Talk:Historicity and origin of the resurrection of Jesus/Archive 1

Secular encyclopedia, no?
This article seems to treat rising from the dead as a legitimate subject of dispute. Strangesad (talk) 23:32, 16 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Article is by and large junk. If you feel like PROD-ing it, no one will probably object and it may just go away in 7 days. An Afd will be a bigger headache and a waste of time. History2007 (talk) 01:21, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't you think we have great books on this topic, such as :
 * Geza Vermes, The Resurrection: History and Myth, 2008.
 * Michael Licona, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach, 2010.
 * N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God: Christian Origins and the Question of God, 2003.
 * Paul Copan (ed.), Will the Real Jesus Please Stand Up? A Debate between William Lane Craig and John Dominic Crossan, 1998.
 * Davis, Kendall, O'Collins (eds.), The Resurrection: An Interdisciplinary Symposium on the Resurrection of Jesus, 1999
 * Stewart (ed.), The Resurrection of Jesus: N.T. Wright and John Dominic Crossan in Dialogue, 2005.
 * etc.  Thucyd (talk) 19:26, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

If you think you can touch up this article, please do. I am sure you will do well. My main point was that the current content is mostly junk. If you want to touch it up, please do, and of course just remove the PROD. If you are not going to touch it up, let it be put out of its misery now. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 01:29, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

-
 * I would add that the only criticism comes from world of Robert M. Price and Richard Carrier, which are neither experts in the field and are close to be laughing stocks in the historical community... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.69.191.249 (talk • contribs)


 * Yes, these two are WP:FRINGE by our book, however there are many genuine Bible scholars who are of the opinion that history can neither affirm nor reject the resurrection. Tgeorgescu (talk) 16:22, 16 October 2017 (UTC)


 * First to claim that miracles certainly do not happen is a huge burden of proof, serious historians and Bible scholars prefer to remain agnostic upon whether miracles do happen (as a matter of historical scholarship, not as a matter of personal faith).
 * Second, except apologists and very conservative believers, the issue of an objective resurrection of Jesus is moot in historical scholarship. No one will lose faith just because historians cannot prove that it is an objective fact. tgeorgescu (talk) 21:03, 2 December 2022 (UTC)