Did the Resurrection Really Happen? [VIDEO]

"Have you considered professional online editing services like www.CogitoEditing.com ?"

The Writing Life
"I'm not missing out on anything - it's rather condescending for you to assume that ..."

Is It Time for Christians to ..."
"I really don't understand what you want to say.Your http://europe-yachts.com/ya..."

Would John Piper Excommunicate His Son?

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • This is great! And thank you for hesitating when asked to separate the cross from the resurrection. Drew referred to liberal theologians who claim that Jesus is different after the resurrection. What I find so important about the resurrection is that Jesus is essentially the same! Yes, he walks through walls. But what’s more important is that his message is the same. You’d think that after we killed God, He would resurrect with holy justice, anger and just violence. But no. God came back with forgiveness, love, and the offer of peace. Jesus message in life, death, resurrection and ascension is that God is not out to get us. God is for us – so we can be for one another in the same spirit of love. It’s hard for me to think that message could sink into the disciples – who had just betrayed Jesus – with a metaphor. And that message of resurrection, as you say Tony, is exciting and challenging!

  • Great presentation! I do not think God goes around messing with the laws of physics, but I believe in the resurrection and that it is central to the significance of Jesus.
    I have read the Jesus Seminar authors, and the similar Bishop Spong as well, and I appreciate much of what they say, but it seems their final view of Jesus is so thin that I wonder why they consider him significant at all. I respect their conclusions, but what makes Jesus any more important than Gautama Buddha, who was also a great man?

    • Lausten


  • Kevin Womack

    Excellent thoughts and insights, Tony. Thanks!

  • Lausten

    Kind of a teaser title, since you only said you like Xtianity with the resurrection, not that it was real or not. You just talked as it were real. Fine if you want to do that, but Drew slipped in a little error in terminology. “Historical” Jesus refers to all of the trappings of his life that have been tacked on since the 1st century. There is very little agreement on who he was or what he said. Agreed upon sayings fill a few pages. It’s agreed that he lived and was crucified. That’s pretty much it. Drew stated “historical” as if it just meant everything that came before the crucifixion.

    Richard Carrier is doing work right now that points out that even those agreements are based on weak scholarship. That does not prove it is not true, but we need that scholarship. If what he said and the events of his life are so important, then we shouldn’t be accepting just anyone’s claims of those.