Fear of God is the First Instinct Behind Unbelief in the unbeliever

Faith & Science Conversation
, , , ,
181

How can I really address your final statement when most of what you quoted is a mix of cut-and-paste points, each of which would take time to unpack? Honestly, I don’t have the bandwidth to go back and break down every section in full right now. I can only take one part at a time.

Please keep in mind, you’re one of several people engaging me on similar threads; five to eight at once, sometimes, and this format just doesn’t make that kind of detailed exchange possible. On top of that, your reply blends some of the back-and-forth I had with Gary, which makes the conversation even harder to follow.

Going forward, I think I’ll start making my posts about a single issue or idea rather than stacking multiple threads of thought together. That’s probably the only way I can keep things clear, given how my mind works, it’s the most practical approach I think, but will create more posts this way.

182

Source? The historicity of the Empty Tomb Pericope is debated. Most Christian NT scholars believe it, most non-Christian NT scholars do not. Have you ever seen the discovery of Jesus’ empty rock tomb in a public university history textbook listed as an historical fact? I doubt it. This is concrete evidence that the historicity of this alleged event is not as strong as most Christians believe.

I personally suspect there may be a grain of truth to the story of women finding an empty grave but the bigger question is: what kind of grave and was anyone guarding it? History tells us that the Romans usually left the bodies of crucifixion victims up on the cross for weeks to be picked apart by scavengers and then what was left was tossed into a common grave with other crucifixion victims. This is most likely what happened to Jesus. Did women discover a mass grave that they believe was the burial place of Jesus and something about the grave’s appearance made them suspect Jesus’ body was missing. I have no idea. What I am trying to show is that if you believe the Gospels were written within only a few years as some fundamentalists believe, using women as witnesses would be convenient if you were writing your gospel in Jerusalem, before 70 CE, and your story was pure fabrication.

183

Bottom line: When looking at ancient claims, we need corroboration. Do we have corroboration of the Empty Rock Tomb tale? No. We only have one undisputed independent source, the unknown author of the Gospel of Mark. However, his status as a contemporary of Jesus and his disciples is disputed. Maybe it was John Mark, maybe it wasn’t. There is no corroboration from any other independent source. That is weak evidence, folks.

And what about the alleged post-mortem sightings of Jesus? Do we have any corroboration of these claims? No. Every appearance story in the Gospels describes a unique alleged appearance. No two Gospels describe the same alleged appearance! No corroboration!

We should treat the Christian Bible no differently than we treat other works from Antiquity. Claims which are not corroborated by one or more other independent sources should be marked as “an historical claim”, not an historical fact.

184

Now you’re speculating about things you assume we’re speculating about.

If there had only been a handful of witnesses and Paul was one of them, I could understand your skepticism. But there weren’t a handful, there were thousands who saw the living, resurrected Christ. And through all of that, not a single contemporary record from Romans, Jews, or any other group survives that refutes those claims or exposes Jesus as a fraud.

Please, show me just one credible counter-account from that era; one Roman, one Jewish, or one regional document that declares, “We disproved this man’s resurrection.” The absence of such evidence, especially in a culture obsessed with record-keeping and control, speaks volumes. The silence itself is historical proof of something extraordinary.

The same principle applies to modern near-death experiences (NDEs). We now have thousands of recorded cases, with over 97% describing remarkably similar patterns of awareness, presence, and continuity beyond physical death. You can’t see their experiences, but when testimony converges this consistently, reason demands that we at least pause and ask why.

That alone should move any honest mind to search deeper.

185

Who will corroborate the first moment of existence, since we can only see as far back as 390 million years before that first event? Or who can witness allllllll that is in the cosmos we see today, that alllll that, fit into a grain of sand in that first moment. Now if we apply the Plank scale, you get cornered to use ‘Place-holders”… kinda like saying “God of the gaps”. Then I would come to you demanding sources, studies, facts, eye witness… you would be scratching your head.

186

Once again, independent corroboration is what we need to believe any historical claim is a fact. Do you have any other independent source which corroborates the claim found in First Corinthians 15 that Jesus appeared to 500 (not thousands) of people?

1 Like
187

I said thousands that witnessed him alive and resurrected. Again, there are many claims in the new and old testament that have not had any historical counter arguments… seems like a one-sided consensus for me. Yet I also asked you, who witnessed the scientific gaps that you wholeheartedly believe in. In this case, science becomes your god with unwavering faith… what’s the difference in belief, tell me? Athiests put science on a pedestal, which becomes a sort of a god argument in itself?

188

If there were thousands, I’d expect many other references to those folks, as well as names and details. It would potentially be the biggest proof of history. One could also argue that many believed in resurrections of other sorts back then, with at least 11 other resurrections in the OT as well. However, if I am to take this proof seriously, at least more seriously than the miracle at Fatima, then I need a lot of proof. I do accept the resurrection, but not because of this.

If the proof was not mentioned because the belief in resurrection was so widespread anyway, it may have been just as reliable as those “miracles”–not very.

Certainly, we all do struggle with uncertainty. Scruton argued (even though a Christian) that we can take faith as a way of filling in our fears. We posit a god or God that can take care of those, and that our behavior explains why we are treated.

It’s a concern that we can fall into that trap, even as Christians.

Thanks

189

-Not one single Christian source claims that thousands of people saw the living, resurrected Christ.

-Only one Christian source says that over 500 people saw the living, resurrected Jesus.

-No two Christian sources describe the same post-mortem appearance, therefore there is no corroboration of these claims. These first century dead person sighting claims are no different from the Elvis sighting claims of today.

190

You are making an assumption: You assume that Jesus was the big deal the Gospels make him out to be. It is entirely possible that Jesus did not become famous until whenever the author of Mark wrote his book.

191

Millions upon millions of human beings prior to the sixteenth century claimed to have seen the sun revolve (at least half way) around the earth. They were all wrong! The earth revolves around the sun.

Just because a lot of people believe something to be true does not mean it is.

192

@moderators Seriously?

ChatGPT: Short answer: Gary’s sentence is technically true but incomplete. Yes, the historicity of the empty tomb pericope is debated in the guild. But:

  • There is a strong bloc of scholars (including many who are not conservative evangelicals) who think some form of empty tomb tradition is historically likely.

  • There is also a significant minority who think the story is legendary, literary, or at least not historically recoverable.

  • So: debated? Yes. Equally split or “no real support”? No.

Let me break that down a bit.

1. What’s being debated?

“Empty tomb pericope” usually means Mark 16:1–8 (the women at the tomb), with Matthew, Luke, and John as later versions.

Scholars argue about things like:

  • Was Jesus really buried in a known tomb, later found empty?

  • Did Mark invent or shape the story for theological/apologetic reasons?

  • How early is the tradition behind Mark? Independent of Paul, or dependent on later reflection?

So Gary’s “it’s debated” is accurate in the sense that there is no unanimous consensus.

2. Scholars who affirm the empty tomb’s historicity

A substantial number of mainstream scholars (not just apologists) think the empty tomb is historically likely, even if they reject a miraculous explanation:

  • N. T. Wright argues that the best historical explanation for early Christian belief is both an empty tomb and post-mortem appearances of Jesus. He calls the empty tomb “historically highly probable.” (The Christian Century)

  • Gary Habermas, in a survey of ~1,400–2,200 scholarly publications (English, French, German), concludes that around 75% of publishing scholars he studied accept the historicity of the empty tomb in some form. (garyhabermas.com)

  • Jacob Kremer, a critical Austrian NT scholar, wrote that “by far most scholars hold firmly to the reliability of the biblical statements about the empty tomb.” (Reddit)

  • Other defenders include William Lane Craig (detailed argument for the empty tomb pericope’s historicity), (reasonablefaith.org) and a range of Catholic and Protestant scholars who see the tradition as early and difficult to dismiss.

Even some who aren’t doctrinally “evangelical” still find the empty tomb tradition historically stubborn.

3. Scholars who doubt or deny the empty tomb’s historicity

On the other side, you do have respected scholars who are skeptical:

  • Bart Ehrman notes that “a number of scholars” regard the empty tomb story as a theological invention of Mark, and points out that Paul never mentions an empty tomb in his letters. (The Bart Ehrman Blog)

  • John Dominic Crossan has argued that Jesus may not have received a proper tomb burial at all, making the empty tomb narrative non-historical.

  • James Crossley wrote a detailed critique “Against the Historical Plausibility of the Empty Tomb Story and the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus,” directly challenging N. T. Wright’s defense. (Brill)

  • Various others (collected in “scholarly doubts” lists) question the story on literary, theological, or comparative-religion grounds. (Jesus Tweezers)

So yes: there is genuine scholarly debate about whether Mark’s empty tomb story is historical or theological-literary.

4. How accurate is Gary’s line, really?

“the historicity of the Empty Tomb Pericope is debated”

On its face, that’s true. Where it can be misleading is if he implies:

  • “Therefore there is no strong scholarly leaning one way or the other,” or

  • “Therefore apologists are just bluffing when they mention majority support.”

Nuance:

  • Habermas’s work suggests that, among those who publish on the resurrection/empty tomb, a clear majority accept some kind of empty tomb tradition, even though his methodology and numbers are debated. (garyhabermas.com)

  • A sizeable minority reject or withhold judgment on historicity. Their arguments are serious and not fringe—but they are not the majority.

So you might say:

Almost everything in ancient history is “debated” in some sense.
In this case, the debate is real, but the center of gravity among resurrection specialists still leans toward saying: something like an empty tomb story goes back very early, even if people disagree over what caused it and how Mark shaped it.

Yes, the historicity of the empty tomb narrative is debated, just like most important questions in NT studies. But “debated” doesn’t mean “no strong view”; a substantial majority of publishing resurrection scholars still think some form of the empty tomb tradition is early and historical, while a significant minority see it as literary or theological. The real discussion is about which explanation best fits all the data, not whether everyone has stopped arguing.

193

Neither you nor I have the expertise to answer these questions. Maybe one day science will, but until then, I suggest the sensible thing to do is sit on the sidelines, not take a position, and let the experts hash it out.

194

If one realizes that non-Christians make up a very small percentage of New Testament scholarship one will realize that I was saying exactly what you are saying: Most NT scholars (75% by one estimate) believe in the historicity of the empty tomb.

195

I’d bow the knee if there were a single impossible fossil.

196

You are putting words in my mouth, Terry. Most NT scholars (one estimate is 75%) believe in the historicity of the Empty Tomb.

An empty tomb proves nothing. There have been thousands of empty tombs in human history. Let’s talk about the evidence for Jesus’ alleged post-mortem sightings, shall we?

197
  • Don’t do that; you’ll only get your pants dusty.
1 Like
198

Happily. Well not actually. Apart from the ecstasy. As it would raise more questions than it answers.

1 Like
200

You won’t find truth by depending on others to do the work for you. We can only take you so far — to inspire searching. That’s it.

I’m not here to change anyone’s mind, because no one changed mine. I went through Scripture front to back several times, along with countless other readings at different points in my life. A woman named Christine K was the spark for me. The difference between you and me is that I already believed in God but didn’t know Him personally; so I set out to search Him out and understand His ways.

You, on the other hand, might accept fragments of belief here and there, but the real deep dive is in Scripture. Only there will you find reason and meaning to the “why” and “how.”

Here’s what happened as I kept reading: with every pass, the picture became clearer, more complete. Each time, new meanings and hidden connections emerged. Today, I’m convinced that the Bible is a mirror, a reflection of humanity itself. Every rise and fall, every victory and failure, is written in detail because it’s telling our story, the story of human nature in conflict with divine purpose.

Look, for instance, at the symbolism in Jacob’s birth. Even before he was born, God told Rachel that the younger would rule over the elder. At birth, Jacob grasped Esau’s heel, a sign of inheritance and struggle. God allowed Jacob’s deception because He knew He could wrestle the deceit out of him later. But the deeper lesson is in how the inheritance passed: Esau sold his birthright for a bowl of lentils. Would you entrust the future of a nation to a man who would trade everything sacred for immediate comfort? Of course not.

Later, Esau’s descendants, the Edomite, became a stumbling block for Israel on their way to Jericho. It all connects. Every story is a thread that weaves into the greater tapestry of human history. And guess who also came from the Edomite culture when you study other religions… Mohammad! Once from the same seed of Abraham. Again, you can’t see what I see unless you choose to.

That’s what I’m trying to capture in my writing. If my books ever make it to publication, you’ll see how each thread; from the Big Bang through Deuteronomy, coherently connects. The next volume (3 of 10) carries that pattern from Joshua through 2 Kings, and even there, the continuity remains unbroken.

So don’t take my word for it. Search it out for yourself. You’ll find that the deeper you go, the more the story reads you. If you’re not willing, how can we have deep conversations without argument? You should know that I also studied the science side of our existence, so I’m not coming here with a single dimension of thought… I think my thoughts and ideas are very diverse. I have said this many times… we needed today with all the we are capable of to see God. And the Bible, well, it was written for infants in adult for in those days. You think you could have explained cosmic inflation to a sheep herder 4000BC? And the first sin, was not Adam’s… it was Lucifer well before Adam. So much is in scripture that inspires new and deeper thought with each passing.

201

“Don’t take my word for it. Search it out for yourself and you will find an intense emotional experience like I had…”

Subjective personal experiences are not reliable sources of evidence for universal truth claims, Mark. Thousands of people who have converted to every religion on the planet and many cults have experienced intense emotions in their conversions just like you.

There has to be a better, more reliable way.

1 Like