There isnt always, just like there are not for many things. Where does that stupid statement come from? Your delusional mind?
It is no surprise that these fedoras have admitted that even if God himself appeared to them, they would claim it was aliens. There are no limits to the wishful thinking of atheists. They admit they will not let materialism go, and still expect people to take them seriously.
One proof would be we have a written account of what happened to the contrary, which mayhaps is not as plausible as Bart's nonsesne, but still has more evidence than anything else someone would consider plausible.
He'd then definitely would argue against the validity of the written account, but screw him.
lmao so true
How could I debunk that within the bounds of what he calls proof anymore than Ehrman could debunk me if I went double ultra skeptic and said that the empty tomb didn't happen at all?
Oh I suppose I could demand proof that these hyper efficient burial plots existed, seems like something you could acquire experimental evidence for.
And never mind the Roman guards placed at the designated tomb, who would have been crucified for failing to do their job. Imagine having to explain that “uh well they never showed up”, I’m sure that would have gone over well.
Is Ehrman just completely historically ignorant?
Three days for a corpse to decompose beyond recognition? I'll need a citation on that one. Also
< Be Roman soldier
< Assigned to guard a tomb so no one steals the body and claims He resurrected
< A band of brigands show up to steal the body, kill them all as ordered and throw them in a ditch
< Also throw the very corpse you were ordered to guard in there as well for apparently no reason
< Get crucified yourself because you had one job, to make sure the corpse stays in the tomb
Yeah, I don't think Roman solders were that retarded.
I doesn't explain the risen bodily appearances and isn't in explaining the nature of the stolen body or the origin of Christianity. I think Ehrman has his logic backwards here. People believed in the re-appearance of Jesus because the empty tomb pointed in its favor.
Ehrman is arguing that people believed that because the tomb was empty, Jesus must have there risen
which goes against the vast majority of New Testament scholarship; in fact, I don't know of anyone who argues this.
Bodily resurrection was not something that Jews believed would happen in the middle of time to one person; they believed that it would happen to many people at the end of time. To say that people were anticipating or expecting Jesus to rise from the dead, and could therefore use the empty tomb of evidence of this, is false. The resurrection was only believed after it happened. If Peter knew that Jesus was going to come back after He died, he wouldn't have acted the way he did. The resurrection was not understood or expected. The return of Jesus after His crucifixion was not something that was on-the-look-out for, and no one would have said
All scriptural and scholarly evidence points in the opposite direction.
People did rob graves, but it was typically only for the valuable cloths and oils and herbs that were on the body during its embalming. It is incredibly strange that people would steal the rather unmarketable body, leave behind neatly fold up the valuable and expensive sheets in which the body was wrapped, and carry the oily and herbaceous naked body through the streets. If they loved someone enough to steal their body to re-bury, they would have loved them enough to preserve their dignity and not carry their body out of the tomb naked. What Ehrman arguing here is simply not reasonable.
Let's hypothetically accept that they were killed by the Roman guards while they took the body and were thrown into a communal burial plot. Okay. If it were communal, then the Romans and many people would know where it was. If there were any doubt about concerning the location of Jesus' body - if Joseph of Aramithea's tomb was empty, then people would look elsewhere. If his tomb had a rolled-away stone and the body was gone, the logical conclusion is that the body had been removed. Where then would they look for the body? The communal pit and other burial sites.
If such an uproar was caused about Jesus and His re-appearance, in efforts to keep peace and order, the Romans would have simply said that the body had been moved to X location.
Bart Ehrman's argument is riddled with holes. What we must accept, as unlikely as it may be, is that the official Christian explanation of what happened is the most complete and solid explanation of what happened to Jesus' body and why people saw Him after He died.
It*
Typos, etc, might be more in there somewhere…
It doesn't explain the risen bodily appearances or the origin of such a belief. I think Ehrman has his logic backwards here. People believed in the re-appearance of Jesus because the empty tomb pointed in its favor, not the other way around.
According to Matthew 28, the first people to go visit Jesus at the tomb were Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Joseph (identified by Papias as the aunt of Jesus).
According to Mark 16, it was Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome.
According to Luke 23-24, it was "the women who had come with Him from Galilee . . . and certain other women with them".
According to John 20, it was Mary Magdalene.
The theory that Jesus's relatives were angry that Joseph of Arimathea was the one to bury him is not too crazy in itself. After all, Jesus's relatives didn't seem to be too close to Jesus's new community of disciples, and to be disparaging of His ministry, per Matthew 12:46-50, Matthew 13:53-58, Mark 3:31-35, Mark 6:1-6, and Luke 8:19-21. However, John 2:1-12 and Acts 1:12-14 remember them in a different light - it is shown that Jesus's relatives were in fact among His disciples too.
Regardless of which memory is correct (assuming they contradict each other at all to begin with), it still remains that Jesus's mother and aunt were most certainly among His disciples at least. If Bart Ehrman's hypothesis is correct, surely they would have noticed that several of their relatives have gone missing right after Jesus's burial, coinciding with His disappearance from the tomb.