Glenn wrote,
<< If God didn't reveal the historical resurrection, then Christianity is
false. Thus, God MUST reveal history in Scripture or we are simply deluded
in our beliefs.
>>
In the NT there is an inordinate amount of stress upon the eye-witness
character of the gospel accounts; and the resurrection is part of the
testimony of those eye-witnesses (Luke 24:46-48; Acts 2:32; 3:15; 5:30-32,
etc.). When the fact of the bodily resurrection of Christ was challenged at
Corinth, Paul did say the resurrection was "according to the Scriptures" but
be built his case for the resurrection far more on the eye-witnesses (1Cor
15).
The historical fact of the resurrection, the history qua history, is never
based in the biblical accounts on a claim of revelation. If it were, it
would remove the resurrection from the possibility of falsification, putting
it in a realm above history so that our faith would have no basis except in
our faith itself. If you want to set up the Christian faith so that it rests
solely upon subjectivity, say that the resurrection of Christ rests upon
revelation alone. Is that what you are trying to do? (-:
Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 19 2001 - 19:22:38 EST