(September 4, 2014 at 12:10 am)Minimalist Wrote: One of the foremost scholars of ANE epigraphy is Christopher Rollston. In this article he details a bit about belief in resurrection. Sure to piss off xtian shitwits.... but who cares.
It's actually the second story on the page and concludes with:
Quote:Thus, in the final analysis, the cumulative evidence is decisive: There is nothing distinctively “Christian” about a belief in a resurrection. Rather, some segments of Late Second Temple and Early Post-Biblical Judaism believed in a resurrection and some segments did not. Christianity, as an heir to apocalyptic branches of Judaism, was quite consistent in always affirming a belief in a resurrection, but the fact remains that belief in a resurrection is well attested prior to the rise of Christianity, and this belief also persists in certain segments of Judaism after the rise of Christianity.
http://www.rollstonepigraphy.com/?cat=5&paged=2
Xtians love to think they are special....but they are not.
Uh, duh...
That was the primary difference between the pharisees and the Saducees. The pharisees believed in the resurrection and the Saducees did not. (That is why the where 'sad you see.') Every 3rd grade Sunday schooler knows that.
Once the Saducees were slaughtered in the destruction of the temple in 70ad and the Saducees all killed, the pharisaical belief in the resurection dominated Judaism.
