Well, first you need to wrap them in duct tape so they don’t explode.
Certainly not hard evidence by any means, but an interesting read anyway:
If you see someone bumping this thread years from now, please link back to this post.
If you operate from the basic assumption (which the OP has done) that there is a higher power that has created the Universe, is omnipotent and so forth, then why is it hard to believe that he could magically bring someone back to life?
I think the standard Christian answer is “it was a miracle.” If there were a way to explain it with our knowledge of how physics works, then it wouldn’t be a miracle.
The whole concept of Christianity for the last 1900 years or so, is that God performed this miracle to resurrect Jesus (who was also the same God). If you try to take away the miraculousness of it, aren’t you kind of gutting Christianity of its central claim?
The OP is clearly operating on the assumption that God isn’t omnipotent, since an omnipotent can of course do anything logically possible.
Also, remember that initially Jesus was thought to be John the Baptist risen from the dead.
Mark 6:14 And king Herod heard of him; (for his name was spread abroad:) and he said, That John the Baptist was risen from the dead, and therefore mighty works do shew forth themselves in him.
If I’m reading the OP correctly, I believe that he is questioning how a god can create a universe with the fixed Rule Set X, and then later insert contravening Incident Y.
The answer is, that if Incident Y occurs, it violates and invalidates the entire Rule Set X. The important thing to remember is that this god itself exists outside of Rule Set X.
This god is omnipotent and omniscient and can do whatever it wants. It can create a universe with Rule Set X, Rule Set Y, Rule Set XY, or whatever.
However, once creating a universe with Rule Set X, in order for this universe to exist properly, the set of rules must be abided by, and not interfered with, otherwise it all unravels.
I believe a similar analogy would be creating a fully-functioning computer program with Programming Language X (I have no experience with computer programming whatsoever, so I’m quite willing to stand corrected.)
If you didn’t like the way the program turned out you could alter it, or scrap it and try again, or even try to write a whole different program with Programming Language Y. In this sense you’re fairly omnipotent.
What you can’t do, however, is fix your Programming Language X program by inserting a line of code from completely different Programming Language Y. Your program would crash.
Boethius came up with a similar explanation in his “Consolation of Philosophy” to explain the Christian God’s omnipresence and omniscience. “Time” is merely a property of the Christian Universe that He created (i.e. a property of Rule Set X) and He exists outside this concept of time.
If he could create the world with rule set “x”, I see no reason to postulate that couldn’t, at a later date, add rule “y” to rule set “x”. How did you surmise that God is constrained to not be able to do that? It looks like an after-the-fact made up constraint to fit this particular issue.
I’m not sure it’s necessary to add additional premises, i.e. that God exists “out of time”, whatever that means. The simpler explanation, assuming someone actually did “rise from the dead” after three days was that he wasn’t really dead at all. The apparent contradiction is from our limited understanding of the human body, i.e. the resurrection is not a violation of Rule Set X, it’s that we have a few mistaken assumptions about Rule Set X, i.e. we assume someone who gets crucified also dies, and this is not necessarily so.
Should we assume a rational explanation means a material explanation?
Of course its hard to put together truth from testimony written with political intent decades after the event, but what always struck me as odd about the resurrection is that nobody seems to recognize Jesus after he was resurrected. My explanation that fits the facts presented in the bible is that Jesus’s body was taken from the tomb for whatever reason and then one of Jesus’ followers decides to keep his legacy alive by claiming that he Jesus reborn, even though he looks nothing like him.
I’m with CurtC. No one in the last two millenia who has argued that Jesus literally rose from the dead have claimed that it is consistent with the natural law or science. The whole point of the resurrection, and Jesus’ other miracles, is that they were miracles. If they were all illusions or misunderstandings, Jesus is no different than any other moral teacher.
And of course many people believe that; but then they don’t let the story of the resurrection bother them any more than the story of Jesus walking on water or healing lepers. Either you accept that Jesus was able to break the rules or not.
Yeah, but if he breaks the rules, does it go on his permanent record?
What is interesting also is that after the resurection when He appeared to the apostels they did not reconize Him (Jn 20,13, 21:4, Lk 24:16)
Matt 16:12 has a interesting phrasing:
Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country.
If you also take the Gospel of Thomas, which I have not read, so just going on what I’ve heard about it. Jesus did not die or suffer on the cross, as this world could not kill Him, but somehow switched bodies or came out of His body into another and watched from a distance.
Going with the above, and the OP’s tendency towards having science define what is real. We have not scientifically discovered what really is life, we can’t yet explain it, if there is a ‘soul’ still is unfounded, and what exactly is consciousness. We have some hope of actually transferring human consciousnesses to a machine, such is the basis of some sci-fi storyline, but also I heard it expressed as a possible way to extend human life span or for human stellar travel, so it is not scientifically ruled out.
One may argue that the technology for that was not available back then, and still not today, though we might aspire to that today. To that, using scientific lines, I say that the universe is a very large place, and it is possible that we are not the only intelligent species out there, and as we exercise wisdom in limiting out contact with primitive people and wild animals in nature, a ‘non-interference’ morality, it is very likely that aliens would also develop this morality as they advanced if morality is absolute. So the use of high technology would be limited to perhaps a few people witnessing it. And that high level of technology would only be employed to help the species where it may otherwise fail, otherwise they would observe us as hands off and as out of sight as possible, as we tend to observe wild animals more so today then in the past.
So scientifically it is not ruled out that Jesus could have been raised from the dead, or even placed in another body, but it would take scientific knowledge beyond our current understanding, though that does not rule that out from others (aliens) using that technology.
Had to have been freezing. caused a coma.
There is no rational answer. My father, who did not believe in God, used to address all the “I’m a Christian, but…” issues the same way.
“You say you believe in a God who made heaven and earth and all that is seen and unseen, and who is eternal, all-powerful and all-knowing. But you can’t believe God could (insert miracle here)???”
What’s REALLY interesting is that the appearances only appeared in later gospels (ie, legendary embellishment), as opposed to the earliest source (Mark)…
There may have been an historical Jesus, however I doubt that he came back to life. There probably was a rabbi wandering around teaching certain things, who may have been executed by the Romans, however probably his corpse was made away with and hidden, if at all. Later, at least a generation after his death certain people made writings about the mystical happenings as an explanation of their particular cult. Doesn’t mean his teachings were wrong, just that they mythologized him after the fact. As to the old testament, it is the religious text belonging to a religion that is not my own. Yes, Christianity started out as a jewish sub cult, but it differentiated long enough in the past that most christians have only vague understandings of it as we tend to concentrate on the new testament and Jesus, not Talmudic law and the Torah.
I’m not sure I understand your issue. Since you believe in God, I would have assumed that you would have no issue whith him being able to subvert natural laws and work a miracle. And if I’m misunderstanting and that you actually not believing in god anymore, I fail to see how not believing in the resurrection could be an issue.
Do you mean that in your opinion, god wouldn’t break the “rules” he has himself imposed on the universe?
I believe the Gospel of Thomas is though to be earlier.