So why do I really believe in Jesus’ resurrection? It comes to this: the folks writing the accounts of the gospels came across, like the majority of people, as sane and basically honest people fundamentally. Folks who are basically sane and basically honest are not wrong about something of that nature for the length of time. The disciples’ reactions even to the resurrection come across as both honest and sane: they react with shock and disbelief initially, outright skepticism about a thing like this.
Even seeing is nearly believing, initially, for something that out-of-the-ordinary. It requires awhile to allow them to believe their own eye. Haven’t I heard the counter-challenges? Why do I think those miracles did happen? A lot of it is the basic reliability of the narrators. Stating this results in a flurry of nit-picking about the gospels usually. But I’ve never read a merchant account of anything, anywhere that couldn’t be nit-picked. I’ve looked over the most common criticisms of the gospels and haven’t found whatever appears like it’s highly relevant to whether the narrators were essentially sane and honest. Remember, I don’t possess the preconceptions of an inerrantist.
Again, why do I think those miracles did happen? A lot of it’s the uniqueness of Jesus. Is an incident where Here, if miracles would happen at all, this is a place enabling you to expect them. Yes, I believe those miracles did happen. For Jesus’ resurrection, why do I think that one miracle did happen? The early … Read the rest