Apparent death theory: a far-fetched story

A response to veritas48's 'defending the resurrection' series, specifically the part where he dismisses rival theories.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• veritas48
• resurrection
• jesus
• tomb
• evidence

[bababybwoo]

I realize that your not likely to believe this but it makes sense to me. I haven't heard yet that believers are debunking theorists on what actually happened. What do we know about that day? They say it must have been three days that he was dead but they don't consider that he may have been taken down off the cross the very night he died and began to heal for three days. The believers say they know his position and how deep he was pierced and where. do they?

[BL4NDY]

on the 3rd day he will rise again ,,, its about the sun over christmas dont you think , chk the stars people ;) lmfao

3kings etc,,, resideing under a cross, , chk it

!__!_!_!_!!!!!

[spAdeman1001]

"A personal, imminent God? What kind of thing do you have in mind as evidence (eg. cosmological arguments?)" Yep.

"Without assuming the truth of the NT narrative, do you have reason to expect that this God would arrange for the particular miracle of the resurrection in 1st C Palestine?" I don't know why I have to diregard the NT, but I'll play along. I have reason to believe there is now a being capable of such an act - which makes it possible. The OT and NT make it probable. Thx.

[bitbutter]

"the swoon theory would require that Jesus made a full recovery after only 3 days.

THAT is impossible."

A slight tangent: Why do you prefer the res' story over a version of swoon theory combined with a miracle-powered 3 day recovery?

[bitbutter]

"Why value our initial assessment of truth claims over our later - possibly better informed assessments?"

I'm not suggesting we should. Rather that initial likelihood needs to be assessed together with a posteriori evidence when deciding whether or not to accept a truth claim.

[SaintJimmyI]

Daniel Ekechukwu = raised from the dead.

[bitbutter]

I don't presuppose that miracles cannot occur. Rather, I haven't been convinced by the evidence for them that they ever do occur.

"In my opinion there is independent evidence that God exists"

A personal, imminent God? What kind of thing do you have in mind as evidence (eg. cosmological arguments?)

Without assuming the truth of the NT narrative, do you have reason to expect that this God would arrange for the particular miracle of the resurrection in 1st C Palestine?

[spAdeman1001]

By the "facts" I meant empty tomb, origin of Xtian chruch etc. - which I've heard are generally accepted. I've seen your latest video. Why value our initial assessment of truth claims over our later - possibly better informed assessments? Thx for the discussion.

[bitbutter]

"Yes, we must consider our expereince, but also the explanatory power of our hypothesis given the historical facts,"

You're right, but calling them 'historical facts' can be misleading. These 'facts' are actually truth claims also, and our confidence in them has to scale according to the initial likelihood of the claims they depend on. The res is initially very unlikely, even on theism (see my latest vid) and so our confidence in the supporting truth claims has to diminish accordingly.

[spAdeman1001]

"imo we do so by examining our experience of the world." This criteria ignores historical facts, it puts all the weight of authenticity on our very limited contemporary personal experience, and imo it is not valid. Yes, we must consider our expereince, but also the explanatory power of our hypothesis given the historical facts, and the explanatory power of rival hypothesis given the historical facts. Thx.