"Incorrect group memories" fails as an explanation in large part because these recollections didn't constitute a "non-essential" part of their lives. Rather, these people's whole lives became oriented around seeing Jesus alive. Furthermore, regarding singular and group appearances, it was not some "truncated" experience. Spending 5 minutes thinking you're seeing something that isn't real is quite different from an extended period of time. Case in point: Peter & his buddies are fishing (they're preoccupied with something, obviously). Someone talks to them from the shore. After a little bit, they "clue in" to who it is, and what does Peter do? He jumps into the water (shouldn't that shock someone out of a hallucination?), swims to shore (how long would that take), staggers up on the beach where he joins Jesus (still his hallucination??) who's making a snack for everyone. Of course, Peter's buddies (being the more responsible sort of guys) go to the bother of finishing the catch, rowing back to shore, getting the boat secure (kind of a habit for fishermen), and then sauntering over to where Peter & Jesus are hanging out. We've got to stop imagining these as some kind of movie cut-scenes. This was REAL LIFE activity, back in the day where you walked everywhere, had to find a water source if you wanted a drink, had to grow/raise/catch food, etc., etc.
You don't just "look at the probability of that hypothesis". You have to "look at the probability of a hypothesis in comparison to alternate explanations and their probabilities." Don't try to do a math equation with half of the equation written out. Solve this: x + y -25^ 3 + z =
There is NO evidence for an empty tomb. The empty tomb is part of the story written years later. And Paul didn't see the resurrected Jesus, he saw Jesus post-ascension. No one knows how many people claimed to have seen Jesus after he was resurrected, it could be as few as a single person who told others. And that person could have been honestly mistaken or lying. There is no way to know.
Most Christian scholars say Mark was the earliest published of the 4 gospels. Most Christian scholars say text written authentically by Mark stops at the place we now call chapter 16 verse 8. If it is reasonable to accept the scholarly majority viewpoint, then it is reasonable to conclude that the earliest gospel never said anybody ever actually saw the risen Christ. It would be thus reasonable, in turn, to infer that the reason the later gospels say various people actually saw the risen Christ , is because of legendary embellishment.
@@les2997 There is literally no evidence of an empty tomb. There isn't even any evidence of a tomb full-stop. And the idea we have Jesus' burial clothes is just batshit insane. Which part of any of that was in the remotest bit scientific?
@@les2997 The shroud of Turin was never used to bury anybody, let alone Jesus. Go buy some critical thinking skills, man. Also, look into this science thing you're so keen on. It'll blow your mind.
Excellent video, Mike, and awesome discussion!
The answer is "Yes, it is improbable"
"Incorrect group memories" fails as an explanation in large part because these recollections didn't constitute a "non-essential" part of their lives. Rather, these people's whole lives became oriented around seeing Jesus alive.
Furthermore, regarding singular and group appearances, it was not some "truncated" experience. Spending 5 minutes thinking you're seeing something that isn't real is quite different from an extended period of time. Case in point: Peter & his buddies are fishing (they're preoccupied with something, obviously). Someone talks to them from the shore. After a little bit, they "clue in" to who it is, and what does Peter do? He jumps into the water (shouldn't that shock someone out of a hallucination?), swims to shore (how long would that take), staggers up on the beach where he joins Jesus (still his hallucination??) who's making a snack for everyone. Of course, Peter's buddies (being the more responsible sort of guys) go to the bother of finishing the catch, rowing back to shore, getting the boat secure (kind of a habit for fishermen), and then sauntering over to where Peter & Jesus are hanging out.
We've got to stop imagining these as some kind of movie cut-scenes. This was REAL LIFE activity, back in the day where you walked everywhere, had to find a water source if you wanted a drink, had to grow/raise/catch food, etc., etc.
You don't just "look at the probability of that hypothesis". You have to "look at the probability of a hypothesis in comparison to alternate explanations and their probabilities."
Don't try to do a math equation with half of the equation written out. Solve this: x + y -25^ 3 + z =
There is NO evidence for an empty tomb. The empty tomb is part of the story written years later. And Paul didn't see the resurrected Jesus, he saw Jesus post-ascension. No one knows how many people claimed to have seen Jesus after he was resurrected, it could be as few as a single person who told others. And that person could have been honestly mistaken or lying. There is no way to know.
same with other history lack of witnesses and other crime story. but still its history and it happens
Most Christian scholars say Mark was the earliest published of the 4 gospels.
Most Christian scholars say text written authentically by Mark stops at the place we now call chapter 16 verse 8.
If it is reasonable to accept the scholarly majority viewpoint, then it is reasonable to conclude that the earliest gospel never said anybody ever actually saw the risen Christ. It would be thus reasonable, in turn, to infer that the reason the later gospels say various people actually saw the risen Christ , is because of legendary embellishment.
Excellent, Mike. Thank you for posting the video.
So we have a strong maybe, but the "risen Jesus" is not a "fact"..
To see how strong a "maybe", check out my comment just a little ways from yours.
The empty tomb is a historical fact. We have Jesus burial cloths.
It isn't, and we don't. Holy crap people.
@@cmhhansen Ignoring science will make you look foolish.
@@les2997 There is literally no evidence of an empty tomb. There isn't even any evidence of a tomb full-stop. And the idea we have Jesus' burial clothes is just batshit insane. Which part of any of that was in the remotest bit scientific?
@@cmhhansen Ignoring science is going to make you look foolish. Check the Shroud of Turin.
@@les2997 The shroud of Turin was never used to bury anybody, let alone Jesus. Go buy some critical thinking skills, man. Also, look into this science thing you're so keen on. It'll blow your mind.