Fink are you referring to this passage:
And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.
2 And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.
3 And his raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow
In each of the Gospels, the next event immediately after this promise from Jesus is the transfiguration. Rather than interpreting Jesus' promise as referring to His coming to establish His kingdom on earth, the context indicates that Jesus was referring to the transfiguration. The Greek word translated "kingdom" can also be translated "royal splendor," meaning that the three disciples standing there would see Christ as He really is—the King of heaven—which occurred in the transfiguration.
ttdtt,
All religions require FAITH.
Definition: A strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
The vast majority of life in general requires faith. We accept what others have told us all the time. In a court, there is no way to go back in time and create some sort of scientific test to make sure the murder was committed by the accused. Jurors review the evidence, witness testimony as well as other line of evidence and make a decision based upon the preponderance of evidence.
Based upon the things we know to be true, none of the explanations advanced to explain them in a naturalistic way are convincing. The ones put forward so far are actually more far fetched that the resurrection being true.
As if they don't want the resurrection to be true, some keep kicking the can down the road and ignore both atheist and bible believing scholars when they state that the events were believed to have taken place when and where they are reported to in the gospels.
If they can remove the events by several decades from the sources, then that opens the possibility of deception. But, that is not what scholars are saying.
By Gary Habermas:
My Minimal Facts Argument in favor of Jesus’ resurrection was developed many years ago while writing my PhD dissertation. It has two requirements for the historical facts that are used: each must be confirmed by several strong and independent arguments, plus the vast majority of even critical scholars must recognize the occurrence’s historical nature. The critical scholars can be liberal, skeptical, agnostic, or even atheist, as long as they are specialists in a relevant field of study, such as New Testament. Of these two requirements, it is important to recognize that the initial standard concerning strong evidential back-up is by far the most crucial.
So why do even critical scholars admit or allow these individual historical facts? The answer is that each one is virtually undeniable. Most of the half-dozen Minimal Facts typically used are confirmed by ten or more historical considerations each. That is simply an amazing foundation, especially for events that occurred in the First Century AD!
The half-dozen facts we usually use are these: 1) that Jesus died by crucifixion; 2) that very soon afterwards, his followers had real experiences that they thought were actual appearances of the risen Jesus; 3) that their lives were transformed as a result, even to the point of being willing to die specifically for their faith in the resurrection message; 4) that these things were taught very early, soon after the crucifixion; 5) that James, Jesus’ unbelieving brother, became a Christian due to his own experience that he thought was the resurrected Christ; and 6) that the Christian persecutor Paul (formerly Saul of Tarsus) also became a believer after a similar experience.
One “secret” not readily known is that these skeptical scholars are quite willing to cite New Testament texts in order to buttress the historical nature of these six events. While not believing that these passages are inspired or even generally reliable, they still employ the individual texts that meet their standards of evidence. It is largely from these passages, plus occasionally from extra-New Testament writings, that they find plenty of data to accept these half-dozen events.
If you are interested in the historical back-up for these six facts admitted by virtually all scholars, as well as how these six can show that Jesus’ resurrection really happened, then attend the Saturday plenary lecture entitled, “Minimal Facts on the Resurrection that Even Skeptics Accept,” by Gary Habermas.
