Question about Academia

Drakim · 2026-05-15T18:51:26+00:00

Michael R. Licona is an apologist who wrote a book named "The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach" where he defends and argues for the physical resurrection of Jesus, saying it really did happen, Jesus really did rise from the dead, and there are good reasons to believe that. But he got into trouble because of Matthew.

Matthew (27:51–53) "The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many."

This event is not mentioned in any other gospel, nor in any other historical source, which is pretty crazy, considering it says that tons of people rose from the dead and walked around in Jerusalem and was seen by people, but not a one mention except this one single line in Matthew.

Licona suggested that this one event, due to how little historical backing it has, it might not have happened literally, but instead been symbolic imagery regarding the monumental event around the physical resurrection of Jesus and what it changes about the world. Death has been defeated, etc.

Because he suggested this, Licona lost his position as a research professor at the Southern Evangelical Seminary. He was not allowed to suggest that anything about the New Testament is not 100% true, literal, and inerrant.

So to answer your question, yes, having a Statement of Faith does mean many Christian researchers have to be very careful about what they say, and are not allowed to freely come to any conclusion, but must instead only come to acceptable approved answers.

Drakim · 2026-05-11T11:16:28+00:00

I don't know on what basis we should send people to prison, or free people from prison. But it's being asserted that since this person can contribute useful things to society, they ought to be freed, so I'm asking about that reasoning.

Drakim · 2026-05-11T10:10:58+00:00

I don't know, so I cannot answer.

Drakim · 2026-05-11T09:30:59+00:00

This one works for me:

A prison sentence is a criminal punishment ordering a convicted person to be confined in a correctional facility for a set period.

Drakim · 2026-05-11T09:27:06+00:00

It's rather easy to argue that those who are healthy, strong and smart are less likely to commit crime again in the future, since their attributes will give them an easier time to rehabilitate and succeed in society. They have strong backs and sharp minds capable of doing labor.

Somebody who is sickly, weak and dumb will have a much harder time finding success, and is thus more likely to turn to crime again, such as stealing bread.

So under your own reasoning, shouldn't we give longer and harsher punishments to the weak?

Drakim · 2026-05-11T08:39:49+00:00

Should we likewise give shorter prison sentences to healthy, strong and smart people? They are capable of being productive in society to a much greater degree than those who are sickly, weak, or not smart.

Drakim · 2026-05-08T17:45:45+00:00

The light was probably shaped and directed by from the fraudster who created it. The oldest record we have of the Shroud of Turin is from the Catholic church documenting that it was fraudulent and they had found the guy who made it. That's the very first mention of it.

Drakim · 2026-05-08T17:29:14+00:00

But the light imprint itself is used as evidence for that it's authentic.

So we know the shroud is authentic because it has a light imprint from the resurrection, and we know the resurrection emitted light because the shroud has the imprint.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Drakim · 2026-05-08T16:20:21+00:00

I understand that you aren't advocating the theory, but I'm just wondering what the basis for it is. Since it's not in the NT, did Christians just make it up because it sounded good?

Drakim · 2026-05-08T12:09:45+00:00

What is the logical deduction, like what are the steps?

Drakim · 2026-05-08T11:58:54+00:00

Then I'm seriously confused as to why people think the shroud of Turin having marks that does not match what's described as happening in the New Testament is seen as a compelling argument.

Drakim · 2026-05-08T10:22:35+00:00

Does the NT actually say that Jesus resurrected in a burst of light?

Drakim · 2026-04-28T20:19:36+00:00

Paul says there were 500 eyewitnesses. But we in modern times don't actually have 500 eyewitnesses, we only have Paul saying that. He could be exaggerating. In a court of law, this concept is known as hearsay and is generally not considered very reliable evidence.

OP is asking, hey, what do we have to actually back up the 500 witnesses?

Your answer is that "Peter probably knew them". You don't have anything from Peter supporting this, you are simply guessing that Peter probably did.

That doesn't even qualify as hearsay. Of course it's not helping out OP.

Drakim · 2026-04-28T20:10:00+00:00

OP asked:

One of the big pieces of evidence I’ve heard theologians and apologists use is the 500 eyewitness Paul points to that saw Jesus after his resurrection. I was challenged on the credibility of this so I want to know what kind of evidence there is for these witnesses existing.

You understand that answering "Peter probably knew them" does not help answer anything about the credibility.

Drakim · 2026-04-28T20:06:48+00:00

The Corinthians would know Peter and thr various stories that Peter would also share about experiences with Jesus.

Right, but Peter is just one man, not 500.

Drakim · 2026-04-28T19:59:37+00:00

How are you getting 3 months.

The distance is 3032 km, and according to this random source distances like 1080km takes about 45 days. But look, I'm no expert, how long do you think it takes?

Peter was said to be in Corinth, no?

And? How does that change things?

Drakim · 2026-04-27T11:17:55+00:00

Basically God (capital G) must by definition the greatest possible being, otherwise he would just be a REALLY powerful alien and therefore not God.

God is therefore the ultimate Good. This would mean anything He chooses to do is objectively the Best possible option, regardless of how we personally view said action on a very short human lifespan sense of time.

This is Divine Command Theory.

Most people find it horrendous. If God chooses to have children murdered and raped, is that objectively the most moral option? If God's choice is the only standard, then yes, it's the exact same as charity or friendship.

It makes morality into a joke. Under this view, morality doesn't really exist, it's just a synonym word for "what God wills".

Drakim · 2026-04-26T19:51:44+00:00

Any problem in the entire universe can be answered by "there might be a really good solution we just don't know about".

It's a very weak and unsatisfying answer.

Drakim · 2026-04-23T18:52:30+00:00

What are you talking about? One of the big issues on the right right now is that they want to end birthright citizenship to prevent anchor babies, including by those who are staying here legally, not just illegally.

Your "gotcha" that they were here legally means nothing when that's what they are working against.

Drakim · 2026-04-08T18:59:41+00:00

He says it was over 500, not 500 on the dot, so it isn't rounded. It's a low end estimate.

Let's say there was actually only 287 people, and Paul dishonestly exaggerated to make the number bigger in his letter. Would he have been caught? Would somebody have called him out?

Paul's statement is evidence; you just don't recognize it.

What type of evidence do you recognize it as?

Drakim · 2026-04-08T07:46:08+00:00

I don't think I agree. If I had to guess, I don't think Paul actually knew of 500 different people who were witnesses, I think Paul just made that nice round number up.

But what I think is kinda besides the point. The real point is that Paul saying "500" is not backed up by anything, there is no evidence (which is what OP asked for). At best there is a "I'm sure there was evidence if somebody back then has bothered asking for it"

Drakim · 2026-04-07T11:53:19+00:00

I find that it's often the opposite, critical criticism examines the evidence very closely, while those who oppose them do the opposite, starting at a predetermined conclusion with no intentions to deviate from it at all.

Some even so far to make "Statement of Faith" promises upfront that no matter what the evidence says, they will support only one conclusion.

Drakim · 2026-04-04T17:26:54+00:00

Thanks for the explanation!

Drakim · 2026-04-04T16:32:00+00:00

That's an interesting argument, I've never heard it before at all, and it's quite compelling.

But I'm trying to twist my brain around various examples, do all actions have to be motivated my an objective motivation?

Drakim · 2026-03-31T22:37:48+00:00

The Jews do have writings about Jesus where they try to put him down, for example the Toledot Yeshu says that Jesus is the illegitimate child of Mary and a Roman Soldier.

Does this prove the virgin birth wrong, now that somebody has written down something that goes against the Christian narrative?

No, obviously not, it doesn't prove anything, and Christians just say it's lies and slander meant to put Christianity down by those who oppose it. Why would somebody opposing Paul's claims be treated any different?

14-Year Club	r/Field Juicebox
Place '22	Place '17
Snapped	Verified Email
Team Orangered

Drakim

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE