Historical Resurrection of Christ? NT Wright responds (HD)

(HD) Transcript: "The resurrection of Jesus took everybody by surprise. The disciples werent expecting it. They knew perfectly well, that if you followed someone who you thought was the Messiah, and he got killed, then that was it. We know at least a dozen other Messianic or prophetic movements, within a hundred years on either side of Jesus, they routinely ended with the death of the founder. And if the movement wanted to continue, they didnt say, oh hes been raised from the dead. They said, lets find his brother or cousin who can carry on this movement. You can see how those Jewish groups did that. This one did it differently. They had James the brother of Jesus, as this great leader of the early church, but nobody said, James is the Messiah. They said, Jesus is the Messiah. Why? Hes dead. They got him, didnt you realize they crucified... No. He was raised from the dead. The only way you can explain, why Christianity began, and why it took the very precise shape it was, is lets say it cautiously, first - they really did believe He was bodily raised from the dead. And then if you take the second question, why would they believe that? You can go through all the theories, that they found themselves forgiven. They had a fresh sense of the presence of God. That this was cognitive dissonance, etc. Then you bring all those theories to the actual facts that we know on the ground in the first century. . .they just dont fit. The only way you can explain the rise of the early Christian belief that Jesus was raised, is that there really was an empty tomb. They really did meet Jesus again, in a transformed body. And the thing makes sense. Of course, when I wrote a big book on this, my philosopher tutor from Oxford who was an atheist read it and he said, great book. You really make the argument. I simply choose to believe that there must be some other explanation even though I dont know what it was. I said, fine. Thats as far as I can take you. I cant bully you into saying, therefore you must believe. Because to do that requires a change of world view. But, once you change the world view, and say, maybe there really is a creator God. Maybe this creator God, really is sorting out this sad old world at last. Then, everything else makes sense in a way that it doesnt with any other possibility."

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• QA
• huntleyweb
• apr-26-10
• apr-21-11
• HS8573
• HS8831
• 100huntley
• christian
• philosophy
• historical
• resurrection
• christ
• nt
• wright
• anglican
• bishop
• christianity
• bible
• church
• 100
• huntley
• street

[naybobdenod]

Too many `maybe`s ` and too many ` ifs ` for my liking.

[Falcondick69]

@GARYWERSLEY and im sure you have mountains of evidence to support this claim?

[TheFunkyTheist]

@TheIconodule I see you and I have a common interest in being Wright?

[TheIconodule]

@TheFunkyTheist hah!

[TheFunkyTheist]

Professor, you are wright.

[GARYWERSLEY]

@zytigon The Golden Rule.1st wrote down by Confucious about 600 BC.He came up with a whole load of rules for living a civilised life.This simplewell known idea was borrowed by the writers of the NTand ascribed to Jesus,a fictional character.The story ofJesus is probly older than the time ascribed to it and may have originated in ancient Alexandria were the OT was 1st translated into Greek from Hebrew at about 200BC.OT and Paganism became our NT."Out of Eygpt have I called my Son."Mat2:15.Hos11:1

[GARYWERSLEY]

@noforbiddenquestions The NT is a collection of stories about a fictional man named Jesus.The origins of the story are obscure,but it is probly older than the time ascribed to it in the Bible.Jesus and the apostles never actually xisted.The stories told about him never happened.There were many stories rejected by the compilers of our NT.Those who compiled the various stories are only 1 branch of a then already xisting Cult of Jesus.With Churches Bishops Deacons Scriptures.They dated the events..

[GARYWERSLEY]

@WayTruthLife83 The whole passage refering to Jesus in Josephus is suspect,which means it is not fit for evidence.The reports of the sky darkening are also suspect, thought to have been inserted by later Christian historians.No contemporary speaks of any event in Jesus life.

Some early Christians cannot be trusted, not because they are Christian,but because they are supected of being forgers.Chief suspect forger is Eusebius,who wrote the history of Christianity up to his time,about AD315.

[Falcondick69]

NT wright should be the next US president

[WayTruthLife83]

@GARYWERSLEY The consensus on Josephus seems to be part of it was a forgery, part of it wasn't.

There were also reports of the sky darkening. Why do you think some early Christian historians can't be trusted, just because they were Christian?