Resurrection

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

At 02:14 AM 1/31/99 -0500, Mark Bakke wrote:

>> >> Tim

>> >> Where is Arimathea?

>> >

>> >BAKKE

>> >It's location is not universally agreed upon, but most opinion seems to

>> >be that it is the same as Ramathaim-zophim, the home of Samuel.  If so,

>> >the site would be modern Rentis, approximately 25 miles NW of Jerusalem.

>> >

>> 

>> TILL

>> I think you missed the point.  Biblicists assume the historical accuracy of

>> the NT in order to "prove" the resurrection, but the historicity of Joseph

>> of Arimathea cannot be corroborated by any contemporary records.  No one is

>> really sure where Arimathea was, yet we are supposed to believe that someone

>> named Joseph of Arimathea, who was mentioned only in biased accounts of a

>> resurrected Messiah, was an actual historical person.  To prove that he was

>> an actual person, a good place to begin would be to establish unequivocally

>> that there was even a place named Arimathea.

>

>BAKKE

>Establishing the location of a city is not the same things as

>establishing the existence of a person who was supposedly from that

>city.  For example, many people doubt the existence of Jesus of

>Nazareth, but how many will doubt the existence of Nazareth? 


TILL
Well, actually there is some doubt about whether Nazareth existed in the
early first century.  I'm not presenting this as any kind of argument but
merely stating a fact.  The existence of Nazareth at this time is disputed
by some.

Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jftill@midwest.net

• Previous message: Resurrection
• Next message: Resurrection
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]