Atheist conclusions about the historicity of the resurrection

[dancindave]

but you can dance to it, and it's also "listening jazz".

Good old boys Federal Lynching KKKidnapping churchstate of hate dance party
…..

 

[Into the Night]

Atheist New Testament scholar Gerd Lüdemann evaluated every reference to Jesus' resurrection in the New Testament, as well as apocryphal literature. Through this approach, he offers a reconstruction of the probable course of events as well as the circumstances surrounding Jesus' death on the cross, the burial of his body, his reported resurrection on the third day, and subsequent appearances to various disciples.

The Christian faith Luedemann concludes ultimately stems from hallucinations of Peter and the other disciples, both men and women.

From a modern perspective this leads to the inescapable conclusion that the primary witnesses to Jesus' resurrection were victims of self-deception.

In conclusion, he asks whether in light of the nonhistoricity of Jesus' resurrection, thinking people today can legitimately and in good conscience still call themselves Christians.



https://www.amazon.com/Resurrection-Christ-Historical-Inquiry/dp/1591022452
https://www.fortresspress.com/store/product/9780800627928/The-Resurrection-of-Jesus

Atheism has no conclusions, Sybil.

 

[Into the Night]

The noteworthy thing here is that even a respected atheist New Testament scholar won't take up the torch of saying everyone was lying about the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. He thinks there is enough reliable historicity to say something really did happen, the disciples really did believe they saw Jesus after the crucifixion, and it does requires an explanation - in this case, hallucinations and self delusion.

I've never heard any respected scholar of antiquity say the evidence points to the crucifixion and resurrection being a fabricated story that was introduced to the oral and written tradition as a legendary tale decades later.

Atheism isn't Christianity, Sybil.