CADRE Comments

Due to being busy on other projects, and also fighting off a nasty round of spring allergies, I didn't do an Easter series on the Cadre this year; and besides Joe was taking point on that this time. So I'll just put up a post for handy links to the first two parts of an ongoing series I've previously been working on, and call it a season. {g} Let me clarify and stress that the point of this series, is NOT to argue (directly anyway) for the historical resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth in any religiously Christian sense -- although, since I have somehow been mistaken by some fans of Richard Carrier in thinking I don't believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus, I'll also clarify here that I do, with full trinitarian Christian theological meaning. (They were referencing a discussion I was having with Keith Parsons where I was taking the side of bodily resurrection vs a mass hallucination theory, not referencing this series; but eh, fans of Richard Carrier, in my ex...

In response to the empty tomb book published by the ensemble of internet infidels. My arguments are found in several pages that disprove any assertion of a late developing tomb myth. http://www.geocities.com/metacrock2000/Jesus_pages/Resurrection/Tomb_yes.html I have two major arguments both of which demonstrate the historicity of an early claim of an existing empty tomb. (1) The pre Markan redaction includes story of empty tomb as early as AD 50 (2) archaeological evidence indicates the tomb is under the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. This is the second argument: One of the major skeptical arguments against the Resurrection of Christ states that no tomb was ever venerated as the site of the Resurrection until Constantine arbitrarily chose one in the fourth century; that the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the oldest traditional site, was just a fabrication. None of this is true. Whil...