• GojuRyu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    I think it is more likely that they refer to the minimum witnesses argument put firth by a youtuber Paulogia. He has done a lot to popularize it as a response to the criticism that sceptics have no singular explanation for the proposed evidence of Jesus provided by the spread of christianity and the accounts of early cristians.

    • sp3ctr4l
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I thought Paulogia’s minimum witnesses argument is basically that Paul could have hallucinated, and that those who witnessed an empty tomb basically did see an empty tomb, but circumstantial confusion led them to misinterpret what they saw?

      I’ll have to rewatch some of his vids.

      Also, hey, Goju Ryu! I trained in Shito Ryu =D

      • GojuRyu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Aah okay, that makes sense. Paulogia does however put forward at least one more person having an experience, possibly due to a grief hallucination. If I remember correctly he suggested Peter being the one to have it.
        I also don’t remember him ever suggesting that the empty tomb is an actual fact in need of explanation. I think he sees it as likely that Jesus would have been unceremoniously put in a mass- or ditch grave as was common for crucifixion victims. The tomb would then be a detail added on later by other christians, likely through narrative evolution.
        I may misremember some of it though, so maybe I should go back and rewatch as well.

        Oh nice! :D