There’s been interesting conversation regarding Jesus’ sanity on this blog. I thought it to be a decent idea to bring this discussion back up (to the top of the blog as it were). But let me pose a new angle:
The Rev. Lee Strobel encountered a few messiahs in mental hospitals during his years as the Chicago Tribune?s ultra-skeptical legal affairs reporter. “I met people who said they were Jesus on a fairly regular basis, he said, but anyone can claim to be God. The question is whether they can back that up. That?s why the resurrection is so crucial for Christians.”
I found this quote in an article giving reasons to believe in Jesus. The crux of it is this idea of the resurrection.
Dr. William Lane Craig, Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology, wrote in the article The Evidence For Jesus :
Any responsible historian, then, who seeks to give an account of the matter [of the resurrection], must deal with these four independently established facts: the honorable burial of Jesus, the discovery of his empty tomb, his appearances alive after his death, and the very origin of the disciples? belief in his resurrection and, hence, of Christianity itself. I want to emphasize that these four facts represent, not the conclusions of conservative scholars, nor have I quoted conservative scholars, but represent rather the majority view of New Testament scholarship today. The question is: how do you best explain these facts?
So let me pose that same question: how do you best explain the account of the resurrection of Christ?
8 Comments
Feed for this entry
Trackback Address
May 17th, 2006 at 3:10 am
a story totally taken from pagan mythology! fools.
May 17th, 2006 at 3:19 am
y0y0, who are you calling the fool? Those who have faith in Jesus, those who have espoused the historical account, or those who believe in the pagan mythology. Your comment isn’t clear as to whom you’re directing your angst and judgement. Would you care to clarify?
May 17th, 2006 at 1:05 pm
Why should we believe a reecent publication which brings confusion to our christianity?
Indeed the end times has come.
Jesus already predicted the future, telling us about nations rising against nations,and especially about the false prophets and teachings.
My fellow Christians stand firm in the Lord , for this is the end times were you will see all kinds of things, that will contradict with the word of God.
Beware of false teachings , close your hears and eyes to false teachings and things which are not of God.
Remember it is written that you should endure all this to the very end!!
Jesus is coming soon. It will be a suprise for all, Shock to those who listen to false teachings and sinners , But those who abide under the shelter of God shall find a resting place in the Most High
Keep your faith in God throuhg Christ Jesus and don,t be deceived with things of the devil especially false teachings
Have faith and may the peace of God be with you all
Frederick
July 12th, 2006 at 9:24 am
I personally do not believe in the resurrection of Christ.I do
however believe that the New Testament was put together by some mysoganistic men seeking to down-grade the role of women in society, and to creating a myth surrounding, possibly a well-meaning prophet.
Why would Christ address his mother as “woman?” This sounds more like the words of a mysoganistic, arrogant male.
Why, when on the Cross, does he say “Woman, behold your Son!”Then to the disciple, Behold your mother?”
I cannot believe these are the words of a dying man on the Cross, especially someone who is apparently the Son of God.
July 12th, 2006 at 9:10 pm
Graham, the New Testament downgrades the role of women in society? I disagree. Firstly, Jesus taught women, which was simply not done at the time. In fact women then usually received no education at all. Jesus made a special point of commending Mary for listening to Him teach, as compared to her sister Martha.
Jesus calls a women he heals “a daughter of Abraham”, a phase that was not used at the time. (”A son of Abraham, sure”, the Pharisees probably thought “… but a daughter?”)
A woman’s testimony at that time was not considered valid in court. Yet even so, the authors of the gospels still faithfully describe how it was a group of women that found the empty tomb. If the men who wrote the gospels were really ‘misogynistic’, it’s hard to explain why they would include that as a prominent feature of their writings. Women were also part of the early church, for example Romans 16:1-2 where Phoebe is referred to by Paul as a “deaconess” along with several other women.
Frankly though, I do not know why Jesus chose to use the word “woman” on the cross. (I remember hearing that Jesus’ use of the word here refers back to Genesis 3:15; the connection is, IMHO, tenuous at best). Perhaps we shouldn’t be so quick to judge how Jesus used the word back then as it may have had different connotations than it does now?
Paul states decisively in Galatians 3:26-29: “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”
What evidence (other than personal opinion) could we say suggests a ‘misogynist’ conspiracy by the disciples?
July 15th, 2006 at 2:55 pm
Don’t you find it ironic even hypercritical that all these Christians condem a book/film they have never in the main seen. Pick at the “facts” in a work of DECLARED fiction, yet live their whole lives following a belief that has not one solid fact to support it, and call it faith and expect everybody to follow there lead.
Sad so Sad.
July 16th, 2006 at 1:30 pm
Ian, I have read the book and seen the movie. It’s convenient for Dan Brown to be able to hide behind the claim that the book is fiction while still declaring “FACT: The Priory of Sion - a European secret society founded in 1099 - is a real organization. … All descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents, and secret rituals in this novel are accurate.”, but it is deceptive at best.
There is such a thing as ‘reasonable faith’. We all (including me and you) have faith in things that are not 100% provable, and we are right in doing so. The idea that there is ‘not one solid fact to support it’ is quite wrong, and I (as a former atheist) would not have accepted Christianity unless it stood upon a firm foundation of historical and philosophical truth. Faith is ultimately about trust, and I trust in Jesus because I have examined the evidence, not in spite of the evidence.
See for example Skeptical Christian.
July 16th, 2006 at 1:44 pm
I didn’t see the movie based on the poor reviews and because I am such a cheap skate and because I had already read the book anyway which is always better. I might have gone to see it if it was at the theatre where my son works, as he can sometimes take a friend for free. Anyhow I know I will see the video eventually. A work mate suggested I read the book which I found interesting and thot provoking and not a bad thing. Not the boogie man that some Christians were claiming it to be. However, I too was struck with the seeming arrogance of Dan Brown’s allusions to it being totally true and not fiction when I knew otherwise.