The question is NOT "how do we explain an empty tomb?" The question is "how do we explain that empty tomb stories were circulating?"
Another question is, do you need a competing historical account, or is it sufficient to speculate and invent, without historical account, that X and Y happened instead. That is, if we feel that 4 gospels is an insufficient number of historical accounts, should we also not supply the same level of historical sufficiency to competing claims. I understand that one might propose probability, but probabilities in this kind of case, will inherently beg the question. So what historical requirements do we put on historical invention which are proposed against historical accounts?
@accabbat @paulogia0 No historical invention required. Just “this didn’t happen. Literally anything else may have, but not this.” And probability absolutely matters. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. (Also the gospels were not written independently.)
That is an historical assertion. One can assert that anything happened historically, because assertions require no reasons. Historical claims are another matter because they face epistemological requirements. I didn't say probability doesn't matter, I said that probability, in this kind of case, will inherently beg the question. Even if the gospels are not fully independent, having historical accounts for claim X is a better position than having no historical accounts for claim Y.
@accabbat @DilettanteSci @paulogia0 Why assume they are an historical account? The gospels are literature- written by Greek speaking authors. Paul's correspondences are not about an empty tomb. He claims Jesus was buried and rose to become a divine figure that interacted with him. That's common apotheosis.
@hop827 @DilettanteSci @paulogia0 They are an account made in the history of that time period >> Historical account. If that is controversial then there are underlying issues that need far greater attention.
@accabbat @DilettanteSci @paulogia0 They are literature. The authors were well versed in Greek stories. That's how you learn to read and write Greek in the ancient world. Odysseus, Homer, the Bacchae- stories of sailing and shipwrecks, gods impregnating humans, sons of gods- it's all been done before
@hop827 @DilettanteSci @paulogia0 They are historical accounts. If you can't operate under that basic and uncontroversial concept like the rest of the world then we might as well be speaking different languages.
@accabbat @DilettanteSci @paulogia0 Hop78/33/45 @hop827 · 1s Just because it mentions historical figures and set in a real time/ place does not mean it's history. Jews were crucified under Rome is historical. Hundreds of graves being opened to have the dead walk around Jerusalem isn't.
@hop827 @DilettanteSci @paulogia0 "Historical Account". If you can't call it that like a normal person then we are done here until you can find your way out of what is the equivalent of flat earthism.
@accabbat @hop827 @paulogia0 How do you define “historical”? I agree that the events described are purported to be in the past.