On the lost tomb of Jesus Christ and exodus of the Israelites

Dear brothers and sisters,

Please help!

I have two questions:

  1. Some like Bart D. Ehrman and others don’t believe in the empty tomb. Ehrman posted on the internet google page stated/stating that the tomb of Jesus Christ was lost and never found by anyone even by His (Jesus Christ) 12 disciples…Is the tomb of Jesus Christ actually lost and not found by His (Jesus Christ) disciples or by other people? More so, if the location of the tomb were known in the 1st or 2nd century by the early church, then certainly the early church of the 1st century will /could locate the tomb easily. People will preserve or erect a monument for remembrance till today. More so, I believe certain historical monuments or graveyards of 2000-3000 years ago are still being preserve till date. I’m just being curious . Can anyone help?
    Do I/we need to worry about?

  2. It is said that "The Exodus is the charter myth of the Israelites.[1][a] Spread over the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, it tells the myth of the enslavement of the Israelites in ancient Egypt, their liberation through the hand of their tutelary deity Yahweh, the revelations at biblical Mount Sinai, and their wanderings in the wilderness up to the borders of Canaan, the land their god has given them. "

Here my simple questions is, is the Exodus of Israelites a myths…Plus Is the 39 books of the Old Testament simply a myths, fables and legends?

Please answer to me briefly and I’ll be so thankful.

Thank you

2 Likes

@Kamei_Dan Can you provide the links to the two posts to which you are referring?

Hi @Kamei_Dan, thanks for bringing these questions to Connect! I am sure our community is going to have a lot of insight and resources to share on both of these very different questions.

I wanted to just share one quick thought related to your first question: the absence of a monument or memorial at the tomb of Jesus is considered by N.T. Wright (trained as a historian and New Testament scholar) as evidence for the resurrection—not against it. In Surprised by Hope, he writes:

Jewish tombs, especially those of martyrs, were venerated and
often became shrines. There is no sign whatever of that having
happened with Jesus’s grave. (pg. 62)

So as far as the material and historic evidence, Wright agrees with Ehrman on this. However, they draw exactly opposite inferences from the evidence. This reminds us that it is important to keep in mind that evidence is always interpreted. Wright’s view is that if Jesus was truly raised from the dead, his tomb—where his body rested for three days—was of exactly zero importance to the early Christians. The whole point—the unexpected and paradigm shifting glory of it—was that he was not there but was going around appearing among them!

While some other books (including others by Wright himself) go more in depth on the evidence for the empty tomb and resurrection, I highly recommend the initial few chapters of Wright’s Surprised by Hope as an overview of the various skeptical objections, evidence which meets those challenges, insight on how it all fits together, and what the theological implications are for us.

This is just one small angle related to your first question, but does it help get you thinking about how various historical and material evidence can be interpreted?

3 Likes

Dear @Kamei_Dan - bless your heart, no - don’t worry one bit about which tomb it was or whether it’s ever found, or whether it’s even still there anymore! The tomb Jesus lay in matters nothing - the heart He lives in matters everything!

And as for whether the Exodus was a myth, the New Testament writers didn’t think so - they spoke of it repeatedly as a historical event. And Jesus Himself spoke of events in the Exodus saga as historical facts - see Luke 20:37, John 3:14 and 6:32.

There are plenty of scoffers to tell you all the things they think aren’t true - always have been, always will be. They’re just seeking the praise of their peers. Don’t let them upset you. They weren’t there to witness the events like the Bible writers themselves were. Between the Apostles who were there and Bart who missed it by 2000 years, who do you think would be a more reliable witness?

6 Likes

Bart Ehrman was a great New Testament scholar, but unfortunately many of his conclusions were heavily biased and he eventually gave up his faith based on those conclusions.

In terms of online resources, Nick Peters, a Christian apologist who specializes in New Testament (and also answers many other common questions/myths about Christianity), has rationally argued against many of Bart Ehrman’s conclusions. Daniel B. Wallace (Professor of NT Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary), who is also a great New Testament scholar at the same level as Ehrman, has rationally disputed Ehrman’s points and arguments many times. He has also debated Ehrman before as well.

From what I’ve seen from Ehrman, there is nothing to fear about his points/arguments. While what he says seemed daunting for me to answer at first, when I first discovered Ehrman, many of his points fall flat once you thoroughly examine the evidence and counter-arguments.

Nick Peters discusses Ehrman in these blog posts: https://www.deeperwatersapologetics.com/?s=Bart+Ehrman

This is Daniel B. Wallace’s blog: https://danielbwallace.com/ and a response from to Ehrman’s then-new book: https://bible.org/article/gospel-according-bart


Also, the tomb does not matter much at all. I agree with @jlyons assessment.

But dealing with Bart Ehrman and answering those who present his arguments can be done by reading what both Peters, Wallace, and many others have written in response to Ehrman. I highly recommend Nick Peters’ blog posts to start with. They’re concise but thorough, and well-suited for non-academic reading.

In closing, I will say this: I’ve found in my search of evidence and answers against questions for/against Christianity, it is really that most have been asked and answered before in the centuries past. While the answers may differ slightly depending on who you ask, the fundamental conclusion has never changed: Christianity stands, and He has risen. There is really not much new under the sun in terms of counter-arguments.

(Also, I’ll share this link that I came across months ago; it’s more suited to those who lost their faith after watching a video of Richard Dawkins, but the message is insightful: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10157261545147495&id=562307494 )

No, the Jewish Exodus is history. Jews still celebrate Passover to this day commemorating the escape from Egypt.

You might find this article about the Exodus interesting, as it mentions that there does indeed seem to be archeological evidence for the Exodus.

Science and archeology sometimes get things totally wrong, but the Bible does not lie. A while ago it was said that there was no concrete evidence that Pontius Pilate ever lived, but then they found a stone with his name on it. It was said that the Old Testament likely had been changed through the centuries, but when they discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls they found that the Old Testament we have now is the same they had then, with some differences in spelling and such. Man sins and misses the mark, but God does not.

1 Like

Thank you sister!

1 Like

Thank you brother!

1 Like