![\"Lena](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/186\/2019\/04\/UNCEM_1437952125082.jpg\")
<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n
Last night, Mike Parker (aka Peter Pan<\/em>) and Robert Boylan (aka Roibe\u00e1rd \u00d3 Ba\u00edol\u00e1in<\/em>, the proprietor of the impressive Scriptural Mormonism blog<\/a>) recorded a genial ninety-minute conversation about the Heartland movement (regarding Book of Mormon geography), the origins and approach of Mr. Pan\u2019s Neville-Neville Land<\/em> blog<\/a>, and l\u2019affaire<\/em> Richard Nygren<\/em> (aka le scandale du <\/em>si\u00e8cle<\/em>).\u00a0 I commend the archived video to the attention of any folks out there who might be interested in those subjects or in the people involved in them:<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cEpisode 35: Discussing Neville-Neville Land with Mike Parker\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n I also note two new entries that have appeared on Neville-Neville Land<\/em> blog since last I mentioned it:\u00a0\u201cAn open reply to Jonathan Neville, part 2,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0and \u201cThe story of Neville-Neville Land, as told to Robert Boylan.\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n ***<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Here are some notes from a project on which I work for a few minutes every year or so, regarding the resurrection of Christ:<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Helmut Koester writes that the appearances of Jesus \u201ccannot very well be questioned.\u201d[1]<\/a>\u00a0 \u201cWe can say with complete certainty,\u201d writes the agnostic New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman, \u201cthat some of his disciples at some later time insisted that he soon appeared to them. . . .\u00a0 Historians, of course, have no difficulty whatsoever speaking about the belief in Jesus\u2019 resurrection, since it is a matter of public record.\u201d[2]<\/a>\u00a0 [\u201cAt some later time\u201d?\u00a0 Early.]\u00a0 Traugott Holtz declares that the disciples\u2019 \u201cexperience of resurrection . . . is in fact an undeniable historical event.\u201d[3]<\/a><\/p>\n Critics who, by and large, accept the notion that the disciples genuinely had experiences of a living Jesus after his crucifixion and death can move in basically two directions.\u00a0 They might point out that events such as the resurrection simply don\u2019t occur, or that life after death is an incoherent concept.\u00a0 Or they might say that we simply don\u2019t, or can\u2019t, know what happened.<\/p>\n What we know, says Fuller, \u201crequires that the historian postulate some other event\u201d besides the disciples\u2019 faith in order to explain the sequel.\u00a0 We must identify the cause of the Easter faith . . . outside of their belief.\u201d[4]<\/a><\/p>\n There are a number of alternative, naturalistic explanations for the resurrection.\u00a0 Raymond E. Brown terms them \u201cgratuitous charges,\u201d which suggests the seriousness with which most serious scholars have taken them.[5]<\/a>\u00a0 As James Dunn says, \u201calternative interpretations of the data fail to provide a more satisfactory explanation\u201d than does the claim of resurrection.[6]<\/a>\u00a0 The Claremont philosopher Stephen Davis writes \u201cAll of the alternative hypotheses with which I am familiar are historically weak; some are so weak that they collapse of their own weight once spelled out. . . .\u00a0 The alternative theories that have been proposed are not only weaker but far weaker at explaining the available historical evidence.\u201d[7]<\/a>\u00a0 J. A. T. Robinson declares that \u201cit is indeed very difficult to dismiss [Jesus\u2019 postmortal appearances] and still find a credible explanation.\u201d[8]<\/a><\/p>\n [1]<\/a> Helmut Koester, History and Literature<\/em>, 84.<\/p>\n [2]<\/a> Bart Ehrman, Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium<\/em> (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 230-231.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a> Traugott Holtz, \u201cKenntnis von Jesus und Kenntnis Jesu,\u201d Theologische Literaturzeitung<\/em> 104 (1979): 10.<\/p>\n [4]<\/a> Fuller, The Formation of the Resurrection Narratives<\/em>, 169, 181.<\/p>\n [5]<\/a> Brown, An Introduction to New Testament Christology<\/em>, 163.\u00a0 See 163-167.<\/p>\n [6]<\/a> Dunn, The Evidence for Jesus<\/em>, 76.\u00a0 Compare N. T. Wright, \u201cChristian Origins and the Resurrection of Jesus: The Resurrection of Jesus as a Historical Problem,\u201d Sewanee Theological Review<\/em> 41 (1998): 118-122.<\/p>\n [7]<\/a> Stephen T. Davis, \u201cIs Belief in the Resurrection Rational?\u201d Philo<\/em> 2 (1999): 57-58.<\/p>\n