How Habermas Arguments for Jesus' Resurrection Contradict our Earliest Testimony! Part 1

See this link for a written summary of the texts I discuss:

For more on Paul see "New Insights into the New Testament" Conference, with Ten major scholars offering new research perspectives. Also, Exclusive: If you use code 20OFF at checkout you will get a $20 discount for going through my link--and you own these lectures and other materials for life!

+++++++++++++++++

I invite you to join my Tabor Research Community for lots more, discussions, my responses to messages, a monthly Zoom meetings, and a fantastic and diverse group of historically oriented students of the Bible:

See details here:

On-line Courses:
"Jesus & Dead Sea Scrolls”

Creating Jesus: Gospel of Mark
__________________________________________
The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men gang aft agley
מהמלים בקשר את המלים ועל סמך המלים
Retired Prof. of Religious Studies/Christian Origins
The University of North Carolina at Charlotte

Podcast: Spotify and Apple:

LinkedIn:

[davidcrenshawphysicaltherapy]

Big fan of Tabor. Appreciate that he’s not looking to discount the idea of resurrection but explain it. Spiritual does not mean unreal or untrue.

[johnanchovieb]

Thank you for this brilliant diiscussion, James. These are important historical readings of the texts.

[mertonhirsch]

Not only James, Coptic and Orthodox churches have traditions that Pontius Pilate's wife was a saint, Pilate may have accepted Christianity, and that Caiaphas became Christian.

[VeridicusMaximus]

Paul very much mimics many of Philo's conceptions, which is middle Platonism as a lens through which to understand Moses.

[SixSevenPodcast]

Are we talking about the same “I personally met Jesus” that Paul never bothers to mention in his own texts in any clear or direct way, and we have Acts to give us 3 variations of a story, one where Jesus is quoting lines from Dionysus character in a popular Greek play at the time called Bacchae? Or is is his nebulous 14 Arabian years or wherever where he never gives any specifics just that he’s encountered Jesus at some point.

I love how Dr. Tabor is a wiz at laying out the facts and leaving his own bias out of it so you’re forced to decide what to think about the info. It’s why I’m sure he was a great professor. But let’s be really clear on this… Paul’s only cited encounter— aside from the prayers for deliverance which were vetoed by Jesus, a first in his ministry up to this point, but I digress — but Paul’s only encounter we know about was Jesus knocking him off a horse to blind him and then being really vague about why he did that… that is, If you’re reading the 1st two versions of the story Paul himself never even told anyone about, but Luke tells us in Acts. The 3rd variation of the story has Jesus saying a lot (some of which has been shown to exist in Greek literature).

So the playing fields of the experience from James/Peter/John has to be taken into acct. in a nutshell, Paul is claiming his experience is genuine, but he doesn’t give any actual account of the experience himself, nor any details. We just have to take his word for it, and the word of his homeboy that changes three times on the matter in three different chapters in Acts.

[AhmedAhmed-xzj]

Prof, if you meet someone who had passed away in a thinking way, you'll ask yourself how he did that? He has a sort of power no one has...and that's what misleaded him thinking Jesus now is immortal and so powerful

[lukewagner]

I was baptized full immersion in the name of Jesus Christ.

Acts 2:38 KJVS
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

I then, shortly after, received the baptism of the Holy Spirit/Ghost, which was a very powerful experience. That’s all the proof I need for the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Romans 8:9, 15-16 KJVS
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. [15] For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. [16] The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

[davidbarnes]

I thoroughly enjoy the scholarship of Dr. Tabor and I have learned a great deal from his discussions on this channel.

However. I am seeking a few clarifications:

1. If the body doesn't leave the grave why does Paul use the term "raised"?
2. If the body isn't raised, what is the purpose of Jesus' ressurection?
3. Dr. Tabor, you used mentioned the term metamorphosis - and used a butterfly example to explain Paul's view. But...the caterpillar body doesn't remain in the cocoon. It becomes the butterfly. So, using the same analogy...isn't the physical body itself transformed into the "spiritual body, " and therefore, there is no body in the tomb after resurrection?

I have been really restling with this.

Thank you.

[Eddieboshoff]

I had a real true and physical manifestation experience with 3 other people about 10 years ago that I will never forget that was very intense, soo now I'm wondering what would it have been because we where in prayer seeking God when we where new believers..So then I have no other explanation that a supernatural real or spiritual realm does exist because it was truly supernatural

[dharma_]

Love this excellent discussion. I have a question about whether first-hand or even anecdotal accounts of people such as but not limited to monks for example experiencing intense spiritual insight that, under such circumstances that the Apostles found themselves post Crucifixion, might manifest as visual phenomena, whether these accounts support a particular direction for this dialogue?
Put another way, could the experiences of monks (etc) in heightened spiritual states be used to support the discussion (and perhaps fork a new line of thinking)?

[RustyWalker]

If the tomb was empty Easter morning, when was the last time anybody checked on him?
This question presupposes the story of the guards was a response to accusations the disciples or followers stole the body themselves or the family took it back to Nazareth without telling the disciples.
In other words, the story uses 3 days because it ties into a number of sources and reports of Jesus' own claim, but what confidence can anyone have that the tomb was only empty Sunday morning and not earlier?

[FountainPenIs]

The caterpillar/butterfly example is just an inferior version of Paul's own example of a seed that is planted in 1 Corinthians 15:37-58.

[beverlykoloian]

I like James Tabor's hypothesis but it raises additional questions for me The main question I have is why the disciples, family members, female followers or others in the movement were not aware that Joseph of Arimathea had moved the body, had plans to move the body and had no idea where he had moved it. Joseph of Arimathea is presented and identified as someone who was very sympathetic to the Jesus movement and he was likely intimate or in communication with its followers and key members. Yet in James Tabor's hypothesis he appears to moves the body to a new location after passover out of concert, and out of communication, with any of the movements key members or family members. I dont think this is plausible. The members were aware Joseph initially put Jesus in a tomb and knew where the tomb was. It makes sense they would have likewise been aware or informed if Joseph moved the body early on. The members (especially the women or family members) would have likely been involved in moving the body cleaning, and giving respect to the body as it was moved. Even if they hadnt...once they realized the body was gone, the first person who would have been contacted for information would have been Joseph of Arimathea. If he had in fact moved the body he would have told Jesus' followers and the resurrection narrative would not have gained traction. As I've said I appreciate James Tabor's analysis is intriguing, but not completely satisfying.

[resurrectionnerd]

Paul's letters give no clear evidence the appearances were even veridical.

The nature of appearances in the earliest sources is ambiguous due to two reasons:

1. Paul equates his vision of Jesus to the others "appearances" with the same verb (ophthe).
2. It's unclear whether the appearances occurred before or after the Ascension.

This is major because the apologists don't have a case if there is no evidence the appearances were veridical. Also, if they appeal to the gospels and Acts then they are tacitly conceding what Paul says is ambiguous.

[TommyStahr]

I worship the Zombie Jesus, He's alive from the dead, I worship the Zombie Jesus, l drink His blood & l eat His flesh. I worship the Zombie Jesus, He's alive forevermore! I've given Him my heart and my brains and now I live with my sweet LORD! (From my Christian Halloween album-which, somehow, goes unpublished

[mysticbeastproductions]

Paul didn't have the conceptual language we have. I think he was getting at the phenomenon of evolutionary catalyst in Jesus. Jesus was talking about having a conscience; a level of development that is still sadly lacking in our species.

[mistymoor]

I think that Paul had some kind of medical emergency ( hence his being blind for some time, some kind of stroke?) This medical event resulted in him having a near death experience and thus encountering Jesus rather than meetung the risen Christ.

[trentlytle]

I'm fascinated by the "special race", especially after reading a few chapters of Hidden Intercourse. Do you know when the earliest use of the phrase "children of light" is? Do you think it's plausible that Valentinus received a tradition of sacred union from the Pauline apostles?

[bobSeigar]

The Almagest & MUL.APIN are the best versions of Her Word.

[HHasan-ofvi]

I think when desciples fled, it mean they found that it was not Jesus someone else on the cross, but others think it was Jesus.

And His disciples all left Him and fled.
(Mark 14:50).
NASB.