Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach

[pocaracas]

So, modern science can tell us why that happened to a crucified body...
Could the person relating that detail be drawing from one of the multiple such crucifixions he witnessed?
The killing of a criminal was seen as a sort of a sport, so everyone would go out to see it.... This practice went on until the 1700's, or even 1800's, in Europe.

John was a youth...a teenager. Why would you automatically assume that John saw lots of crucifixions?

Because they happened... Maybe not daily, maybe not weekly, maybe not monthly... but every so often, there was one poor sod that got the death penalty by crucifixion.

But more importantly, Jesus' crucifixion was unique. It was more common for the Romans to break the legs so that the person could not raise and lower himself to breathe if they wanted to speed things along. In the absence of this (which was a mercy), crucifixions lasted for days. And that was what made crucifixion such a powerful motivational punishment. But death was by asphyxiation...not by a lance wound.

Jesus was beaten so badly prior to crucifixion (because Pilate did not expect Barrabas to be released), that he was already in very bad shape before reaching Calvary. He died quickly, his legs were not broken, but his side WAS pierced.

Why would John have ever seen this before?

My bold.
"more common"... would you claim that Jesus was the only figure to have been flogged prior to being hung up?
Living in a metropolis such as Jerusalem, how would John NOT have seen such a thing before writing it down so vividly about his object of adoration?

The point is that the way some possible historical jesus was crucified has no bearing on the veracity of any story about a resurrection.
Tons of people got crucified - even if there was no historical Jesus, such an account could be produced and corroborated by science.... because it could be repeated and investigated.

---

So, I can take Homer's word that Hercules was truly the son of Zeus and a very beautiful mortal woman?
Or maybe I should only accept the part where Hercules was invincible?
Or maybe I should focus on Achilles?

If you wish to, you can.

However, before you begin, you might ask yourself whether any of the professionals who have tenured positions at the major universities around the globe are asking these same questions in the way that they're asking questions about the historical Jesus.

If not, I think you will have the field all to yourself.

How many of those professionals are believers in the greek mythology? How many attend the temple of Athena?
Let me guess... none!

How many believe in the christ mythology? How many attend a christian church?
Let me guess... most!

Can you spot the bias?


Anyway, there are stories from any mythology told as if they were witnessed by real people who then relayed it to the story-teller who wrote it down.
The most blatant example of this (and in which you don't believe) are the muslim hadiths.... Heck, even different muslim sects fails to acknowledge certain hadiths held as absolute truth by some other sect.
And the hadiths carry the names of those who relayed the tale, all the way to the original who heard or saw the prophet Muhammad saying or doing whatever is in that particular hadith.
And the Qur'an is supposedly the direct account as told by the prophet himself to some scribe.
Why don't you believe what is claimed within that book?
There's far more evidence for it than Jesus' resurrection.