[Paul Seely's recitation of the historical evidence snipped]
Paul, Obviously I failed to communicate in the above. I wasn't denying that
there was historical evidence of the resurrection, I was denying what I saw
as George's claim that no one except the apostles were allowed to look for
that evidence. In that particular place in the discussion, I was pointing
out that Jesus didn't have to appear to everyone who wanted to believe (I
agree with George), but that the first century skeptic had the right and
opportunity to go talk to someone who had actually seen Jesus in the flesh
walking around. That is a case of a non-apostle having the ability to
gather evidence before placing his belief in Jesus as Christ.
To me that opportunity is one of the best supports for the historical
resurrection. The Mormons do not offer anyone the chance to examine that
golden plate, but Paul gave information that any of his hearers could have
followed up on.
And I would claim that we today have the right to evaluate what evidence
does exist. Christianity is not simply the acceptance of an
assumption/belief that Jesus arose without any corroborating evidence even
today. We can verify the existence of the Romans, we can verify
crucifiction, we can verify the first century existence of a New religious
sect, and we can evaluate the reported reactions of the disciples. Granted
we can't actually verify the resurrection itself (and neither could Paul's
1st century listeners) but we can verify much surrounding the event.
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm