From: lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Help me Refute this Advertisement
Date: 16 Apr 92 19:36:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: skyblu.16APR199212363879
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <sk2tuINN440@matt.ksu.ksu.edu>, strat@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Davis) writes...
>I just typed this from the pack page of the Kansas State University
>Collegian.  I apologize for any spelling errors... I was using the
>ten-finger protocol!  :-(
> 
>Please help me gather information to refute this advertisement in a
>letter to the Collegian editorial staff.  Please respond by
>electronic mail since I do not normally read alt.atheism.  Thank
>you.
> 
>-- BEGIN QUOTED MATERIAL
> 
>HL: Evidence For the Resurrection
> 
>SH: Paid Advertisement Sponsored by Christian Students and Faculty
> 
>A student at the university of Uruguay said to ma, "Professor
>McDowell, why can't you refute Christianity?"
> 
>"For a very simple reason," I answered.
"I've never tried."

>SS: A QUESTION OF HISTORY
> 
>After more than 700 hours of studying this subject, I have come to

That's about 3 years of full-time course work.

>the conclusion that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is either one
>of the most wicked, vicious, heartless hoaxes ever foisted on the
>minds of human beings-- or it is the most remarkable fact of
>history.
> 
>SS: LIVING WITNESSES
> 
>The New Testament accounts of the resurrection were being
>circulated within the lifetimes of men and women alive at the time
>of the resurrection.  Those people could certainly have confirmed
>or denied the accuracy of such accounts.

As Christianity spread, people did deny the accuracy of "such accounts."
Unfortunately, much of the anti-Christian writing has been lost.  All
we know of the arguments of Celsus, for example, is what remains in
the writings of Origen (_Contra Celsus_).

>The writers of the four Gospes either had themselves been witnesses
>or else were relating the accounts of eyewitnesses of the actual
>events.  In advocating their case for the gospel, a word that means
>"good news," the apostles appealed (even when confronting their
>most severe opponents) to common knowledge concerning the facts of
>the resurrection.

This is rejected by most biblical scholars.

>SS: THE NEW TESTAMENT RELIABLE?
> 
>Coinciding with the papyri discoveries, an abundance of other
>manuscripts came to light (over 24,000 copies of early New
>Testament manuscripts are known to be in existence today).  The
>historian Luke wrote of "authentic evidence" concerning the
>resurrection.  Sir William Ramsay, who spent 15 years attempting to
>undermine Luke's credentials as a historian, and to refute the
>reliability of the New Testament, finally concluded:  "Luke is a
>historian of the first rank ... This author should be placed with
>the very greatest of historians."

I believe that Ramsay was "attempting to undermine Luke's credentials"
about as much as I believe McDowell attempted to disprove Christianity.
Ramsay goes through contortions to try to prove that Luke is accurate
about such things as the census at the time of Jesus' birth, and McDowell
uncritically repeats it in his book, _Evidence That Demands a Verdict_.
Ramsay found some inscription which McDowell claims is "evidence that
Quirinius was governor of Syria around 7 B.C."  It is nothing of the
sort (though Ramsay did argue that), which is why McDowell doesn't say
what the inscription says.  In fact, McDowell says that the inscription
"ascrib[es] to Quirinius this post."  This is false.  The inscription
says that Quirinius was elected duumvir of the Roman colony of Pisidian
Antioch in Galatia.  Ramsay has an argument that since this post might
have been given for playing a major role in a certain war, that that war
occurred at a certain time, that the only legions that could have fought
in it were in Syria, and that therefore Quirinius must have been governor
of Syria.  Every link in this argument has serious weaknesses.

>A Roman guard of strictly disciplined fighting men was stationed to
>guard the tomb.  This guard affixed on the tomb the Roman seal,
>which was meant to prevent any attempt at vandalizing the
>sepulcher.  Anyone trying to move the stone from the tomb's
>entrance would have broken the seal and thus incurred the wrath of
>Roman law.

So says only the gospel of Matthew.  Mark, Luke, and John never mention
any Roman guard.

>SS: FACT #1: BROKEN ROMAN SEAL
> 
>As we have said, the first obvious fact was the breaking of the
>seal that stood for the power and authority of the Roman Empire.
>The consequences of breaking the seal were extremely severe.  The
>FBI and CIA of the Roman Empire were called into action to find the
>man or men who were responsible.  If they were apprehended, it
>meant automatic execution by crucifixion upside down.  People
>feared the breaking of the seal.  Jesus' disciples displayed signs
>of cowardice when they hid themselves.  Peter, one of these
>disciples, went out and denied Christ three times.

Only Matthew (27:66) reports such a seal.

>SS: FACT #2: EMPTY TOMB
> 
>As we have already discussed, another obvious fact after the
>resurrection was the empty tomb.  The diciples of the Christ did
>not go off to Athens or Rome to preach that Christ was raised from
>the dead.  Rather they went right back to the city of Jerusalem,
>where, if what they were teaching was false, the falsity would be
>evident.  The empty tomb was "too notorious to be denied."  Paul
>Althaus states that the resurrection "could have not been
>maintained in Jerusalem for a single day, for a single hour, if the
>emptiness of the tomb had not been established as a fact for all
>concerned."

The earliest Christian writings (letters of Paul) never mention the
empty tomb.

>SS: FACT #3: LARGE STONE MOVED
> 
>On that Sunday morning the first thing that impressed the people
>who approached the tomb was the unusual position of the one and a
>half to two ton stone that had been lodged in front of the doorway.
>All the Gospel writers mention it.

Yes, but they disagree with each other about when it was moved, whether
or not it was observed moving, who first discovered it, and more.

>SS: FACT #6:  JESUS' APPEARANCES CONFIRMED
> 
>Christ appeared alive on several occasions after the cataclysmic
>events of that first Easter.
> 
>When studying an event in history, it is important to know whether
>enough people who were participants or eyewitnesses to the event
>were alive when the facts about the event were published.  To know
>this is obviously helpful in ascertaining the accuracy of the
>published report.  If the number of eyewitnesses is substantial,
>the event can be regarded a fairly well established.  For instance,
>if we all witness a murder, and a later police report turns out to
>be a fabrication of lies, we as eyewitnesses can refute it.
> 
>SS: OVER 500 WITNESSES
> 
>Several very important factors are often overlooked when
>considering Christ's post-resurrection appearances to individuals.
>The first is the large number of witnesses of Christ after that
>resurrection morning.
> 
>One of the earliest records of Christ's appearing after the
>resurrection is by Paul.  The apostle appealed to his audience's
>knowledge of the fact that Christ had been seen by more than 500
>people at one time.  Paul reminded them that the majority of those
>people were still alive and could be questioned.  Dr. Edwin M.
>yamauchi, associate professor of history at Miami University in
>Oxford, Ohio, emphasizes: "What gives a special authority to the
>list (of witnesses) as historical evidence is the reference to most
>of the five hundred brethren being still alive.  St. Paul says in
>effect. 'If you do not believe me, you can ask them.'  Such a
>statement in an admittedly genuine letter written within thirty
>years of the event is almost as strong evidence as one could hope
>to get for something that happened nearly two thousand years ago."
> 
>Let's take the more than 500 witnesses who saw Jesus alive after
>His death and barial, and place them in a courtroom.  Do you
>realize that if each of those 500 people were to testify for only
>six minutes, including cross examination, you would have an amazing
>50 hours of firsthand testimony?  Add to this the testimony of many
>other eyewitnesses and you would well have the largest and most lop
>sided trial in history.

Paul *reports* 500 witnesses.  That's hearsay.  Speaking of living witnesses,
the gospel of Matthew reports (27:52-53) that at the death of Jesus, there
was a massive earthquake "and the tombs were opened, and many bodies of the
saints who had falled asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs
after his resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many."
But we have no accounts of any of these people, nor does any other gospel
writer mention this momentous event.  Further, this says they were brought
back to life at the crucifixion, but only entered the city after the
resurrection.  What did they do for three days?  Hide?

>SS: HOSTILE WITNESSES
> 
>Another factor crucial to the interpreting Christ's appearance s is
>that He also appeared to those who were hostile or unconvinced.
> 
>Over and over again, I have read or heard people comment that Jesus
>was seen alive after His death and burial only by His friends and
>followers.  Using that argument, they attempt to water down the
>overwhelming impact of the multiple eyewitness accounts.  But that
>line of reasoning is so pathetic it hardly receives comment.  no
>author or informed individual would regard Saul of Tarsus as a
>follower of Christ.  The facts show the exact opposite.  Saul
>despised Christ and persecuted Christ's followers.  It was a
>life-shattering experience when Christ appeared to him.  Although
>he was at the time not a disciple, he later became the apostle
>Paul, one of the greatest witnesses for the truth of the
>resurrection.

Jesus did *not* "appear" to Paul.  Paul heard his voice (while others
who were with him did not).  Saul of Tarsus was a persecutor of
Christians who came to identify with those he persecuted and converted.
There are explanations for this other than supernatural ones.

>SS: REAL PROOF, THE DISCIPLES' LIFES
> 
>but the most telling testimony of all must be the lives of those
>early Christians.  We must ask ourselves:  What caused them to go
>everywhere telling the message of the risen Christ?

If this counts as proof, then every religion is the one true religion.

>-- 
>  Steve Davis  |    Contact me at ...            | The Boarding House BBS!
>               | Internet:  strat@cis.ksu.edu    | 9600 baud (v.32/v.42)
>               | FidoNet:    Steve @ 1:295/3     | America: 913-827-0744

Jim Lippard              Lippard@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Dept. of Philosophy      Lippard@ARIZVMS.BITNET
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:8439 sci.philosophy.meta:580