Re: Don't convince me of the resurrection from the bible
Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2013 1:20 pm
BUT ALSO
You can show that the actual resurrection of Jesus is the most reasonable explanation for the historical evidence
In other words, anyone taking a position has to have some theory to explain the historical record. When put side by side and considered for their pros and cons, the historical resurrection is the theory that makes the most sense. That is slightly different from being 'beyond any reasonable doubt', but not a ton different. Faith is more about starting to act on the most reasonable theory than it is about believing something that is not quite reasonable.
Yes i agree and the resurrection is the best explanation for the empty tomb and the encounters with the resurrected Christ. If i were a skeptic i might claim the body of Jesus never made it to the tomb meaning it was destroyed or buried someplace else and later the disciples had mass hallucinations but this analysis is unsatisfying unless someone is committed to their skepticism.
You can show that the actual resurrection of Jesus is the most reasonable explanation for the historical evidence
In other words, anyone taking a position has to have some theory to explain the historical record. When put side by side and considered for their pros and cons, the historical resurrection is the theory that makes the most sense. That is slightly different from being 'beyond any reasonable doubt', but not a ton different. Faith is more about starting to act on the most reasonable theory than it is about believing something that is not quite reasonable.
Yes i agree and the resurrection is the best explanation for the empty tomb and the encounters with the resurrected Christ. If i were a skeptic i might claim the body of Jesus never made it to the tomb meaning it was destroyed or buried someplace else and later the disciples had mass hallucinations but this analysis is unsatisfying unless someone is committed to their skepticism.