What if the Early Creed was about the Virgin Mary, not Jesus?

[Sparko]

Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions.

None of the detailed appearance stories appear in Christian literature until the last quarter of the first century (they don't even appear in the first gospel, the original version of Mark). As for the witnesses in the list in First Corinthians 15, what exactly did they all see?

A bright light...same as Paul????

We don't know because Paul doesn't tell us. For all we know, all the original appearance claims involved the emotionally distraught disciples having vivid dreams, visions, trances, or group experiences involving mistaken perceptions of natural phenomena...all involving bright lights!

[ATTACH=CONFIG]17338[/ATTACH]
Jesus?

ah another "what if" argument from silence. Can't you do anything better Gary? The same old strategy over and over?

! cor 15:3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: 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,[b] 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, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

Christ died. Was buried. Then he was not dead and was raised back to life. And he showed himself to more than 500 people and to the apostles. Why would they think they saw Jesus alive if all they saw was a bright light? What indication is there that the appearances were not as described in the Gospels? None. Paul is entirely consistent with the gospels. The entire chapter we are discussing is about resurrection of the body from the dead. Both Jesus' and our own. Jesus was the first, Paul teaches, and then one day we will be resurrected too, just like Jesus was. Not as a bright light, but in a glorified immortal body.

[DesertBerean]

Sigh. Why are arguing over an hypothetical situation? Bye.

[Sparko]

Sigh. Why are arguing over an hypothetical situation? Bye.

The gospels didn't say that Jesus wasn't a hologram either, so it is possible that Aliens projected him walking around after he died just to mess with the local yokels.

The Gary thing is easy.

[Gary]

ah another "what if" argument from silence. Can't you do anything better Gary? The same old strategy over and over?

! cor 15:3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: 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,[b] 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, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

Christ died. Was buried. Then he was not dead and was raised back to life. And he showed himself to more than 500 people and to the apostles. Why would they think they saw Jesus alive if all they saw was a bright light? What indication is there that the appearances were not as described in the Gospels? None. Paul is entirely consistent with the gospels. The entire chapter we are discussing is about resurrection of the body from the dead. Both Jesus' and our own. Jesus was the first, Paul teaches, and then one day we will be resurrected too, just like Jesus was. Not as a bright light, but in a glorified immortal body.

"Why would they think they saw Jesus alive if all they saw was a bright light?"

I don't know. Ask Paul...

[Sparko]

"Why would they think they saw Jesus alive if all they saw was a bright light?"

I don't know. Ask Paul...

well Paul wouldn't know Jesus since he hadn't met him before. So a blinding light and a voice identifying Jesus was pretty convincing. If he just walked up to him as a normal man, Paul would probably not have believed him. On the other hand, the people in Jerusalem at the time of his death DID know him and would not have believed he came back to life unless they could see he was a man whom they could talk to and touch, rather than some ghost or bright light.

[Gary]

well Paul wouldn't know Jesus since he hadn't met him before. So a blinding light and a voice identifying Jesus was pretty convincing. If he just walked up to him as a normal man, Paul would probably not have believed him. On the other hand, the people in Jerusalem at the time of his death DID know him and would not have believed he came back to life unless they could see he was a man whom they could talk to and touch, rather than some ghost or bright light.

It appears that you are unable to grasp the concept of Begging the Question.

[DesertBerean]

It appears that you are unable to grasp the concept of Begging the Question.

Just as you don't seem to grasp the concept of honesty in debating.

Ok. I'm really out. I've got things to do, so enjoy your day. Bye.

[mossrose]

Yeah, I left already, too.

Before the troll could throw me out.

[Sparko]

It appears that you are unable to grasp the concept of Begging the Question.

or you don't. How is that begging the question?

[One Bad Pig]

What if the Early Creed was about the Virgin Mary, not Jesus?

It wasn't.

Many Christians, of all denominations, place a great deal of importance on the Witness List in the Early Creed found in First Corinthians 15 as the best evidence for the supernatural claim of the Resurrection of Jesus.

Sure.

Christians proclaim: "This witness list must be treated as we would treat eyewitness testimony to a traffic accident in a court of law. If so many eyewitnesses claimed to have seen the same car accident, that is excellent proof of the validity of the claim that the accident really had occurred."

This is a terrible analogy. Car accidents leave physical evidence.

But we aren't talking about a car accident. We are talking about a supernatural event. Just because multiple persons claim to have seen alien abductions, should we believe them? Just because thousands of people claim to have seen, talked to, and touched their recently departed loved one---should we believe them?

There's a crucial difference between these and the appearances of Jesus - the latter often involved appearances to multiple people simultaneously, and involved multiple senses.

Here is something for Protestant Christians to think about. If the Apostle Paul had included a Marian Creed in one of his epistles, would you believe the eyewitness claims in that passage?

Why wouldn't they?

Let's look at a hypothetical example:

For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received:

That the Holy Virgin Mother intercedes for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that she was buried in Jerusalem, but when her grave was later opened, it was empty, and only her grave clothes remained.

She then appeared to Juan Diego on a hill in Mexico.

Then to Sister Catherine Luboure in Paris, to the Jewish convert Alphonse Ratisbonne in Rome, to Melanie Calvat and Maximim Giraud in France, eighteen times to Bernadette Soubirous in Lourdes, and to Francisco Marto, Jacinta Marto, and Lucia Dos Santos in Fatima, Portugal.

In her final apparition to the children of Fatima, she caused many tens of thousands to see the sun appear to fall and spin like a wheel of fire, several times, as proof of her presence among them. In 1942, most of these eyewitnesses were still alive, though some had died.

Then she appeared in Beuaraing, Banneux, and Syracuse to more devout Catholics.

Last of all, as to one untimely born, she appeared also to me.

You're terrible at writing hypothetical scripture.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]17335[/ATTACH]
Superstitious people see what they want to see.
You see the Virgin Mary...I see a water stain.

[/quote]
I see... a water stain. I don't see this type of thing as an apparition; I see it as a Rorshach blot. I appreciate that you're trying to blur the categories so you can conveniently broad-brush everything away.

Of course, Orthodox and Catholic Christians DO believe that Mary was assumed into heaven after her burial - you can visit her tomb outside Jerusalem - but that belief is not based on post-assumption appearances (which do not appear to have happened until quite some time later). Further, there's just not a whole lot of parallel between the accounts, because Mary died a natural death, didn't raise herself, and was assumed directly from the tomb to heaven.

[Gary]

OBP: "There's a crucial difference between these and the appearances of Jesus - the latter often involved appearances to multiple people simultaneously, and involved multiple senses."

How do you know these appearances involved multiple senses?

Answer: That is what the Gospels say!

Logical fallacy: Begging the Question.

The alleged appearances to groups can be easily explained by looking at cumulative human experience: the misperception of natural phenomena such as a bright light, a cloud formation, or a shadow.

"Of course, Orthodox and Catholic Christians DO believe that Mary was assumed into heaven after her burial - you can visit her tomb outside Jerusalem - but that belief is not based on post-assumption appearances (which do not appear to have happened until quite some time later). Further, there's just not a whole lot of parallel between the accounts, because Mary died a natural death, didn't raise herself, and was assumed directly from the tomb to heaven. "

How many Protestants reading this thread believe that the body of the dead Virgin Mary was wisked out of her grave up into heaven leaving yet ANOTHER EMPTY TOMB and neatly folded grave clothes????

Isn't it obvious, folks?

The Empty Tomb of Jesus and the Empty Tomb of Mary are both examples of early catholic "miracle" claims used to "shock and awe" the ignorant, superstitious masses into believing.

[Jedidiah]

Sigh. Why are arguing over an hypothetical situation? Bye.

Not only hypothetical, but serves no purpose that I can see. Not even from an anti-Christian perspective (at least as I imagine itO).

[Jedidiah]

OBP: "There's a crucial difference between these and the appearances of Jesus - the latter often involved appearances to multiple people simultaneously, and involved multiple senses."

How do you know these appearances involved multiple senses?

Answer: That is what the Gospels say!

Logical fallacy: Begging the Question.

The alleged appearances to groups can be easily explained by looking at cumulative human experience: the misperception of natural phenomena such as a bright light, a cloud formation, or a shadow.

"Of course, Orthodox and Catholic Christians DO believe that Mary was assumed into heaven after her burial - you can visit her tomb outside Jerusalem - but that belief is not based on post-assumption appearances (which do not appear to have happened until quite some time later). Further, there's just not a whole lot of parallel between the accounts, because Mary died a natural death, didn't raise herself, and was assumed directly from the tomb to heaven. "

How many Protestants reading this thread believe that the body of the dead Virgin Mary was wisked out of her grave up into heaven leaving yet ANOTHER EMPTY TOMB and neatly folded grave clothes????

Isn't it obvious, folks?

The Empty Tomb of Jesus and the Empty Tomb of Mary are both examples of early catholic "miracle" claims used to "shock and awe" the ignorant, superstitious masses into believing.

Just for your information it is possible to edit your posts if you are not happy with them, rather than deleting them and starting over. Lots easier.

[Sparko]

sigh. saying what the gospels tell us is called "referring to evidence" not "begging the question" you idiot.

so now every time you cite an expert's article we can claim you are begging the question. good to know.



Gary, you really, REALLY suck at apologetics and debate. Really,

[One Bad Pig]

OBP: "There's a crucial difference between these and the appearances of Jesus - the latter often involved appearances to multiple people simultaneously, and involved multiple senses."

How do you know these appearances involved multiple senses?

Answer: That is what the Gospels say!

Hand-waving duly noted.

The alleged appearances to groups can be easily explained by looking at cumulative human experience: the misperception of natural phenomena such as a bright light, a cloud formation, or a shadow.

Pathetic attempt to blur categories duly noted. None of those by themselves would would lend credence to the idea that Jesus had been resurrected. Ancient people weren't credulous idiots, Gary.

"Of course, Orthodox and Catholic Christians DO believe that Mary was assumed into heaven after her burial - you can visit her tomb outside Jerusalem - but that belief is not based on post-assumption appearances (which do not appear to have happened until quite some time later). Further, there's just not a whole lot of parallel between the accounts, because Mary died a natural death, didn't raise herself, and was assumed directly from the tomb to heaven. "

How many Protestants reading this thread believe that the body of the dead Virgin Mary was wisked out of her grave up into heaven leaving yet ANOTHER EMPTY TOMB and neatly folded grave clothes????

Sorry, Mary didn't leave grave clothes behind either.

Isn't it obvious, folks?

Obvious that you're desperate enough to say anything in order to cast doubt on the Resurrection.

The Empty Tomb of Jesus and the Empty Tomb of Mary are both examples of early catholic "miracle" claims used to "shock and awe" the ignorant, superstitious masses into believing.

There is nothing to which you won't stoop, is there?