With Easter around the corner, a new apologetics ministry announced this week that it will soon be offering a course that examines why the resurrection of Jesus is such a core teaching in the Christian faith.
The course, entitled "The Historicity of the Resurrection," will be offered as part of Athanatos Christian Ministries' new online academy, which launched at the beginning of February.
A Barna Group survey last October found that 75 percent of Americans believe in the resurrection as the literal truth.
Athanatos Executive Director Anthony Horvath, one of the course's facilitators, says that resurrection is a claim that is unique to the Christian faith and is not present in any other religions.
"Jesus claimed to be God. The resurrection gives us a very important reason to believe His claim," explained Horvath to The Christian Post.
"God respects our need to have evidence for things," he added. "He didn't send a guy out to make some claims and disappear into the clouds."
Athanatos’ online offering is designed to be taught at an introductory level. It is for the average Christian who has questions but doesn't know where to go, according to Horvath.
Horvath, who has ten years of experience in the apologetics ministry and has taught at a Bible college, said he used to direct his ministry toward hard-core atheists but only recently began focusing on Christians.
While ministering to non-Christians, Horvath observed that most of them had been Christians before.
"They were raised Christians but they leave Christianity because they never really understood it in the first place," he said, noting his comment was true for "Skeptic" magazine editor Michael Shermer and "The God Delusion" author Richard Dawkins.
Horvath’s goal now is to equip Christians with a proper understanding of Scripture before misunderstandings cause detriment to their faith.
"We have launched our online academy because many people long to know more about the Christian faith but are not being taught," said Horvath. "Many Christians will fall away from the faith completely."
Instruction for the apologetics course is set to begin April 15.
For the two-week course on Jesus' resurrection, students will be referring to the book "Son Rises: The Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus," written by Christian apologist William Lane Craig, as the base text.
The Athanatos Online Academy will also be offering classes on other topics such as the New Testament Canon and an introduction to biblical Greek. Each course costs $15 and would require five hours or more each week.
"The formation of the New Testament Canon seems very academic and wouldn't get covered in most Sunday school classes," said Horvath.
The course would help "immunize" Christians against challenges posed by books like "The Da Vinci Code," he said.
Whichever course people decide on taking, Horvath is hoping that Christians will take a pro-active approach to studying their faith.
"The one thing that we can't do any more is assume that just by virtue of being in a Christian climate we're going to raise informed and educated Christians."
On the Web: More information on courses offered by Athanatos Christian Ministries at www.athanatosministries.org/courses
RSS
<<In any case, Mithrias is an extremely poor case.>>
Why? How is Mithraism a poor case for comparison? The similarities between the two religions are far reaching.
<<nor do I believe that the belief is intellectually sustainable, however, even if it were true, it would indeed invalidate those "more primitive religions",>>
How? Can you prove that the primitive religions, which had followers are invalidated by the existence of a recognizably similar, borrowed tradition called Christianity, which historically arrived on the scene after the Advent of Christ?
<<unless of course you believe the Bible is a lie, if you believe it is a lie, then you can say anything you want, but if you believe it is a lie, you can't really call yourself a Christian now can you?>>
Many Christians assert a different doctrine than I believe, yet I allow that they are Christians because they are asserting and professing their faith in Jesus exists; they are also asserting what they believe as they understand it. Many Christian tenets, doctrines and beliefs exist, contradicting what some other Christians believe. Are you saying those who don’t believe the Bible aren’t Christians, even though they profess Christ? I haven’t read anything in the Bible that indicates to me that in order to be a Christian I need to believe the Bible is true. I am a Christian if I profess Christ, no?
<<unless of course you believe the Bible is a lie, if you believe it is a lie, then you can say anything you want, but if you believe it is a lie, you can't really call yourself a Christian now can you?>>
Many Christians assert a different doctrine than I believe, yet I allow that they are Christians because they are asserting and professing their faith in Jesus exists; they are also asserting what they believe as they understand it. Many Christian tenets, doctrines and beliefs exist, contradicting what some other Christians believe. Are you saying those who don’t believe the Bible aren’t Christians, even though they profess Christ? I haven’t read anything in the Bible that indicates to me that in order to be a Christian I need to believe the Bible is true. I am a Christian if I profess Christ, no?
I know of no scripture which says belief in the Bible credits one as a Christian, do you?
myTmuus said:
"Many Christians like me, believe that primitive religions foreshadowed what would later take place after the advent of Christianity, does that invalidate those other more primitive religions?"
Chris333 said
<<I am not sure that many Christians believe this>>
I know many who do. In fact the very subject is discussed on Athanatos Online… I quote
“For the sake of this post, let’s merely concede that there are similarities to ancient myths and train our minds on the critical distinction: none of them are set against a historical backdrop as fleshed out as Christianity. In other words, it may be absolutely true that Christianity is ‘borrowed’ but the fact that the resurrection actually happened, nonetheless, only means looking with less skeptical eyes on the ‘ancient myths.’ For example, we might ask ourselves if the ancient myths were foreshadows. A standard literary device. I’m sure most have heard of it.
Maybe there are ‘pagan parallels’ in Christianity, but if in fact the historical evidence is that the Christian account actually happened, the significance of those parallels changes dramatically.”
http://sntjohnny.com/front/easter-is-no-legend-the-resurrection-is-no-mere-myth-myth-made-fact-is-a-different-story/236.html
<<I wonder if myTmuus is another alias. >>
For whom? I just joined last week, prior to last week I had never participated in these discussions.
<<Lazarus was only temporarily raised from the dead and died again, others mentioned died again as well, and their remains remain.>>
That “temporary” theory is only taught in religious traditions. Are there any Bible scriptures indicating that Lazarus, Jarius' Daughter, the young man during his own funeral procession and the other similar resuscitations performed by the apostles, like Dorcas and Eutychus ever went beyond the miraculous event they are written?. I think, the miracle of the resurrections occurs and the narratives end as such. So, are you naturally assuming or guessing that later they died, or is there some better evidence else where, other than in the Bible which confirms it?Because to the best of my knowledge the Bible stops at their resurrections.
<<accension is a rising of the soul, resurrection is a complete body and soul being taken into heaven.>>
Do you think an ascension is just “a rising of the soul?” I ask because I was taught that when Jesus ascended it was his resurrected body. And the same theory goes for the other Gods I previously mentioned, i.e. Osirus, Attis and Mithra. The hieroglyphs, texts, artwork and oral traditions their followers left, claim bodily resurrections occurred.
<<The Bible is clear that the only man who was Resurrected was Jesus Christ.>>
How do you explain this statement? “Throughout Christian history up to the present day there have been various accounts of Christians raising people from the dead.”
<<I am not sure how to answer this, my comment was in response to the difference between the two such as dying and going to heaven is more of an accention rather then a resurrection per se... >>
Well the reason I asked was because several pre-Christian religions present resurrections their followers claim actually occurred. Does it matter if we call them stories, legends, or myths? These are all faith based beliefs and practices.
Some Christians claim the Bible is factual. I don’t wish to step on any toes, so I am being very careful with how I turn a phrase. I do understand that according to Egyptian holy texts and hieroglyphs convey the story that Osirus rose from the dead. Accounts from ancient Greek texts say the God Attis, was resurrected and so does the sacred texts in Persian witness a resurrection for the God Mithra.
<<There are many post Jesus documents that talk about his ressurection as well as his accention and many of the witnesses documented what they saw as well…>>
Indulge me if you will, but what are the names of the “many Jesus documents” to which you are referring? Could you be more specific?
<<Do you think the tower of babel was built for the fun of it, no it was built in defiance of God's commandments, same as worshiping other "Gods" or in this case "false Gods". So to ask how do i know they were false Gods is because i believe in the 10 commandments, number 1 being there shall be no other God…>>
You side stepped my question. But, FWIW I don’t think anything about the Tower of Babel other than it being an allegory or a story that explains the origin of nations, of their languages, and of Babylon (Babel). The story's theme of competition between the Lord and humans appears elsewhere in Genesis, in the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. The story displays the Lord's contempt for human ambition.
The traditional Judaeo-Christian interpretation, as found for example in Flavius Josephus, explains the construction of the tower as a hubristic act of defiance against God, ordered by the arrogant tyrant, Nimrod.
I don’t understand, other than through a blatant misinterpretation, how anyone could confuse an allegory about language, the origins of nations and God’s disdain for human ambition, with it being a story about FALSE Gods. The story pretty much speaks for it’s self as the way .
You guys have got to check out this article on a recent poll done in the UK. Atheists have the craziest beliefs. If you are like me you'll have to read it two or three times to get it.
“The opinions of atheists are especially interesting. 23% of respondents identified themselves as such, but 14% of these think Easter was about Jesus dying for the sins of the world, 12% believe he rose again from the dead, and, remarkably, 7% think he was son of God.”
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/over.half.of.britons.believe.jesus.rose.from.the.dead/17383.htm
Thanks Chris for backing me. This would be the third time in the last few days. I especially enjoyed your closing comment, “…only the popular anti-Christian writers would put forth something so unscholarly.” It made me think of Dr WL Craig trying to arrange a debate with Richard Dawkins whom declined on the grounds that he wasn’t a bishop. Having had the luxury of being present in one of Craig’s debates, I can say that he would demolish Dawkins.
You may want to go to Craig’s new web sight Reasonable Faith to download his latest podcasts, they are most interesting, very short and quick to the point.
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer?pagename=podcasting_main
Thanks Star! It looks like he flagged your earlier post exposing him. I wonder if myTmuus is another alias.
seedplanter
Re:star2,
Is this bobcu?
Yes as well as Dwen/yyyy/xxxx/oldguy/first/danny2/danny/BobC/BobCu and who knows what else.
"Many Christians like me, believe that primitive religions foreshawdowed what would later take place after the advent of Christianity, does that invalidate those other more primitive religions?"
I am not sure that many Christians believe this, nor do I believe that the belief is intellectually sustainable, however, even if it were true, it would indeed invalidate those "more primitive religions", unless of course you believe the Bible is a lie, if you believe it is a lie, then you can say anything you want, but if you believe it is a lie, you can't really call yourself a Christian now can you? In any case, Mithrias is an extremely poor case.
William Lane Craig said in his debate with Sinnot Armstrong:
"Sinnot-Armstrong's mention of Mithraism is baffling, since Mithraism does not even purport that Mithrias was raised from the dead. Perhaps Sinnot-Armstrong hopes to resuscitate the hypothesis of the nineteenth-century History of Religions School that myths of dying and rising pagan deities like Osiris and Adonis led the disciples to believe that Jesus rose from the dead. That hypothesis, however, collapsed early in the twentieth century due to two factors: (1) The purported parallels were spurious. These pagan deities were merely mythological symbols of the crop cycle, as vegetation dies during the dry season and comes back to life during the rainy season....(2) The causal connection is missing. As the eminent New Testament historian Martin Hengel explains, it was precisely because of the Jewish belief in the resurrection of the dead that the Hellenistic mystery religions "could gain virually no influence" in Jewish Palestine. Thus even the skeptical Hans Grass admits that it would have been "completely unthinkable" for the Jewish disciples of Jesus to have sincerely come to believe that Jesus was risen from the dead because of the influence of myths of pagan deities."
The idea that Christianity "borrowed" from pagan religions is absurd and obsolete, only the popular anti-Christian writers would put forth something so unscholarly.
"Indulge me if you would, but who disproved these "old arguments?" "
The supposedly similar legends to Christ are not so similar after all. Read, "The Case for the Real Jesus" By Lee Strobell to see some scholarly positions on the subject. Mostly only the popular anti-Christian writers use these arguments (believe it or not they have existed for well over a millenia, and are not new, nor are they strong)
accension is a rising of the soul, resurrection is a complete body and soul being taken into heaven.
The Bible is clear that the only man who was Resurrected was Jesus Christ. Lazarus was only temporarily raised from the dead and died again, others mentioned died again as well, and their remains remain.
"Indulge me if you will, but why do you presume the Egytians worshipped "false Gods" or that they were not resurrected? Many Christians like me, believe that primitive religions foreshawdowed what would later take place after the advent of Christianity, does that invalidate those other more primitive religions?"
Do you think the tower of babel was built for the fun of it, no it was built in defiance of God's commandments, same as worshiping other "Gods" or in this case "false Gods". So to ask how do i know they were false Gods is because i believe in the 10 commandments, number 1 being there shall be no other God...
"Indulge me if you will, but is that information according to the Gospels found in the Bible or in some published historical account?"
A mixture of the two but from the Gospels I was able to determine my search criteria to look up the historical documents that led me to that general number. There are many post Jesus documents that talk about his ressurection as well as his accention and many of the witnesses documented what they saw as well...
"Indulge me if you will, which early religious resurrections do you believe were factually ascensions?"
I am not sure how to answer this, my comment was in response to the difference between the two such as dying and going to heaven is more of an accention rather then a resurrection per se...
<<the difference between ressurection and assention is one has to come back from the dead, most of the early religious "ressurections" were in fact assentions or claims to that effect.>>
Indulge me if you will, which early religious resurrections do you believe were factually ascensions?
<<To say one is ressurected implies that that person came back from being dead, not dying and going to some other spiritual plane.>>
Do you mean like Lazarus, Jarius' Daughter, the young man during his own funeral procession and the other similar resuscitations performed by the apostles, like Dorcas and Eutychus?
<<The ressurection of Jesus was witness by many hundreds of people before his accention.>>
Indulge me if you will, but is that information according to the Gospels found in the Bible or in some published historical account?
<<I don't know what this mithrass nonsense is but most egyption "false"Gods were not ressurected at all....>>
Indulge me if you will, but why do you presume the Egytians worshipped "false Gods" or that they were not resurrected? Many Christians like me, believe that primitive religions foreshawdowed what would later take place after the advent of Christianity, does that invalidate those other more primitive religions?
Oh, FWIW, Mithra is the Saviour who resurrected three days after his death in Persian mystery religions. His accounts pre-date(according to some historians) Christianity. Evidence of his existance is verified by early cave paintings, sculpted artwork and some sacred texts which were found in places where his followers are said to have met.
<<By the way these old arguments of pagan similarities were disproved long ago, they have no relevance to the resurrection debate. >>
Indulge me if you would, but who disproved these "old arguments?" Was it a Christian or an impartial scholar, the Councel of Apologetics Inc., cult fanatics, pagans, religionists, fundementalists, a group of scientists? Please tell me who? The opinion is out there that there is no consensus against what you consider an old argument, since Christian Apoligists on a regular basis reintroduce or reinvent the argument in order to bolster public interest in courses, books and discussions on the topic. And subsequently, some group counters it with their response and the argument appears.
<<It is an out-dated argument, welcome to the twenty-first century! You'll have to try a different one if you want to make a significant impression on anyone familiar with history.>>
Did you generate that response because you could not articulate a proper response? Or do you really think an "old argument" is grounds for dismissal? IMO An outdated argument is an argument none-the-less and one that may very well have not been properly settled. It's alright for you to dismiss it, but others here might find it entertaining. And if people are willing to discuss it, whether or not it demands attention is subject to the individuals involved the debate.
star2,
Is this bobcu?
By the way these old arguments of pagan similarities were disproved long ago, they have no relevance to the resurrection debate. It is an out-dated argument, welcome to the twenty-first century! You'll have to try a different one if you want to make a significant impression on anyone familiar with history.
asdfg
From the looks of it you are the one who is doing the flagging.
Are you really yyyy/xxxx/oldguy/first/danny2/danny/bob?
Dear CP Admin / Christian brothers and sisters,
as some of you may all ready be well aware, there is a person currently posting on this site who was recently banned for flagging every single post on the CP. This person is not worth the time spent writing in contention with. He/she is, however, worth our prayers. Please avoid getting into a discussion with this person, as it will only lead to a temporary shutdown of all posting.
To subject:
You know who you are. There is absolutely nothing terrifying about an atheist or an intellect. Go attend to your poor self esteem elsewhere.
"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rent you." - KJV, Mt. 7:6
QT, the difference between ressurection and assention is one has to come back from the dead, most of the early religious "ressurections" were in fact assentions or claims to that effect. To say one is ressurected implies that that person came back from being dead, not dying and going to some other spiritual plane. The ressurection of Jesus was witness by many hundreds of people before his accention. I don't know what this mithrass nonsense is but most egyption "false"Gods were not ressurected at all....
JonnyBlad,
Here's some more:
http://www.cru.stuorg.iastate.edu/debate/audio
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer?pagename=podcasting_main
http://psalm305.blogspot.com/2007/11/j-p-moreland-mp3-sermons.html
http://www.biblicaltraining.org/index.php?page=speakers
http://home.earthlink.net/~gbl111/page2.htm
http://graphe.wordpress.com/2006/10/21/alvin-plantinga-mp3/
http://www.rctr.org/ap5.htm
http://www.veritas.org/media/
http://www.maclaurin.org/lectures.php
http://www.themaingate.net/apologetics/audio.php
http://www.christiancadre.org/Audio.html
http://www.trinitylectures.org/MP3_downloads.php
http://www.tektonics.org/
http://apologeticssearch.com/
http://www.leaderu.com/index.html
Apologetics!
http://polemos.net/Apologetics.html
"The resurrections whether myths, legends or historic are not UNIQUE to Christianity. Sorry."
Slacker countered this effectively:
"Actually if you would read thru the rest of that article instead of just the first paragraph that you posted, you would notice that the "rest" of those ressurections you claim are in the article are never actually witnessed by people and for that article to claim that resurrection is in every other religion is completely false."
They just aren't the same kind of thing.
"I understand what is precisely meant by resurrection,"
No, clearly you do not. I again suggest Strobel's "The Real Jesus"
<<Actually if you would read thru the rest of that article instead of just the first paragraph that you posted, you would notice that the "rest" of those ressurections you claim are in the article are never actually witnessed by people and for that article to claim that resurrection is in every other religion is completely false.>>
What? The ONLY resurrection mentioned in the article is Christ‘s, as this direct quote states and the one I challenged went as follows…“Athanatos Executive Director Anthony Horvath, one of the course's facilitators, says that resurrection is a claim that is unique to the Christian faith and is not present in any other religions.” The resurrections whether myths, legends or historic are not UNIQUE to Christianity. Sorry. Historical evidence predating Christianity indicates that fact via the sources I listed from wikipedia. The religion of Mithraism which I mentioned in a later post, does also.
BTW, How can you prove that those pre-Christian religions are false, and how can you prove their resurrections are false? Were you there to witness any of those resurrections? Many other religions which attest to the resurrection of their deity, also claim to have eye witnesses(recorded in their accounts) just like the women who went to the tomb in the Christian account. Resurrection is a borrowed belief throughout literature, mythology and it predates Christianity.
Chicago - My pastor just talked about that this past Sunday. And I agree, Jesus could have shared the Good News with anyone about his resurection but he told the women first!
"I understand what is precisely meant by resurrection, that is why I cited my source now, and in my previous posts. Other religions which existed before the ADVENT of Christianity tell either a similar or the exact same stories with a different name for their God or Gods and they are as historically or unhistorically accurate as the history of Christ.
If you are indeed not out to make money off of a form of Christianity which you obviously are marketing as , would you then offer that course at no charge? "
Actually if you would read thru the rest of that article instead of just the first paragraph that you posted, you would notice that the "rest" of those ressurections you claim are in the article are never actually witnessed by people and for that article to claim that resurrection is in every other religion is completely false. Resurrection is the raising from the dead, going to heaven is not resurrection it is accention (accending to heaven). Resurrection implies dying and then being restored, dying and going to heaven isn't resurrection so to compare the two is in fact false.
The wikipedia article you posted mentions christianity, mormanism, islam, zen buddism, judism, egyptian and greak influences however in that article only christianity talks about a physical ressurection. The rest talk about assention rather then resurrection.
Please pardon my spelling i work nights and it is 6am... Thanks...
"Where is your citation for this idea that women weren't credible witnesses in 1st Century Judea?"
This is common knowledge for those who are familiar with historians. If you take a look at the disciples own responses to the women who went back from the empty tomb, they did not believe them. Of course, Thomas did not believe his fellows either, but none the less, the testimonies of the women did not exactly bolster the credibility of the resurrection. To be added to the gospels is definitely a historical statement as to the validity of the event.
<<<<Most important, Your accusation that I am out to 'steal money' is really out of line. Some 1.5 billion Christians believe in the resurrection and there are hundreds of thousands of churches. Are they then just out to 'steal money'? Good grief.>>
Thats a ridiculous comparison, because only if those 1.5 billion Christians who believe in the resurrection were selling an education in Christian Apologetics/how to defend their faith, would it be considered stealing money from other Christians. The faith comes freely from Jesus, but some people are making a profit off of it, and that in my opinion is stealing.
<<Sorry fellah. You're wrong. You are out of line. However, like I said, I didn't expect you to see that, and hence I did not expect an apology. Thank you for exhibiting for all the attitude I suspected was behind your comments all along. You've removed all doubt. Have a good day, sir. >>
Why should I see the FACTS as wrong when all you've done is JUST say I'm wrong- you've offered no shred of evidence in the defense of your comments, I read and quoted youand then disproved you.
Oh, and BTW the religion of Mithraism like Christianity has a resurrection "witness" in it's beliefs, so again, resurrection beliefs are not unique to Christianity.
Sorry fellah. You're wrong. You are out of line. However, like I said, I didn't expect you to see that, and hence I did not expect an apology. Thank you for exhibiting for all the attitude I suspected was behind your comments all along. You've removed all doubt. Have a good day, sir.
Matthew 10 7-8 states that Jesus said:
7And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
8Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.
Apparently some Christians feel it should cost weaker, easily duped Christians to confirm their faith and prepare them for apolgetics(tools to defend their faith) instead of freely giving them with justice in order to teach them to serve G-d.
<<Honestly, such comments are completely out of line. I think you should apologize, though I don't expect one, and I shall have no trouble functioning if I don't receive one. >>
Apologly dictates that I have stated something wrong about you for which I have either a)misrepresented the facts about you; or b)lied about what you said, you misrepresented fact and I corrected. You charge money for an online course designed to prevent Christians from "falling away" and believing a work of fiction. You are charging for services you consider to be education(eventhough you presented fallacies for which I produced evidence) which churches are instructed to give away freely. How does telling the truth based on the quotes from the article, quotes from a source about resurrection and statements clearly defined as my opinion warrant an apology from me?
<<Most important, Your accusation that I am out to 'steal money' is really out of line. Some 1.5 billion Christians believe in the resurrection and there are hundreds of thousands of churches. Are they then just out to 'steal money'? Good grief. Furthermore, as to whether or not I'm lying I think the really important thing to do- if you are a person of integrity- is to contact me to see if I can substantiate my claim before sinking to such depths.>>
Stating my personal opinions on a free for all board is not sinking to depths- and what depths is there when pointing out fallacy so easily refuted? I am as entitled as the next person who post here to exhibit my objections, my skepticism and by my pointing out that I considered it lying to claim, as I factually mentioned; factually, other religions do have resurrection stories, they are NOT unique to Christianity and they are not confusing in my mind with resuscitation.
Perhaps you ought to have explained it better in the interview so it appeared correctly in the article.
FACT:
Miraculous resurrection of one sort or another has been a recurrent theme or central doctrine of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Religious accounts represent the resurrection of individuals, as well as a general resurrection of humanity on Judgment Day. Christianity also uses the term to refer to God's resurrection of Jesus. Accounts of resurrection also occur in other religious traditions. With the advent of written records, the earliest known recurrent theme of resurrection was in the ancient Egyptian religion and it was especially focused upon an individual in the cults of Neith, Isis, and Osiris.
SOURCE:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection
I understand what is precisely meant by resurrection, that is why I cited my source now, and in my previous posts. Other religions which existed before the ADVENT of Christianity tell either a similar or the exact same stories with a different name for their God or Gods and they are as historically or unhistorically accurate as the history of Christ.
If you are indeed not out to make money off of a form of Christianity which you obviously are marketing as , would you then offer that course at no charge?
<<<Hi, I'm Anthony Horvath, aka sntjohnny, aka the person referenced in the article. I am speaking mainly to QT here.
You need to understand in the first place what is precisely meant by a resurrection.
In the first place it is not a 'bodily disappearance' as in your Buddhism examples. >>>
I understand what you've said, but the quote I commented on stated, "Athanatos Executive Director Anthony Horvath, one of the course's facilitators, says that resurrection is a claim that is unique to the Christian faith and is not present in any other religions."
If other religions have resurrection stories or a belief that God or a God-like representation resurrected, the claim to uniqueness or not present in any other religion, is false.
Hi, I'm Anthony Horvath, aka sntjohnny, aka the person referenced in the article. I am speaking mainly to QT here.
You need to understand in the first place what is precisely meant by a resurrection. In the first place it is not a 'bodily disappearance' as in your Buddhism examples. Also, resuscitation is not a resurrection, either. Many of the alleged examples in the 'Hero Pattern' are simply not examples at all. While it didn't appear in the article (it was hinted) I also argue that the resurrection is unique in that it is set in a real historical context and is open to historical inquiry in no other way. I make this argument in somewhat more detail here: http://sntjohnny.com/front/easter-is-no-legend-the-resurrection-is-no-mere-myth-myth-made-fact-is-a-different-story/236.html
So, I am aware of such claims. The best popular treatment of your claims that I know of are in Strobel's "The Case for the real Jesus." Strobel enlists scholars whose most critical point is that such objections have already been tried and dismissed... like 50 years ago. They survive as legitimate only on the net. They do not survive in the face of thorough analysis. I review Strobel's book on my site, as well. I suggest you save the $15.00 from enrolling in one of my classes and buy Strobel's book for a good start on countering your allegations.
Most important, Your accusation that I am out to 'steal money' is really out of line. Some 1.5 billion Christians believe in the resurrection and there are hundreds of thousands of churches. Are they then just out to 'steal money'? Good grief. Furthermore, as to whether or not I'm lying I think the really important thing to do- if you are a person of integrity- is to contact me to see if I can substantiate my claim before sinking to such depths. If in fact I can't, and I have no answer to your litany of objections (as if you are the only person to have read Harpur's The Pagan Christ. Give me a break), then perhaps you can re-issue your indictment.
Honestly, such comments are completely out of line. I think you should apologize, though I don't expect one, and I shall have no trouble functioning if I don't receive one.
chicago24: Taking "speed of spread" as your criterion for truth is sloppy thinking. Islam spread fast, too, but I don't see you converting to Islam.
Where is your citation for this idea that women weren't credible witnesses in 1st Century Judea?
Most myths take generations to develop and spread. The fact that Christianity spread so fast indicates that SOMETHING miraculous did, indeed, occur.
Also, women were not credible witnesses in first-centruy Palestine. Why would the gospel writers indicate that women were the first to report the empty tomb if these authors were creating fiction?
These are some facts that do indicate the resurrection's credibility.
To all my brethren,
There are many regular commentators on this site who will fight tooth&nail to deny the validity of CHRIST, it appears by their posts that they hate the savior, they wish to discredit our faith, they want us to believe in what they believe in, they will call us childish names and try to belittle us, I pray that we all will pray for the unbelievers in our midst for their salvation. We are all sinners in need of forgiveness, don't forget my brethren that this site is a spiritual battlefield and worthy of fighting for- persevere, be filled with the love of CHRIST and the power of THE HOLY SPIRIT, rebuke, correct,teach- but do them in love. Follow the example of our MASTER AND SAVIOR OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST.
Hey Hansteadpete 1,
If more people would actually sit down and read the four gospel accounts side-by-side, I'll bet there would be a lot fewer Christians running around.
On the contrary, when people sit down to read the four gospels they do so with the understanding that they are reading about the same person from different perspectives just as they were written. I may see a girl with blue eyes and blonde hair, while you may see the same girl with a green shirt and blue pants. Although we are seeing the same person our viewpoints of this person differ because we are looking at her from different perspectives. This helps to get a more complete picture of the person rather than leaving out specifics of the person regarding other issues. The four gospels are the reason there are more Christians.
QT,
Sure the Davinci Code is stated to be fiction, but they say that it is based upon historic facts. This however is not entirely true. On the Davinci Code website they have a "Facts" page which gives supposed facts, in reality many are blatant lies. It is one thing to say, "I am writing a fictional book which has very little ties to reality" It is another to say, "I am writing a fiction book that is based in historical truths".
Another reference would be Dr William Lane Craig. You can search around the internet and find debates and such fairly easily.
"It would be interesting to see exactly what "evidence" they are referring to."
The resurrection is not so easily dismissed. Perhaps you should start with The Resurrection of The Son of God by N.T. Wright.
The differences within the four gospels only reveal that they were not revised to harmonize.
<<The course would help "immunize" Christians against challenges posed by books like "The Da Vinci Code," he said.>>
What challenges does one face with a piece of fiction? Brown states, "this is a work of fiction intended as a mystery/detective novel." The DaVinci Code did not challenge me- but I guess I think more realistically than others. It was a great read, but the author explicitly states his book is fiction, and contains legends that many people for centuries have tried to explain. If DaVinci Code shook the foundations of some Christians' faith, they really do not know Christ.
<<"The formation of the New Testament Canon seems very academic and wouldn't get covered in most Sunday school classes," said Horvath.>>
Not if one denies all the FACTS about why some books were chosen over others, which books contain the most errors and the agenda of Bible Literalists who are convinced the Bible is FACTUALLY written by "GOD."
All Horvath has to say is something close to what he is quoted about Christianity being unique regarding resurrection-- He can just tell his students what most fundamentalists say, "God said it, I believe it, that settles it!" He as good as said it when he denied the facts about other religions, which he may or may not really know anything about.
<<Athanatos Executive Director Anthony Horvath, one of the course's facilitators, says that resurrection is a claim that is unique to the Christian faith and is not present in any other religions.>>
As the knowledge of different religions has grown, the bodily disappearance of Divine Heroes has been found to be common. In ancient times pagan similarities were explained by the early Christian writers, such as Justin Martyr, as the work of demons and Satan, with the intention of leading Christians astray. Gesar, the Savior of Tibet, at the end, chants on a mountain top and his clothes fall empty to the ground. The bodies of the Divine Gurus of Sikhism vanish after their deaths. There is a traditional spot in Jerusalem whence, while mounted, Muhammad and his horse both ascend into the sky.
Lord Raglan's Hero Pattern lists many Divine Heroes whose bodies disappear, or have more than one sepulchre. B. Traven, author of The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, wrote that the Inca Divine Hero, Virococha, walked away on the top of the sea and vanished. It has been thought that teachings regarding the purity and incorruptibility of the Divine Hero's human body are linked to this phenomenon. Perhaps, this is also to deter the practice of disturbing and collecting the hero's remains.
There are stories in Buddhism where the power of resurrection has been demonstrated on at least two famous occasions in Chan or Zen Buddhist tradition. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection
I'm of the opinion that I wouldn't take this man's course simply because he's out to steal money. He is lying in the quote above with the claim that resurrection is unique to Christianity.With the advent of written records, the earliest known recurrent theme of resurrection was in the ancient Egyptian religion and it was especially focused upon an individual in the cults of Neith, Isis, and Osiris.
If we study religions, esp. Gods, those believed to be Gods and literary figures have been thought to resurrect from the dead. It goes back to the most primitive of religions that insist one God evolved into another via resurrection.
It would be interesting to see exactly what "evidence" they are referring to. There are only four conflicting accounts written several decades after the alleged events. Several of the accounts conflict so much, they are mutually exclusive, and one of the world's major religions is based on this?
If more people would actually sit down and read the four gospel accounts side-by-side, I'll bet there would be a lot fewer Christians running around.