The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Convo with ChatGPT about Jesus
| '"'''"'"' | 09/29/25 |
| '"'''"'"' | 09/29/25 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: September 29th, 2025 5:46 PM Author: '"'''"'"' Me: If Jesus had not been crucified, how likely is it that his teachings would still be known today?
ChatGPT: Very low. Without the crucifixion (and the resurrection narrative that followed), Jesus would likely have remained a minor Jewish preacher among many in 1st-century Palestine. The drama of his death, framed as sacrificial and redemptive, gave his movement a unifying symbol and urgency. That event, more than his sayings alone, catalyzed the spread of Christianity through Paul and later Roman adoption. Without it, his teachings might have survived as fragments within Judaism, but not as a global religion.
Me: Is there real proof of his death, resurrection and transfiguration?
ChatGPT: There’s a difference between historical evidence and theological belief:
Death: Historians widely agree Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate (~30 CE). Sources include the Gospels, but also Roman/Jewish writers like Tacitus and Josephus. So his death by crucifixion is considered historically credible.
Resurrection: No historical “proof.” All accounts come from Christian texts (Gospels, Paul’s letters) describing empty tomb and appearances. Historians can’t verify these events; they see them as early believers’ experiences/claims, not objective evidence.
Transfiguration: Only in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke). No outside documentation. It’s viewed as a theological vision/story rather than verifiable history.
👉 In short: Death—yes, historically supported. Resurrection and Transfiguration—faith claims, not proven events.
Would you like me to give you a rundown of the strongest historical arguments skeptics and believers each use for the resurrection?
You said: Yes
ChatGPT said:
Here’s a compact breakdown of the main historical arguments around the resurrection:
Skeptical Arguments
Source bias – All resurrection accounts come from believers, written decades later, with no neutral witnesses.
Contradictions – The Gospels differ on who visited the tomb, what they saw, and when.
Alternative explanations –
The body was moved or stolen.
The disciples had visions/hallucinations born from grief.
The story was developed later to give theological weight.
Silence in other sources – No Roman/Jewish records mention the resurrection.
Believer Arguments
Early testimony – Paul’s letters (c. 50s CE) already proclaim the resurrection, too soon for full myth development.
Empty tomb – Even opponents in the Gospels admit the tomb was empty, suggesting the body wasn’t there.
Transformation of disciples – Fearful followers became bold preachers willing to die for the claim, often seen as unlikely without a profound experience.
Rapid spread of Christianity – The resurrection story gave the movement its explosive growth, harder to explain without a powerful central belief.
👉 So: skeptics see psychological, social, or narrative invention; believers see early testimony, radical transformation, and empty-tomb traditions as signs of truth.
Who witnessed Jesus after his resurrection?
ChatGPT said:
According to the New Testament:
Mary Magdalene (alone at first, then with other women) – reported in all four Gospels.
Peter (Cephas) – mentioned in Luke and in Paul’s letters.
Two disciples on the road to Emmaus – Luke.
The apostles as a group – multiple times, in locked rooms (John, Luke).
Thomas separately, in the famous “doubting Thomas” episode (John).
More than 500 people at once – Paul mentions this in 1 Corinthians 15:6.
James (the brother of Jesus) – also only in Paul’s letters.
Paul himself – much later, in a visionary encounter on the road to Damascus.
Historians note these are internal Christian sources only, but within those texts, that’s the list of witnesses.
Want me to also lay out which of these accounts overlap or contradict each other?
Me: Yes
Here’s how the resurrection appearances overlap and diverge in the sources:
Women at the tomb
Matthew: Mary Magdalene + “the other Mary.”
Mark: Mary Magdalene, Mary mother of James, and Salome.
Luke: Several women (Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary mother of James, “others”).
John: Mary Magdalene alone first.
👉 Contradiction: Who exactly was there? 👉 Overlap: Mary Magdalene appears in all.
Disciples in Jerusalem
Luke: Jesus appears to the disciples, shows hands/feet, eats with them.
John: Appears to disciples in locked room, breathes Holy Spirit.
Matthew: Focuses instead on Galilee, not Jerusalem.
👉 Contradiction: Location differs (Galilee vs. Jerusalem). 👉 Overlap: Core group of disciples sees him together.
Thomas
John only: Absent at first, then touches Jesus’ wounds a week later.
Emmaus road
Luke only: Two disciples meet Jesus on the road, recognize him in breaking bread.
Galilee
Matthew: Disciples see him on a mountain in Galilee, receive the “Great Commission.”
John: Disciples fish in Galilee; Jesus cooks breakfast on the shore.
Other mentions
Paul (1 Corinthians 15):
To Cephas (Peter).
To the Twelve.
To 500 people at once.
To James (Jesus’ brother).
To “all the apostles.”
Finally to Paul himself.
None of these large-scale appearances are in the Gospels.
Summary
Overlap: Mary Magdalene as first witness; core apostles as group; personal encounters with Peter.
Contradictions: Number/names of women, location (Jerusalem vs. Galilee), unique stories (Thomas, Emmaus).
Paul adds extra appearances not recorded in the Gospels, including 500 witnesses and James.
👉 Historians say these variations show independent traditions, while believers see them as complementary perspectives.
|
Date: September 29th, 2025 6:01 PM Author: '"'''"'"' Learning experience: If you want your story to blow up, get yourself killed. Spit in authority's face, preach against them, let them persecute and execute you, instant cult following.
Without Judas's betrayal, Jesus would've been just another Jewish preacher.
|