The Resurrection of Jesus: Evidence, objections and more.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 фев 2024
- In this conversation, Dr. Mike Licona and Bill Scott (@thetruthconversation) discuss the Resurrection of Jesus, from the most popular objections to commenting on aspects such as the Gospels' genre. Don't miss this exciting conversation.
____________________
Mike Licona is Professor of New Testament Studies at Houston Christian University. HCU offers an accredited Master of Arts degree in apologetics that may be completed entirely online or on the HCU campus in Houston.
📜For more information, visit bit.ly/2Wlej6Z
🎓You can also earn a Master of Divinity degree that can be completed entirely online at bit.ly/3po5uEX
👨🏻🎓 HCU offers a rigorous Doctorate of Ministry degree: hc.edu/houston-theological-se...
🌐WEBSITE: www.risenjesus.com
💻FACEBOOK: / drmikelicona
📱TWITTER: / drmikelicona
📚 Buy “Jesus, Contradicted”: bit.ly/48H0FNM
📚 Buy "The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus": amzn.to/38vTfNU
📚Buy "The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach": amzn.to/2NOOZkT
📚Buy "Paul Meets Muhammad": amzn.to/2RdEFoB
📚Buy "Why Are There Differences in the Gospels?": amzn.to/36dzc5C
🅿️ If you like Mike's work, become a patron by visiting his new Patreon page at / risenjesus or make a tax-deductible contribution(s) as allowed by law by going to Mike's secured website:
✋www.risenjesus.com/donate
I love the demonstration of the pencil that can be caught mid-air. It is a great apologetic example that can be used in any apologetic environment.
Thanks Brother Mike.
Used a lot of your work in my time as Youth Leader.
The Virgin Birth and the Resurrection are pivotal point's in my explaining CHRISTIANITY.
Keep on keeping on. Pietermartzburg🇮🇱 kzn South🇿🇦 Africa.
Nice glad to see you uploading again.
Love you Mike. We don't see eye to eye on everything but I think you rock and I pray for your continued success
First and foremost, the belief in the Resurrection is said to be "according to the Scriptures" per 1 Cor 15:3-4. So the "appearances" only serve as confirmation of this already arrived at belief based on their own interpretation of Scripture.
Secondly, the verb for "appeared" (ophthe) did not necessarily indicate the physical appearance of a person since it was also used for visions and dreams. Given that Paul is unclear whether or not the appearances happened before or after Jesus went to heaven, the exact nature of the appearances is unclear in our earliest source. Therefore, there is no solid evidence the appearances were even veridical in Paul's early testimony. Apologists have to appeal to the gospels for that idea. But of course, the gospels come later and each resurrection narrative seems to grow in the telling and evolve more elaborate. You can literally see the legend evolve when you read Paul, Mark 16:1-8, Matthew 28, Luke 24, and John 20-21 in that order.
"Ophthe" literally means that "he appeared", as in seen.
Thanks for playing
@@utopiabuster “The meaning of ophthe. Ophthe is the aorist passive form of the Greek verb horao (I see). The word is used nine times in the New Testament in relation to the raised Jesus (Luke 24: 34; Acts 9: 17; 13: 31; 26: 16a; 1 Cor. 15: 5-8 (four times); and 1 Tim. 3: 16). When used with the dative, it is usually translated ‘He appeared’, and as such emphasizes the revelatory initiative of the one who appears. The sense is almost, ‘He let himself be seen’ (as opposed to something like ‘he was seen’).
Some scholars who favour objective visions rather than ordinary seeing argue that the New Testament’s use of ophthe entails this conclusion. Thus Badham says: ‘most New Testament scholars believe that the word ophthe . . . refers to spiritual vision rather than to ocular sighting.’ The argument is that the religious use of ophthe is technical, marks a clear difference from ordinary visual perception of physical objects, and entails some sort of spiritual appearance, vision-like experience, or apprehension of a divine revelation.” - Stephen T. Davis, Christian Philosophical Theology, pg. 136
This idea is made clear in a passage from Philo:
“For which reason it is said, not that the wise man saw (εἶδε) God but that God appeared (ὤφθη) to the wise man; for it was impossible for any one to comprehend by his own unassisted power the true living God, unless he himself displayed and revealed himself to him.” - Philo, On Abraham 17.80
In these two cases, when referring to a past event that unambiguously refers to normal seeing, Paul uses the form εἶδον instead of ὤφθη.
Gal. 1:19
I saw (εἶδον) none of the other apostles-only James, the Lord’s brother.
Gal. 2:14
When I saw (εἶδον) that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas...
ὤφθη is mostly used in the Septuagint for when God appears in theophanies or angels in angelophanies. Why is this relevant? Because the phrase "Jesus appeared (ὤφθη) to...", without a further description, may be referring to appearances of Jesus from heaven (in a spiritual sense) rather than physically interacting with a formerly dead corpse that had been revived. Appealing to belief in a physical resurrection doesn't evade the ambiguity because 1 Cor 15 does not specify whether these appearances occurred before or after his ascension to heaven.
@@utopiabuster If my last comment isn't visible you'll have to click "new" comments. "Appeared to" is vague because Jesus can be believed to "appear" in a vision from heaven (like he did to Paul) so this doesn't evade the problem. Thanks for playing!
@@resurrectionnerd ,
Are you a graduate of the Richard Carrier School of Desperation?
Give me one acedemic citation for your claim.
And, come up with your own snazzy sarcastic valediction instead of the typical denierism of stealing wisdom from Christians.
Thanks for playing unworthy.
@@utopiabuster I just gave an academic citation. Again, click to view "new" comments.
“The meaning of ophthe. Ophthe is the aorist passive form of the Greek verb horao (I see). The word is used nine times in the New Testament in relation to the raised Jesus (Luke 24: 34; Acts 9: 17; 13: 31; 26: 16a; 1 Cor. 15: 5-8 (four times); and 1 Tim. 3: 16). When used with the dative, it is usually translated ‘He appeared’, and as such emphasizes the revelatory initiative of the one who appears. The sense is almost, ‘He let himself be seen’ (as opposed to something like ‘he was seen’).
Some scholars who favour objective visions rather than ordinary seeing argue that the New Testament’s use of ophthe entails this conclusion. Thus Badham says: ‘most New Testament scholars believe that the word ophthe . . . refers to spiritual vision rather than to ocular sighting.’ The argument is that the religious use of ophthe is technical, marks a clear difference from ordinary visual perception of physical objects, and entails some sort of spiritual appearance, vision-like experience, or apprehension of a divine revelation.” - Stephen T. Davis, Christian Philosophical Theology, pg. 136
What about the "dancing sun" in Fatima? Thousands of people saw the sun performing strange moves in the sky. I would classify this as a mass hallucination. If thousands can hallucinate a dancing sun then 500 people can hallucinate the appearence of a risen Jesus.
Jaja is not that simple budy , that event occured at the same time and the same location from people who was expecting that natural event , the diference with the christian beliefs is that must of them were not expecting to see jesus again they were separate from time and space , and the fatima event occured one time those christian guys were experiencing the risen jesus for over 40 days , not because an event has similarities is the same one , good luck trying to explain data in that way cause you wont be able to those guys had a contrary belief about the mesiah . This is an unique event who tranformed jewish that after killed jesus cause of his teachings , so why they would died for him and lose the most important fact in life that is their lifes themselves. Easy cause he raised and comproves he is god.
ruclips.net/video/6K2AQE7retM/видео.htmlsi=Fw9GkcnMpPb87QDc
Promo sm
The four gospels are not historical evidence of Jesus or the resurrection.
If this is your evidence, you have no evidence.
The Bible can indeed be evaluated as a historical document, and has held up throughout time, and unsubstantiated assertions by the RUclips atheist camp certainly pose no threat.
@Johnny-mz9ot
"The Bible can indeed be evaluated as a historical document"
... and has failed.
"and has held up throughout time"
Nope. It has been proven wrong over and over again.
"We have good reason to believe that Jesus predicted his death and resurrection."
Nope.
In fact, we have nothing written by Jesus, nor any eye witness accounts of what he said.
What we have are urban myths about Jesus written decades after he supposedly died.
Additionally, we know for a fact that some of the stories about Jesus are fabricated.
So we do not have good reason to believe any of that.