Originally posted by RhinestoneCowboy
View Post
Ok, where does Paul mention an empty tomb again?
I'm pretty sure I showed you that "raised from the dead" was a non-sequitur when it comes to physical resurrection. You seemed to have taken a month long hiatus after my last post that demonstrated this.
Sirach 48:5read these sources first? Or are you just uncritically cutting and pasting them from Carrier?
The only thing that I infer is that it's implausible that Jesus received the type of burial depicted in the gospels.
Paul mentions no "tomb" at all or any of the burial details found in the empty tomb story.
His mention of "burial" is entirely consistent with a dishonorable burial in a mass grave or other type of ground burial.
Paul cites no firsthand eyewitness testimony for this burial but says his understanding is "according to the scriptures." A mention of the empty tomb would have greatly helped his argument in 1 Cor 15. See how easy that was?
Correct Jesus would have been considered worse than a robber in the eyes of the Romans. Sedition/treason was at the top of the list.
It still is consistent with and corroborated by the other texts regarding Roman crucifixion practice. Judea was under Roman rule.
Roman citizens typically weren't executed by crucifixion but the point is that we have no reason to assume Jesus the "non-Roman King of the Jews" would have received preferential treatment in being allowed burial. If they refused burial to their own citizens then we shouldn't expect anything different for Galilean peasants.
The gospel accounts attempt to whitewash Pilate's role in Jesus' execution. There is an increasing anti-Jewish theme that becomes more apparent over time.
The gospel accounts attempt to whitewash Pilate's role in Jesus' execution. There is an increasing anti-Jewish theme that becomes more apparent over time.
No, these are entirely different claims with different evidence. A priori, the conflicts of Caesar's assassination do not rule out that an assassination actually happened. The same with the burial of Jesus. But it's the background knowledge of what we know about Roman crucifixion practice, Jewish criminal burial, Joseph blatantly violating Jewish law, going out of his way on Passover to bury a criminal messianic pretender that he just condemned to death, the dependence of the passion narrative on the psalms: https://books.google.com/books?id=fN...page&q&f=false the contradictions/inconsistencies and apparent legendary growth in the resurrection reports, etc, that point to this account being fiction as opposed to actual history. So I'm afraid your "comparison" is not analogous when all that data is taken into account.
False dichotomy. There are other options. Talk about fallacious reasoning.
Yeah, but in what way will Jesus "appear"? How do we know Mark didn't think that Jesus was taken straight to heaven first then "appeared" in visions to them in Galilee? How do we know Mark didn't intend to depict Jesus as the Son of Man returning in all his glory on the clouds in Galilee? There are many different possibilities! The point remains that the other evangelists were unsatisfied with Mark's report and rewrote/added to it and contradict it. This is consistent with legendary growth in chronological order.
Oh, so it makes more sense that the Mishnah traditions were just made up on the spot? They just popped out of thin air? Or do you think it's reasonable that the codifications were based on earlier traditions, teachings, precedents/proceedings?
I certainly see no reason here from you to doubt that the Mishnah does reflect earlier tradition. In fact, most scholars that are familiar with the material would argue exactly that! You should try reading them.
Philo of Alexandria, Moses II - 208, "After this, can we still think worthy of pardon those, who, with a reckless tongue, make unseasonable use of the most holy name of the Deity and treat it as a mere expletive?"
Do you have another source that explains the grounds for blasphemy?
blasphemous dances (Life of Moses II, 162).
Or how about the Old Testament?
and seat two worthless men before him, and let them testify against him, saying, 'You cursed God and the king.' Then take him out and stone him to death."Isaiah said to them, "Thus you shall say to your master, 'Thus says the LORD, "Do not be afraid because of the words that you have heard, with which the servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed Me."Therefore, son of man, speak to the house of Israel and say to them, 'Thus says the Lord GOD, "Yet in this your fathers have blasphemed Me by acting treacherously against Me.But the person who does anything defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from among his people.Both their own iniquities and the iniquities of their fathers together," says the LORD. "Because they have burned incense on the mountains And scorned Me on the hills, Therefore I will measure their former work into their bosom."only
Passover started at night. Jewish "days" went from evening to evening. Didn't you pastor teach you that?
Are you denying that it does? Mishnah Sanhedrin 7.5 says to "rend garments" as a result of a guilty verdict in response to blasphemy. That's precisely what Mark has the high priest do.
Who's laughing now?
The arguments have not been shown less plausible than their negations. Care to try again?
No, I don't. Try using a valid comparison next time.
Exactly. If there were only 10 senators involved in an earlier account and 80 in another then you would probably be skeptical of the account and the circumstances involving 80 senators.
Now, when you have the earliest accounts about Jesus' resurrection speak only about visions and revelations which evolve into physically touching a resurrected corpse that leaves an empty tomb and floats to heaven 40 days later, you're no longer skeptical. Why is that?
Your fallacious comparison fails. We have good reason to conclude that Caesar was assassinated despite the discrepancies whereas we don't have good reasons to conclude that Jesus was buried in a tomb, then resurrected and physically floated to heaven.
Originally posted by RhinestoneCowboy
View Post
A little like how you said way back in May on page 54: That's right Darth, I was scared off because I underestimated the, er, force of your arguments.
RC, always good for a laugh.
Comment