to bed completely well, returning immediately to her household labors. When Aureliano desclared happily that God's Spirit had chased away the fever spirits, Loewen noted that they had not invited him and his Western colleague to pray this time. Aureliano apologized but noted, "It doesn't work when you and David are in the circle. You and David don't really believe."

© Copyright Original Source

This bears, at best, a passing resemblance to what you typed. Is pneumonia so difficult to diagnose that it requires a doctor to do so? Do pneumonia or pneumonia-like symptoms disappear immediately, even with treatment?

While I'm at it, I note that on pages 293-95, for example, several healings are confirmed via examinations by doctors before and after. Why don't you accept the word of other doctors, Gary?

[Gary]

You're not very good at accurately relaying what you read, Gary. Here is the actual text:

Source: Keener page 230

Thus, for example, one anthropologist recounts the experience of a fellow anthropologist named Jacob Loewen, who was doing Bible translation among the Choco people in Panama. The wife of his host, Aureliano, was dying fromwhat was obviously pneumonia; Loewen sent to a nearby town for relevant medicine, only to discover that none was available. While Loewen had translated the promise of healing in Jas 5:14-15, he knew that he did not have faith to pray. Nevertheless, reading this passage, the local believers prayed with him for her healing, and she rallied slightly. By the next morning, she was dying again, so the local believers anointed her with oil, without inviting Loewen, and this time she rose to bed completely well, returning immediately to her household labors. When Aureliano desclared happily that God's Spirit had chased away the fever spirits, Loewen noted that they had not invited him and his Western colleague to pray this time. Aureliano apologized but noted, "It doesn't work when you and David are in the circle. You and David don't really believe."

© Copyright Original Source

This bears, at best, a passing resemblance to what you typed. Is pneumonia so difficult to diagnose that it requires a doctor to do so? Do pneumonia or pneumonia-like symptoms disappear immediately, even with treatment?

While I'm at it, I note that on pages 293-95, for example, several healings are confirmed via examinations by doctors before and after. Why don't you accept the word of other doctors, Gary?

Is there anything in my summary that is not correct?

What symptoms did the woman have? Other than a fever, we don't know. All we know is that the guy who told the guy who told Keener this story believed that the woman was dying from pneumonia. The only way someone can be certain someone has pneumonia is by a chest xray. Short of an xray, someone can make an educated assumption that the patient has pneumonia by using a stethoscope to listen for rales in the lungs. Fever alone does not mean pneumonia. The woman could have had a number of illnesses causing a fever, including the flu.

When someone has a viral illness, the high fever will sometimes suddenly "break", and the person will quickly feel much better.

[Gary]

You're not very good at accurately relaying what you read, Gary. Here is the actual text:

Source: Keener page 230

Thus, for example, one anthropologist recounts the experience of a fellow anthropologist named Jacob Loewen, who was doing Bible translation among the Choco people in Panama. The wife of his host, Aureliano, was dying fromwhat was obviously pneumonia; Loewen sent to a nearby town for relevant medicine, only to discover that none was available. While Loewen had translated the promise of healing in Jas 5:14-15, he knew that he did not have faith to pray. Nevertheless, reading this passage, the local believers prayed with him for her healing, and she rallied slightly. By the next morning, she was dying again, so the local believers anointed her with oil, without inviting Loewen, and this time she rose to bed completely well, returning immediately to her household labors. When Aureliano desclared happily that God's Spirit had chased away the fever spirits, Loewen noted that they had not invited him and his Western colleague to pray this time. Aureliano apologized but noted, "It doesn't work when you and David are in the circle. You and David don't really believe."

© Copyright Original Source

This bears, at best, a passing resemblance to what you typed. Is pneumonia so difficult to diagnose that it requires a doctor to do so? Do pneumonia or pneumonia-like symptoms disappear immediately, even with treatment?

While I'm at it, I note that on pages 293-95, for example, several healings are confirmed via examinations by doctors before and after. Why don't you accept the word of other doctors, Gary?

Ok. Let's look at some of the cases mentioned on the above pages:

Keener, p. 293:

"In one report from the Solomon Islands, a father and mother moved by watching Jesus raise a girl from the dead in the Jesus Film prayed for their dying five year-old daughter. Although the doctors had said that her condition was terminal, she awoke completely well in the morning. The doctors could not explain her healing".

Source: Eshleman, Jesus, 105-106

Gary: What disease did the girl have? Who were the doctors? Let's see the medical records! If Muslims or Satanists were pushing this miracle, would you simply accept this third hand (at best) information?

All we have is Keener quoting someone named Eshleman. Where did Eshleman get his information? Directly from the doctors? We don't know.


Keener, p. 294:

"On another occasion, a desperate woman requested prayer. Her kidneys were failing, and her eyes and skin were discolored; the doctors had sent her home saying that they could not help her. Flint (a Christian preacher on the island of Fiji) and a Christian woman prayed for her, and his colleague told the woman, "The Lord has healed you." The woman went to the doctor and discovered that her condition was worse, so she challenged Flint about his friend's prophecy. He felt sure in his heart that God was going to do this miracle, however, and encouraged her accordingly. Two weeks later, her eyes and skin were normal, and her next checkup showed fully functional kidneys."

Source: Rev. Flint

Gary: How long had the woman's kidneys been failing? We are not told. Discoloration of the skin is more suggestive of chronic kidney disease, but patients can develop rashes with acute kidney disease. So was this chronic kidney failure or acute kidney failure? We don't know. In either case, why couldn't the doctors help her? Why didn't they offer dialysis? Is dialysis not available on Fiji? The story doesn't tell us, but saying that doctors can't help someone with kidney failure, even end-stage kidney failure, is false, unless dialysis wasn't available. But what if she only had an acute form of kidney failure? Acute kidney failure happens all the time to people who get very sick and most fully recover! There is nothing in this story that can't be explained by natural causes.


Keener, p. 294:

"Flint's daughter, hospitalized with meningitis, was expected to die or become barely functional; praying and fasting, Flint felt confidence that God would heal her. When the family took her home, the doctor cautioned that she would not eat well or move her body; yet she immediately began eating, and she is now strong at age five, with no ill effects. The specialists are amazed, Flint says, that it is the same child."

Gary: My little brother had meningitis at age three and my parents were told that his condition was very bad and that he might not make it. He went home several days later and has been as healthy as a horse ever since. Meningitis is very serious. It can kill. It can cause serious complications, but most children recover and do just fine. Once again, there is nothing in this story that cannot be explained by natural causes.

At the bottom of page 294, in the footnotes, Keener tells of another story from Pastor Flint, in which a woman who is dying from AIDS is suddenly healed in 2004, after seeing a man "in a vision", finding that man, and asking him to pray for her. (Then from a written statement Keener received from Pastor Flint in 2008): "Flint said that he had heard that tests now showed no HIV, and the testimony is well known around Fiji. Unfortunately, the recovery data was within the past two years, and I currently lack means to verify the account independently."

Gary: That is pathetic, folks. Keener simply takes this man's word for everything. Keener never spoke to the patient. Keener never spoke to the doctors. This is not research. This is simply a laundry list of unconfirmed third-hand stories. We have no clue as to the accuracy of any of these "medically confirmed" stories.

[Apologiaphoenix]

If Muslims or satanists were pushing a miracle, I would just as much look at the quality of the sources and decide. I don't change the rules based on which side is doing the arguing.

[One Bad Pig]

Is there anything in my summary that is not correct?

For one, "rallied slightly" has much different connotations than "better for one evening." For another, you omitted the anthropologist's belief that his prayer would not work. Also, you neglected to mention that the anthropologist was not told right out that he had been excluded, but only learned after asking. You also threw in "allegedly," as if a man embarrassed by his exclusion would be motivated to embellish the cure that happened without him.

What symptoms did the woman have? Other than a fever, we don't know. All we know is that the guy who told the guy who told Keener this story believed that the woman was dying from pneumonia. The only way someone can be certain someone has pneumonia is by a chest xray. Short of an xray, someone can make an educated assumption that the patient has pneumonia by using a stethoscope to listen for rales in the lungs. Fever alone does not mean pneumonia. The woman could have had a number of illnesses causing a fever, including the flu.

When someone has a viral illness, the high fever will sometimes suddenly "break", and the person will quickly feel much better.

Since when are laymen incapable of distinguishing pneumonia from a mere high fever? This isn't obscure medical science, Gary. Your bias is showing.

Ok. Let's look at some of the cases mentioned on the above pages:

Keener, p. 293:

"In one report from the Solomon Islands, a father and mother moved by watching Jesus raise a girl from the dead in the Jesus Film prayed for their dying five year-old daughter. Although the doctors had said that her condition was terminal, she awoke completely well in the morning. The doctors could not explain her healing".

Source: Eshleman, Jesus, 105-106

Gary: What disease did the girl have? Who were the doctors? Let's see the medical records! If Muslims or Satanists were pushing this miracle, would you simply accept this third hand (at best) information?

All we have is Keener quoting someone named Eshleman. Where did Eshleman get his information? Directly from the doctors? We don't know.


Keener, p. 294:

"On another occasion, a desperate woman requested prayer. Her kidneys were failing, and her eyes and skin were discolored; the doctors had sent her home saying that they could not help her. Flint (a Christian preacher on the island of Fiji) and a Christian woman prayed for her, and his colleague told the woman, "The Lord has healed you." The woman went to the doctor and discovered that her condition was worse, so she challenged Flint about his friend's prophecy. He felt sure in his heart that God was going to do this miracle, however, and encouraged her accordingly. Two weeks later, her eyes and skin were normal, and her next checkup showed fully functional kidneys."

Source: Rev. Flint

Gary: How long had the woman's kidneys been failing? We are not told. Discoloration of the skin is more suggestive of chronic kidney disease, but patients can develop rashes with acute kidney disease. So was this chronic kidney failure or acute kidney failure? We don't know. In either case, why couldn't the doctors help her? Why didn't they offer dialysis? Is dialysis not available on Fiji? The story doesn't tell us, but saying that doctors can't help someone with kidney failure, even end-stage kidney failure, is false, unless dialysis wasn't available. But what if she only had an acute form of kidney failure? Acute kidney failure happens all the time to people who get very sick and most fully recover! There is nothing in this story that can't be explained by natural causes.


Keener, p. 294:

"Flint's daughter, hospitalized with meningitis, was expected to die or become barely functional; praying and fasting, Flint felt confidence that God would heal her. When the family took her home, the doctor cautioned that she would not eat well or move her body; yet she immediately began eating, and she is now strong at age five, with no ill effects. The specialists are amazed, Flint says, that it is the same child."

Gary: My little brother had meningitis at age three and my parents were told that his condition was very bad and that he might not make it. He went home several days later and has been as healthy as a horse ever since. Meningitis is very serious. It can kill. It can cause serious complications, but most children recover and do just fine. Once again, there is nothing in this story that cannot be explained by natural causes.

At the bottom of page 294, in the footnotes, Keener tells of another story from Pastor Flint, in which a woman who is dying from AIDS is suddenly healed in 2004, after seeing a man "in a vision", finding that man, and asking him to pray for her. (Then from a written statement Keener received from Pastor Flint in 2008): "Flint said that he had heard that tests now showed no HIV, and the testimony is well known around Fiji. Unfortunately, the recovery data was within the past two years, and I currently lack means to verify the account independently."

Gary: That is pathetic, folks. Keener simply takes this man's word for everything. Keener never spoke to the patient. Keener never spoke to the doctors. This is not research. This is simply a laundry list of unconfirmed third-hand stories. We have no clue as to the accuracy of any of these "medically confirmed" stories.

In other words, you dispute the findings because you don't trust the doctors, the informants, or both. It is amusing to see you attempt to explain away symptoms at third hand, as if you are more qualified at this remove to understand what happened than the attending doctors. Again, your bias is showing. I am unsurprised that you eventually chose this book to read, because I was confident that you would manage to set the bar for evidence high enough that nothing in it would pass muster. I am interested to see if you will actually finish it, but so far your a priori skepticism has been invincible.

[Gary]

If Muslims or satanists were pushing a miracle, I would just as much look at the quality of the sources and decide. I don't change the rules based on which side is doing the arguing.

Yes. You would believe any miracle report based on what someone told someone who told someone who told someone that you read in a book.

Sad.

[Gary]

For one, "rallied slightly" has much different connotations than "better for one evening." For another, you omitted the anthropologist's belief that his prayer would not work. Also, you neglected to mention that the anthropologist was not told right out that he had been excluded, but only learned after asking. You also threw in "allegedly," as if a man embarrassed by his exclusion would be motivated to embellish the cure that happened without him.

Since when are laymen incapable of distinguishing pneumonia from a mere high fever? This isn't obscure medical science, Gary. Your bias is showing.


In other words, you dispute the findings because you don't trust the doctors, the informants, or both. It is amusing to see you attempt to explain away symptoms at third hand, as if you are more qualified at this remove to understand what happened than the attending doctors. Again, your bias is showing. I am unsurprised that you eventually chose this book to read, because I was confident that you would manage to set the bar for evidence high enough that nothing in it would pass muster. I am interested to see if you will actually finish it, but so far your a priori skepticism has been invincible.

Your whining and protests are as pathetic as the third hand reports you want me to believe.

WHO are the doctors that you want me to believe? What are their names? Where are their medical practices? Let me see a written statement from them! Let me see the medical records! I'm not going to accept third hand reports from charismatics LOOKING for miracles.

Ok, Doctor OBP. Here is a case for you. Give me the diagnosis:

A 43 y/o woman has a fever of 103 degrees and is bed-ridden. She has no appetite and barely moves in bed. She says she feels like she is dying.

What is the diagnosis?