Are Supernatural Tales Written Decades After an Alleged Event by Anonymous Authors Good Evidence?

Image result for image of amelia earhart

 

We have evidence of resurrection appearances, we don’t have evidence for any of the other theories [for Jesus’ empty tomb].  Independent sources, like the M material, L material, Paul and John’s independent material.

–Christian reader of this blog

 

Must one have confirmatory evidence for a suspected explanation for an odd event before including this suspected explanation in one’s list of most probable explanations for the odd event?  No.  Crime detectives do this all the time.  What is necessary, however, is to include only those possible explanations which are consistent with the available evidence.  Why can’t Christians understand this simple point??

Just because we have no confirmatory evidence that a human being(s) moved the body of Jesus of Nazareth from his tomb does not preclude exactly that explanation as the cause of his empty tomb!  The explanation that someone moved the body does not contradict the available evidence.

“Hold on right there!” object Christians.  “We have the eyewitness testimony of over 500 people claiming to have seen Jesus alive again after his public death.  Your hypothetical explanation that his tomb was empty due to someone moving his body does conflict with the available evidence!”

Is this true, dear Readers?

If Christians could demonstrate that they truly do possess multiple, confirmed, corroborating, uncontested, eyewitness accounts of people claiming to have seen a walking/talking resurrected body, then Christians would be correct.  The problem for Christians is that they do NOT have even one confirmed, uncontested, eyewitness account of anyone claiming to have seen a walking/talking resurrected corpse!

Image result for image of amelia earhart

Let’s look at an analogy:

On July 2, 1937 the plane of Amelia Earhart disappeared in the South Pacific.

Within weeks after the disappearance of her plane and presumed death, stories began to spread among villagers of several islands in the South Pacific that the dead Amelia Earhart had appeared to multiple people in some fashion.  Most of the reports involved Earhart appearing to individual persons, most often chiefs and other elders among the natives.  But some reports included stories of Earhart appearing to groups of hundreds of people.

Several decades later, an anonymously authored book surfaced in South America giving a detailed account of Earhart’s crash, death, and hints of post-death appearances to villagers.  The book quickly became a sensation among devoted followers of Amelia Earhart.  The book claimed that shortly after her crash and death, a supernatural being appeared to a group of women villagers, telling them that Amelia Earhart would soon be appearing to the villagers, giving them a divine message from the gods.  Ten years later, two other books were published about the Earhart mystery, both again anonymously written.  These books included detailed accounts of the dead Earhart appearing to groups of people, talking to them, eating with them, and even levitating into the clouds in front of large crowds.  A couple of decades later, a fourth anonymous book on the subject was published.  In this book, the villagers are able to touch the body of the dead Earhart to examine her injuries from the plane crash!

Since the publication of these four books, hundreds of thousands of people all over the world have come to believe that Amelia Earhart came back from the dead and appeared to hundreds of villagers on several islands in the South Pacific.

Question:  Is any of this sufficient evidence for any intelligent, educated person to believe that the dead Amelia Earhart really did appear to hundreds of villagers in the South Pacific over 80 years ago?

Of course not!

Image result for image of the ghost of amelia earhart

 

 

 

 

End of post.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Are Supernatural Tales Written Decades After an Alleged Event by Anonymous Authors Good Evidence?

  1. Re: the Christian’s comment at the top of your post:

    ‘M and L material’: unfortunately for this Christian, none of the M or L material that the two gospel writers may have relied on (it’s considered hypothetical by many scholars) does not include resurrection appearances! Both ‘M’ and ‘L’ consist of a series of parables (eg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M_Source). In any case, neither Matthew nor Luke’s resurrection account is eye-witness or first-hand. Both lift, and alter, their resurrection stories from Mark; they cannot be considered independent.

    ‘Paul…’s independent material’: Paul does not claim to have seen a resurrected body. He had, he says in Galatians 1.12-26, a revelation in his head. Luke later embellishes this so it becomes, in Acts, a beam of light – no resurrected corpse anywhere (and no empty tomb in Paul’s writing either.)

    ‘John’s independent material’ bears so little resemblance to the synoptic gospels’ that it’s hard to credit they’re talking about the same events. John’s version is not considered to be an eye-witness account and although it might be independent, it contradicts the synoptic accounts (themselves contradictory) on so many points that it calls into question the historicity and veracity of both his own and Mark’s resurrection story.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I wouldn’t believe supernatural tales written today, by first hand witnesses. Consider Sathya Sai Baba, an Indian guru who died in 2011, and who many people claim has performed dozens of miracles. The witnesses to many of these supposed miracles are still alive today, and you can go interview them yourself.

    One of the weirder aspects of Sai Baba’s death is that some of his believers claimed that he wasn’t dead, but only sleeping. Now suppose that some people started claiming to have seen Sathya Sai Baba, and that his body had gone missing. Would you accept that the best explanation is that this man has raised himself from the dead, or would you think that some kind of mischief had gone on?

    I don’t believe the contemporary claims of miracles that I can investigate, so why should I accept claims of miracles that I have no ability to investigate?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s