Exactly, nobodies.
like dead men not literally dead men.Unless you mean something else and im too naive to understand 
Hi Nick,
Thanks for your honest inquiry. It sounds like we need a historian to help answer your questions about how many historians might have been in the city of the time, how much writing down of events was done by people back then and could have been expected to have been saved for future people to read. Perhaps it is less than you might expect.
- No one actually witnessed the resurrection itself, rather they witnessed the risen Jesus, after knowing that He had died. Only His closest followers would have had such personal interactions with Jesus, that would have been fully convinced of that He was in fact, their friend and teacher Jesus, alive again. Three of those followers did write, in fact, what came to be the Gospels
- Jesus also appeared to about 500 other people on one occasion. 1 Corinthians 15:6 Those people were called ābrothers and sistersā so might have all been believers, too, but they were likely also marginalized. Hard to say if any would have been āhistorians.ā However, Jesus did not appear to the entire city of Jerusalem, so the number of historians who might have personally witnessed the risen Christ and have written about their observations would still be low.
While looking up that other verse for you, I also found this one, which I have heard as another argument for the faith. This is an account of a Jewish scholar, which looking back has prophetic implications for today. Some people say that the fact that there are so many followers of Christ, could suggest that the Christian movement could have indeed come from God.
Acts 5:33ff
33 When they heard this, they were furious and wanted to put them to death. 34 But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, who was honored by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men be put outside for a little while. 35 Then he addressed the Sanhedrin: āMen of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. 36 Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. 37 After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. 38 Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. 39 But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.ā
2 Likes
Thanks again michelle.I mean the historians didnt necceseraly wrote things down that theyve seen.They could have written down rumors .Or the guards report which we dont have?
I dont make an argument against our faith if you believe that by
I just like to know if the silence of the historians of that area on the ressurection subject should concern us?(if you like to put it that way)
Hi Nick,
I have been interpreting your question as genuine (not as arguing against the faith), which is why I thought it was worth the time to think about what responses to give that might be helpful to you. When I wrote āanother argument forā I mean in the sense of an āapologeticā argument that I have heard people use.
I am unconcerned about the lack of other extra biblical accounts, because the ones that you already mentioned make for good evidence on their own to help validate the reliability of the Gospels. Of course no one evidence can prove to us the existence of God, but I find that those types of apologetics do help to encourage me that my faith is reasonable. Faith can be rationale, while it is still faith.
1 Like
Thanks michelle.I knwo faith is very important especially on the ressurection.But sometimes questions raise up and you cant help it but to share them with others.Take care!!!
Yes, it is good that you are thinking in such a way that you have questions, and it is good that you bring those questions to others. I think God will honor your search as more questions continue to arise.
1 Like
I like the play on words and your understanding is fine. Michelle answered brilliantly. The witnesses were the chosen, believers, little people, marginal as Michelle said. The powerful had ābetterā things to do and could never see what was in front of them in their depravity. It has always been thus. It all adds to the credibility immensely for me.
2 Likes
True true. But i cannot see how could they ignore it .I mean they were aware of sorcery and such bet never seen a ressurected man.Orrā¦ i dont know maybe they did?I mean was necromancy even a thing back in ancient rome?Plus the soldiers would have seen it(meaning the ressurection)
The Talmud is a commentary on the Torah.
The evidence is in Scripture. The empty tomb is the greatest piece of evidence.
In post-biblical times, miracle-mongering and the relic cult (apparitions, magical pictures, etc.) would become big business. Martin Luther used to wonder why 18 of the 12 disciples were buried in Spain alone!
2 Likes
What i mean is extra biblical evidence
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.