One more note before we start looking at the New Testament. The NT documents were obviously written by "biased" authors; that is, authors who claimed that Jesus was God as well as man, he died, his death was God's sacrifice (the ultimate Passover Lamb) for our sins, and he rose again from the dead as proof that the sacrifice was sufficient. The authors also claimed that Jesus did many miracles: turned water into wine, healed the lame, the blind, the deaf, fed the 5000, and raised the dead. What are we to make of these claims? It's not fair to admit these claims as true since we are looking at the evidence in an objective framework without assuming the existence of God, miracles, or anything else supernatural. On the other hand, I don't think it's fair to dismiss these claims out of hand either, since if we do we're answering our question on the resurrection before we look at the evidence. Also, remember that these authors were eyewitnesses or directly knew eyewitnesses to Jesus' life and death. I propose we put such claims to the side and simply ignore them, at least for the time being. When we read one, we'll skip over it without judgment to its truth or falsity. This seems, at least to me, the most fair way to proceed. Do you agree? |
