Where was the dead body of Jesus? Did the disciples disappear it?

by opusdei1972 63 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Qcmbr

  If Jesus existed then maybe he didn't die as evidenced by post-cruxifiction activities so:

  • Imposter (why did no one recognise him).
  • Someone took fall for him.
  • He didn't die on cross (on there a few hours , soldier bribed to claim speared) and needed some time to recover.
  • Elaborate ruse worked up by someone in authority (a high level convert).

  If Jesus did die:

  • Imposter
  • Made up stories

  What did not happen:

  • Came back to life from a dead state due to supernatural reasons after paying supernatural debt to supernatural self to fulfil supernatural laws broken by supernatural first man and woman.
• 

  sowhatnow

  after reading many things, and yet always thinking if God is so powerful , you would thnk here would be mountains of evidence for the proof of jesus. and that the bible after thousands of years would not be so controversial, its never made selse, theres info in it humans would not have needed to know if all we needed to have was faith in jesus. too many contradictions, and no real logic for all the goofy things the people had to do.

  i posted on yahoo answers, a question similar to this, cant recall my exact words,

  what proof is there of what happened in luke about jesus healing the crowds of people, after all there should be many historians that have written down this event,

  the anwsers i got were many and pretty hepful , and really, not surprising. lots of references ot readings from , the christ conspiracy the greatest story ever told. and also reading bart ehrmans books. and some others

  no one has any proof this jesus christ exsisted.

  and now the new info is that romes govt at the time made it all up to control the people.

  maybe thats what they are hidng in the vadican.

  there is a docmentary or book called ceasars messiah. sounds interesting.

  sorry for my misspelled words i dont know how to spell check here. and i dont know how to use the one on my laptop for on line posts.
• 

  designs

  The greatest proof Jesus is alive- Benny Hinn's new jet.
• 

  bioflex

  @cofty:

  Paul never teaches the bodily resurrection of Jesus.

  The myth grows from Jesus being with his followers in some metaphorical sense to a bodily resurrection over many decades.

  Psa 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell (grave); neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

  There is proof enough in the bible.( i can understand if you dont believe the bible)

  1. The fact that he was raised proves bodily ressurection - he died in the body and was ressurected in the body.

  2. The fact that his mortal body did not see corruption(decay) proves a bodily resurrection. (spiritual bodies cant decay)

  3. The fact that he still had the marks from his cricifixion proves bodily resurrection.
• 

  bohm

  Bioflex:

  1. The fact that he was raised proves bodily ressurection

  Circular argument. you cannot begin an argument if jesus was resurrected by assuming he was raised from the dead.

  2. The fact that his mortal body did not see corruption(decay) proves a bodily resurrection

  unwarrented assumption: You do not know his body did not decay.

  3. The fact that he still had the marks from his cricifixion proves bodily resurrection.

  circular argument. if you assume the account of the bible is true then he was raised; but the issue is if the account is true.
• 

  Band on the Run

  Believers can be rational. Paul most certqinly taught a physical resurrection. There are immense differences in theology between a physical resurrection and a spiritual/mystical one. He opposed the gnostics whose resurrection would be mystical/an illusion. Bart Ehrman's latest book concerning how Jesus became God is not being summarized accurately. He talks about the synoptics and John teaching very different views of Jesus. John is the only gospel that clearly elevates Jesus to God.

  What the main body of the text addresses is a series of steps in Judaism towards a man becoming God. I never thought of it as a Jewish idea. He mentions angels as a middle ground. I might call a prof in the fall and ask if there is any consensus in the field. I was always taught at college and church (but not KH) that YHWH was monotheistic. Ehrman comes up with a long list of steps toward Godhood. A few references were actually human. Was it Elijah who disappeared? Someone else, too.

  I don't want to parrot names as in the Witnesses and pretend that I know more than anyone else in the world. People don't like evangelicals of any sort. Atheists are included. I did not know Jesus on a personal basis. My mindset is not first century B.C. Middle Eastern. I've lived under the American empire not the Roman one.

  I've always viewed Ehrman as a populizer of other more academic work. This work should reach the masses. I have a feeling that temperament plays a major role in how comfortable we are with any belief. Friends who attend a wedding in Episcopal churches freak out b/c the fit is so good for me. It is possible to step back and view the material for what it says. I purposely never wrote about anything Witnessy b/c I wanted a good grade. A law degree is good for such work. We tend to focus on the text and acknowledge problematic issues.
• 

  cantleave

  I think Jesus was one of the regenerations of Dr.Who.
• 

  bioflex

  There is proof enough in the bible.( i can understand if you dont believe the bible)

  Perhaps you looked past what i put up there and there is a reason why i did. There is no point of having this argument if you consider my source(bible) as irrelivant.

  If you take the bible out then there would be no Jesus, Paul, and the other biblical folk and we would not be having this conversation. My response was directed specifically to cofty.

  cofty said: Paul never teaches the bodily resurrection of Jesus.

  The myth grows from Jesus being with his followers in some metaphorical sense to a bodily resurrection over many decades.
• 

  bioflex

  my above post is directed at bohm
• 

  bohm

  bioflex:

  There is no point of having this argument if you consider my source(bible) as irrelivant.

  I do not consider the bible to be irrelevant at all; it contain what the authors want to put into words.

  If you take the bible out then there would be no Jesus, Paul, and the other biblical folk and we would not be having this conversation.

  okay but i do not "take the bible out". I just don't accept what's in the bible as being automatically true just like you do not accept what's in other books (religious or not) to be automatically true.

  This naturally does not change the observation your "facts" are no such thing as the shortest consideration of the meaning of "fact" and "oppinion" should make you realize.