예수는 부활했는가?

From the perspective of some scholars and historians, the resurrection of Jesus is nothing more than a simple myth that has been passed down through the generations. Despite the claims of those who believe in the literal resurrection of Jesus, there is no reliable historical evidence to support this claim. Some scholars claimed that we could know the resurrection of Jesus, according to the informations of empty tombs. There were some opinions like this but we have to say ‘not sure’ about it.

 

The story of the resurrection appears to have originated as a way for early Christians to explain the death of Jesus and his continued influence on their community. As the story was passed down over time, it was embellished with miraculous details and eventually came to be seen as a literal event.

 

However, many of the details of the resurrection story are difficult to reconcile with historical facts. For example, the story of the empty tomb is likely a later addition to the story, as there is no evidence that such a tomb ever existed. Similarly, the accounts of the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus are inconsistent and difficult to verify.

 

It is more likely that the resurrection story developed over time as a way for early Christians to explain the significance of Jesus in their lives. Rather than being a literal event, the resurrection was a symbol of the enduring power of Jesus' teachings and the hope that he offered to his followers.

 

In the end, we could say the question of the resurrection is a matter of personal belief and faith. While some may find comfort in the idea of a literal resurrection, others may find meaning in the symbolic significance of the story. Ultimately, the truth of the resurrection may be impossible to determine, and each individual must make their own decision based on the evidence and their own beliefs.

 

(Dawkins argues that the complexity of living organisms can be explained through natural selection and gradual evolution, and that the idea of "irreducible complexity" is flawed because it assumes that every component of a complex system must be functional in order for the system to work. In reality, Dawkins argues, many components of a complex system may have originated as simpler structures with different functions, and only later evolved to become part of a more complex system.

 

Dawkins presents several examples of complex biological systems, such as the eye and the bacterial flagellum, and shows how they can be explained through gradual evolution rather than through the intervention of a designer or creator. He argues that natural selection, acting over long periods of time, can produce complex structures that appear to be designed but are actually the result of a gradual, step-by-step process.

 

Overall, Dawkins' argument is based on scientific evidence and logical reasoning, and he presents a persuasive case for the role of natural selection in explaining the complexity of living organisms.) >> simple

 

In the context of the debate around the historical accuracy of the resurrection of Jesus, one possible hypothesis is the "other person hypothesis." This hypothesis suggests that after the death of Jesus, someone else was prepared to replace him, potentially by Joseph of Arimathea or Jesus himself. This replacement did not necessarily have to physically resemble Jesus, as evidenced by the story in the Gospel of Luke where two disciples walked with a new Jesus without recognizing him. Rather, the replacement could have had a similar "special mood" as Jesus, which was enough to convince some early Christians of the resurrection. Similar hypotheses can also be found in the Quran and have been suggested by skeptical professors, highlighting the ongoing debate around the truth of the resurrection.

 

>> but how about James ? The answer is simple. He was Jews and an uneducated, uncivilized ancient man. He was in the middle of some deflicting mood. So he just tried to destroy himself.