If you don’t believe Jesus was God, then how do you explain the historical fact that his tomb was empty, there were several eyewitnesses to his postmortem appearances, and many of his disciples died for their faith?
SAM THE SKEPTIC: Personally, I don’t even think Jesus existed. First, no secular evidence outside the Bible supports the life of Jesus. No birth records, no trial transcripts, no death certificates, nothing.
Second, the earliest NT writers seemed confused about the details and theology of Jesus’s life, which became clearer later on in the history of Christianity. For instance, the Trinity wasn’t developed until 200 years after Jesus’s death by the church leader Tertullian.
Third, the resurrection story is contradictory. John 20:1 says only Mary Magdalene came to the tomb on Sunday morning, Matthew 28:1 said Mary the Mother of Jesus and Mary of Magdalene showed up, and Mark 16:1 says both Mary’s plus a woman named Salome. Which one is it? Also, after finding the tomb empty, Mark 16:8 states they ran away and said nothing to anyone, but Matthew, Luke, and John all say the women ran to tell the disciples.
Now to the supposed resurrection. There are various hypothesis that explain the apparent resurrection of Jesus. The swoon theory argues that Jesus did not die on the cross, but fell unconscious and was later revived in the tomb in the same mortal body.
The second hypothesis argues Jesus was stolen from his burial. His tomb was found empty not because he was resurrected, but because the body was hidden somewhere else by the apostles or some unknown person. Grave robbing was a known problem in the first century Judaea.
Lastly, the vision hypothesis argues the sightings of a risen Jesus were visionary experiences. It’s similar to modern day ghost hunters who desperately try to find the supernatural that they hear and even say they “see” ghosts. However, there is no empirical evidence for this.
These are just some of the reasons why I don’t think Jesus rose from the dead or even existed. Thanks for your question.
CHRISTIAN ANSWER: Sam stated there was no secular evidence outside the Bible that supports the life of Jesus. This is simply false. The Roman historian Tacitus wrote about Christ in his historical document “Annals” in AD 116. He mentions the emperor Nero and how he tortured Christians for following Christ, the one who suffered crucifixion during the reign of Tiberius.
Then there was the Jewish historian Josephus who wrote Antiquities of the Jews in AD 74 about Jesus who transgressed the law and was punished. Moreover, there was a letter written in AD 72 by an Assyrian Stoic Philosopher named Mara Bar Serapion. The letter refers to the unjust treatment of the execution of the “wise king” of the Jews.
Finally, to say one must appeal to a source other than the Bible to confirm the historical Jesus is like telling someone else to write my own biography. Shouldn’t the disciples be able to write a story about the person they followed?
Sam the skeptic mentioned three counter arguments to the resurrection of Christ: The swoon theory, the stolen body, and the visionary theory. Let me briefly show the weaknesses of these three views. The swoon theory argues Jesus did not die on the cross, but fell unconscious and later revived in the tomb. Medical authorities have reviewed the 1st century Roman execution process and found this theory unwarranted. First, they would scourge them with 39 lashes. This would produce deep lacerations and much blood loss, which most likely set the stage for hypovolemic shock and was the reason Jesus fell climbing up Golgatha. At the crucifixion, Jesus’ wrists and feet were nailed to the cross, which caused him to slowly suffocate to death. It also states a soldier thrusted a spear into Jesus side, and both water and blood came out. The reason water came out was because sustained rapid heart beat causes the fluid to gather in the sack around the heart and lungs. It’s called a pericardial effusion. Jesus was definitely dead.
The stolen body is another argument. Ironically, many skeptical NT scholars have been convinced that Jesus’ burial by Joseph of Arimathea is unlikely to have been a Christian fabrication. Given the hostility Christians had toward the Sanhedrin, it is unlikely Jesus’ followers would have invented a tradition about a member of the Sanhedrin using his own tomb to provide Jesus with a respectable burial. Second, the Jewish authorities knew exactly where this burial was so when rumors starting going around that Jesus resurrected from the dead, they would try to dispel this immediately and show the dead corpse since it would cause rioting in Jerusalem. However, the tomb was empty.
That’s why they accused the disciples of stealing the body in Matthew 28. But why would they accuse the disciples of stealing Jesus’ body if the tomb still contained the dead body of Jesus? Third, all the reports indicate the tomb was discovered empty by women. In first century Jewish society, women were not even allowed to testify in a court law. So if you were making up a story in an attempt to persuade others that Jesus was resurrected, why would you use women as your primary witnesses? The testimony of men would have provided much needed credibility to the story. Lastly, if the disciples stole the body, why would they die for a lie?
The last hypothesis states that the followers of Christ so badly wanted to experience the resurrection of Christ that they hallucinated. However, Jesus offered himself to be touched at least three times and he ate food with his disciples on 3 different occasions. When he appeared to Mary, she didn’t recognize him until he spoke her name. When he appeared to the apostles on a mountain in Galilee and to 500 others, it said some worshipped, and some were doubtful. All of these specific details indicate that the witnesses were not hallucinating or victims of group thinking.
Please feel free to leave a comment below. Thanks!
because there are no historical fact at all. he’s a composite myth character who has caused more trouble than good. there are zero academic standards in religious studies.
Thanks for your response. What do you mean there are zero academic standards in religious studies?
the video I posted explained that. how you want or feel about documents is not how the work is done.
King Herod was dead before the alleged birth and as much as we have about him, he never ordered the murder of population babies
if it wasn’t for Constanine, you’d be a Mithras follower
Ok, I saw the video that you posted here. I mentioned at least 3 historical sources outside of the Bible that mention the historical Jesus. Mara-Serapion, who was a Stoic Assyrian Philosopher, wrote to his Son in AD 73. He said, “What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king? Next, Josephus, a Jewish historian, wrote about the historical Jesus and his execution under the reign of Tiberius Caesar. Finally, in my article, I referenced Cornelius Tacitus. He was a Roman historian around 112 AD. He said, “Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius.”
There are also three other historical sources I did not refer to. Pliny the Younger, who was the Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor 112 AD. He wrote to the emperor Trajan about the followers of Jesus. There was a man named Thallus, who was a Samaritan historian. He wrote in AD 52 attempting to explain the bizarre phenomenon that happened during the crucifixion of Jesus in a naturalistic way. This man was not a believer. Then there was Suetonius, a court official under Hadrian. He writes,”As the Jews were making constant disturbance at the instigation of Christ, he expelled them from Rome.”
I am no expert, but I encourage you to look up these historians yourself. If you have any further questions or comments, I hope I can answer them. Have a happy new year!
a generation is 20 years. do you think Elvis Presley could have happened but no one wrote about him for another few years?
Joseph is known forgeries by later christian scribes. you are over claiming with THallus – Pliny wrote about a cult
and funny how Pontius pilot never wrote about the event, eh?
also. there were never Jewish slaves in Egypt, the known lifts from earlier religions and there you are using a computer on the internet – made by atheists and homosexuals… . to spread bronze age stories in the information age.
So, are you sure you want to insist in your claim? Because even the well respected Historians like W. E. H. Lecky has recognized the opposite of your allegation and said: “The character of Jesus is not only the highest pattern of virtue BUT the strongest incentive in it practice and influence! 3 Years of active life has done more to regenerate & soften mankind than all the disquisitions of philosophers and all exhortations of moralists”
On another note, PLEASE forgive the abusers of the faith if you can find it in your heart. I am sorry if you have suffered on the hands of “token Christians”. Please do not judge the faith like we are asked not to judge a philosophy by its abusers of its practice.
On the diametrically opposite end, upon further examination, you may be amazed discover all the bastions of higher learning were established by fervent followers of Christ who gave it all in the process of giving back!
I should forgive those who would oppress and genocide me? No thanks.
Religion is mental illness and should be in the diagnostic manual.
Who are the skeptical scholars who are convinced that the honorable burial is unlikely to be an invention?
Atheist Jeffrey Jay Lowder.
I am not familiar with Lowder’s position on the empty tomb, although he seems to be a bright guy,. Nevertheless, he does not have a PhD in New Testament studies, nor does he qualify as a NEw Testament scholar, much less “many” New Testament scholars. I would guess that the broad consensus among mainstream scholars would be that the honorable burial cannot be affirmed as historical.
In all honesty, I would have to do more research on Joseph of Arimethia. When I wrote this article, I saw that comment about Joseph from a Christian scholar. Of course, his perspective was biased. Thanks for bringing this up.