Quote:
Originally posted by Z-man
That said, allow me to get back to the subject at hand, namely the bones of Christ. Logic would dictate that one of two groups of people would have buried the bones of Christ - His followers, or His enemies. He was very controversial in His time - a radical Man with a message. He polarized the people around him -- there was no one 'neutral' who was neither for nor against Jesus. Thus, only friend or foe would have buried Him.
Now let's say that Christ was just a man. If I were one of His followers that proclaimed that He was risen from the dead, why would I make sure to bury Him in such a way that He could be identified later on in life and the whole resurrection event could be determined to be a big lie? No sir, if I wanted to propegate such a lie, I would make sure that the remains of Jesus would be unidentifiable. I would probably scatter his remains - maybe have His body cremated or his bones buried in a mass tomb to make His remains indistinguishable amongst many others.
Now on the other side, if I were an emeny of Christ, not only would I bury His body, I would also ensure that EVERYONE in that age and all ages to come would know for certain where the remains of this Jesus was. According to the recent news articles, it seems this tomb was just discovered some 30 years ago. So if enemies of Jesus buried Him, they really didn't do that good a job of making sure it was a known fact that Jesus did not rise from the dead.
|
Simple.
The resurrection story didn’t surface until some years after his death. He died and his family, friends, and/or followers buried him as they would bury anybody else. Some time later, they concocted the story of him living on. A simple version of that is that he lives on inside the hearts of his followers. I can see that story getting carried away.