The 4 different stories of what happened the morning that Jesus was found missing from his grave don't correspond. I have seen several Christians try to come up with a version of that morning that accounts for all scripture without contradiction, but so far I have not seen anyone be able to do it. If anyone thinks they can, give it a shot. I highly doubt it’s possible though.

quote:Biblical Accounts of Easter Sunday:

Matt.28

[1] In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

[2] And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.

[3] His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:

[4] And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.

[5] And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.

[6] He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.

[7] And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.

[8] And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.

[9] And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.

[10] Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.

Mark.16

[1] And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

[2] And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

[3] And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?

[4] And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.

[5] And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.

[6] And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.

[7] But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.

[8] And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.

[9] Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

[10] And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.

[11] And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

Luke.24

[1] Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.

[2] And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.

[3] And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.

[4] And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:

[5] And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?

[6] He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,

[7] Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

[8] And they remembered his words,

[9] And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest.

[10] It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.

[11] And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not.

[12] Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.

John.20

[1] The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

[2] Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.

[3] Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre.

[4] So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre.

[5] And he stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in.

[6] Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie,

[7] And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.

[8] Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed.

[9] For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.

[10] Then the disciples went away again unto their own home.

[11] But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre,

[12] And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.

[13] And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.

[14] And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.

[15] Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.

[16] Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.

[17] Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

[18] Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.



[This message has been edited by Easy Going (edited 03-04-2004).]

If someone can manage to wirte an account that doesn't disagree with any of them, I'll officially be impressed.

They really don't seem all that different to me. Obviously they are, but for the most part it seems like what would happen when stories are passed on between people. For the most part they all tell of the same thing, it just seems like they got messed up.

And no Im not Chirstian and dont believe in the Bible.

quote:Originally posted by SEN D-F:

They really don't seem all that different to me. Obviously they are, but for the most part it seems like what would happen when stories are passed on between people. For the most part they all tell of the same thing, it just seems like they got messed up.



The differences are a problem for Christians since they believe the Bible to be the inspired perfect word of God. Once you see this as just imperfect second and third hand testimony, there are serious issues with believing that it is sufficient evidence for their claims. Christians will not admit that there are any contradictions in the Bible, but I have never seen any of them reconcile these passages.

A few things first to help understand where/how these verses

fit chronologically . . .

The original "God-breathed" word of God had no contradictions.

Each gospel account is written with a different "slant" . . .

Mt = Jesus as King

Mk = Jesus as Servant

Lk = Jesus as Man

Jn = Jesus as Son of God

Pay particular attention to who, what, when, and where.

A Greek-English Interlinear Text (GEIT(by Zondervan)) is a GREAT help!

Judeans began their days after sunset.

There was a HIGH sabbath on Wednesday (like when Christmas falls

on a day in the middle of a week) which was the day Jesus was crucified, followed by the weekly sabbath (Friday sunset-Saturday sunset).

Mt 28:1 (Lk 23:56b) {GEIT} Now late on the sabbath, as it was getting

dusk toward the first day of the week, came Mary the Magdalene and the

other Mary to see the sepulchre.

Mt 28:2-4 Great earthquake; angel descends/removes stone; guards faint

Jn 20:1-2 The first day of the week comes Mary Magdalene early, when

it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and sees the stone taken away from

the sepulchre. Then she runs and comes to Simon Peter, and to the other

disciple, whom Jesus loved, and says unto them, They have taken away the

Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.

Jn 20:3-10 Peter and other disciple run to sepulchre, looked, went home.

Jn 20:11-17 (Mk 16:9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of

the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, . . . )

But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down into the sepulchre, and sees two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.

And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She says unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have taken him.

And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.

Jesus said unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? who seekest thou? She, supposing

him to be the gardener, said unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.

Jesus said unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and said unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.

Jesus said unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father; and to my God and you God.

Jn 20:18 (Mk 16:10-11) Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.

Mt 28:5-8 = Mr 16:2-8 = Lk 24 1-8 Women go with spices to selpuchre, see angels, and go to the disciples

Mt 28:11-15 guards at sepulchre recover and return to city, receive bribes

Lk 24:9-12 And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven and to all the rest

It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary (of James) and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles

And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not.

Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he behelod the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.

Mk 16:12-13 = Lk 24:13-35 Jesus appears to two men on road to Emmaus, they return, tell disciples and are not believed.

Mt 28:9-10 = Mk 16:14 = Lk 24:36-44 = Jn 20:19-24 Jesus appears in the midst of the disciples at Jerusalem, Thomas not there.

Mt 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.

Jn 20:25 Thomas told of Jesus Christ's appearance, didn't believe

Yes, there are verses that seem out of order according to how we read them in the bible. This is done MANY times throughout the old and new testaments

consider Genesis 1:1 - 2:3) where a synopsis is given either before or after

a detailed account.

There a many considerations not mentioned here, e.g. a typical english word (appear, believe, power, filled, received, etc.) in the KJV may have been translated from two or three different Greek words. (Biblical)Greek was a very mathematical language. Prepositions were very exact in the who, what, where.

1. Matt has Mary M meeting the angel and Jesus on her first trip at the crack of dawn before she runs off to tell Simon Peter or anyone.

2. You have the John account of Mary M meeting Jesus happening before the Matthew account of an angel saying you are looking for Jesus in the wrong place, showing her Jesus is not there, and telling her He is risen.

3. Matthew’s account has Mary M and Mary the mother of James meeting Jesus together the first time they are down there. Your account, Mark, and John does not.

4. Your account has Peter running down twice to discover the empty garments and leave confused. You only are doing this same account twice to account for more contradictions.

5. Mark says that the women were to scared to tell the disciples, and only Mary M could do it when she met Jesus. Matthew says they all went to the disciples after they all met Jesus. Your account has Mary M going alone the first time, and the rest going afterwards which contradicts Mark’s claim that none talked before meeting Jesus.

There is more, but that should keep you busy for now.

Havent read this link, dunno if its any good, but might add something to the thread...im getting lazy....

http://www.apuritansmind.com/Apologetics/ResurrectionAccount.htm

Perhaps Jesus wasn't crucifed at all. Some Gnostic traditions believe that Jesus switched places with Simon of Cyrene (the cross-bearer) at the last minute, or that he created the illusion of doing so, and escaped.

'And wtach as I turn water into wine! *kazaam*'

'ooooooooooooooooooooo!'

'And who needs one slice of bread, when you can have a whole loaf! *abra kadabra*'

'aaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!'

[This message has been edited by SEN D-F (edited 03-05-2004).]

quote:Originally posted by inquisitor_11:

Havent read this link, dunno if its any good, but might add something to the thread...im getting lazy....

http://www.apuritansmind.com/Apologetics/ResurrectionAccount.htm

Here is that account:

quote:1. "Mary Magdalene" visited Jesus' tomb Sunday morning "while it was still dark” (John 20:1 ). (It is possible that someone was with her, since she refers to "we" [J ' 20:2].)

2. Seeing that the stone had been rolled a (John 20:1 ), she ran back to Peter and John in Jerusalem and said, "We do not know where they have laid him" (v 2).

3. Peter and John ran to the tomb and saw the empty grave clothes (John 20:3-9) and "the disciples" (Peter and John) "returned to their homes" (v. 11 ). But Mary Magdalene' followed Peter and John to the tomb.

4. After Peter and John left, Mary Magdalene lingering at the tomb, saw two angels "where the body of Jesus had lain" (John 20:12). Then Jesus appeared to her (Matthew 16:9) and told her to return to the disciples, (John 20:14-17).

5. As Mary Magdalene was leaving, the "o ~ women' arrived at the tomb with spices to anoint the body of Jesus (Mark 16:1).' , this time, it "began to dawn" (Matt. 28) The group including the "other Mary" (28:1), the mother of James (Luke 24:10), Sa*lome (Mark 16:1), and Johanna (Luke 24:1, 10) also saw that the stone had been rolled away (Matt. 28:2; Mark 16:4; Luke 24:2; John 20:1 ). Entering the tomb, they saw "two men" (Luke 24:4), one of whom spoke to them (Mark 16:5) and told them to return to Galilee, where they would see Jesus (Matt: 28:5-7; Mark 16:5-7). These two young "men" were actually angels (John 20:12).

6. As Mary Magdalene and the women left to go tell the disciples, Jesus appeared to them and told them to go to Galilee to his "brethren" (Matt. 28:9-10). Meanwhile, the "eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had appointed for them" (Matt. 28:16; Mark 16:7).

7. Mary Magdalene with the "other women" (Luke 24:10) returned that evening to the eleven (Luke 24:9) and "all the rest" (v. 11) now reassembled in Galilee behind closed doors "for fear of the Jews" (John 20:19). Mary Magdalene told them she had seen the Lord (v 18). But the disciples did not believe her (Mark 16:11). Neither did they believe the story of the other women (Luke 24:11 ).

8. Upon hearing this news, Peter got up and ran again to the tomb. Seeing the empty grave clothes (Luke 24:12), he marveled. There are noticeable differences between this visit and his first one. Here Peter is alone, whereas John was with him the first time (John 20:3-8). Here, Peter is definitely impressed; the first time, only John "saw and believed" (John 20:8).



If Mary M came first before other women, then how do the Bible scholars who wrote that acount for this:

Mark.16

[1] And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

[2] And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

[3] And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?

[4] And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.

This has Mary M asking how the stone will be rolled away after she saw it gone and went to tell to Peter.

quote:Originally posted by SEN D-F:

'And wtach as I turn water into wine! *kazaam*'

'ooooooooooooooooooooo!'

'And who needs one slice of bread, when you can have a whole loaf! *abra kadabra*'

'aaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!'

[This message has been edited by SEN D-F (edited 03-05-2004).]

even if there were no tricks involved, feeding a crowd and keeping order is an accomplishment in itself.

Hey, son of God or not, Jesus was a great guy! No denying that!

quote:Originally posted by inquisitor_11:

Havent read this link, dunno if its any good, but might add something to the thread...im getting lazy....

http://www.apuritansmind.com/Apologetics/ResurrectionAccount.htm

you shouldn't be last.... its not cool

[This message has been edited by lostanddisillusioned (edited 03-10-2004).]

^I already pointed out a problem with that. Matt, and Mark have Mary M going down at the crack of dawn with Mary the mother of James. This has to be the first trip for her because she wonders who will roll away the stone (see Mark and Matt). They both see the angel together before she leaves, which still contradicts John which has her running to tell Peter before she speaks to the angel.

That account has her leaving first without seeing the angel, then coming with Peter, and then joining the other women later and seeing the angel. The problem is that when she goes with the other women, she does not already know that the stone is gone.

Besides, that also contradicts Mark since he says that all the women were scared and told no man and only Mary M did after she saw Jesus. All the other gospels and that account say all the women told the disciples.

Whilst i havent followed your argument as in depth as it probably warrants, it looks like you have a very good point! Implications?

quote:Originally posted by inquisitor_11:

Implications?



quote:Originally posted by Easy Going:

The differences are a problem for Christians since they believe the Bible to be the inspired perfect word of God. Once you see this as just imperfect second and third hand testimony, there are serious issues with believing that it is sufficient evidence for their claims. Christians will not admit that there are any contradictions in the Bible, but I have never seen any of them reconcile these passages.

I finally looked at it myself and i definately agree that the accounts are divergent. This is what i came up with (if ive fudged anything important, let us know)

Main Points of agreement

1)women visit tomb at dawn

2)stone rolled away (already) (by) angel(s)

3)women find tomb empty

4)Jesus appears, at some stage, to Mary M/women

5)Peter/ Peter and John go to tomb, find it empty.

Main Points of Divergence

1)Which women (Mary M in all, other Mary in 3 of them)

2)Stone already rolled away (3) vs rolled by angel/earthquake (Matt)

3)Angel(s) 1 or 2?, similar but diff. descriptions, inside or out?

4)Jesus appears to Mary before she goes to the 11 (Mark/Matt) vs. Jesus appears to Mary after Peter and John have seen empty tomb (John) - *Its possible that she does go to the 11 first, only Peter and John go, then she mets Jesus and goes to them again (there are still probs though)

Id say that youre right in that you probably can't get a correct sequence of events from all 4 accounts. However, there is a core of events they agree on.

I know it sounds funny, but in some ways i think the divergence is a good thing- i.e. if it was a conspiracy to create a myth of a risen Jesus, you think they would have got the story straight- but thats another issue.

There is a difference between differences and contradictions. If one says Mary M went, and one says the Mary M went with Mary the mother of James, that is a difference but not a contradiction.

quote:Originally posted by inquisitor_11:

Main Points of Divergence

1)Which women (Mary M in all, other Mary in 3 of them)



It was at least 3 and it included Mary M. There is nothing to support that Mary M went alone the first time though as that would contradict reports that when she went in a group she was asking who was going to move the stone.

quote:Originally posted by inquisitor_11:

2)Stone already rolled away (3) vs rolled by angel/earthquake (Matt)



It would not be inconsistent to say that the stone was rolled back by an angel accompanied by an earthquake that morning before the women got there. I don’t see this as a contradiction.

quote:Originally posted by inquisitor_11:

3)Angel(s) 1 or 2?, similar but diff. descriptions, inside or out?



If a passage says they saw an angel, it really does not contract one that says there was two. Again, this is difference in the account, but not a contradiction. I can say you went to see your girlfriend when really you saw her and her friend.

quote:Originally posted by inquisitor_11:

4)Jesus appears to Mary before she goes to the 11 (Mark/Matt) vs. Jesus appears to Mary after Peter and John have seen empty tomb (John) - *Its possible that she does go to the 11 first, only Peter and John go, then she mets Jesus and goes to them again (there are still probs though)



This is a major contradiction. Luke has Peter going down after Mary M sees the angel and Jesus. John has Mary M going to Peter before she sees the angel or Jesus and thinking the body was stolen. I have seen 2 different ways to try to rectify this. One is two trips by Peter to the tomb. The second is saying Luke was not trying to be chronological and listed events out of order. There are problems with both of these explanations.

quote:Originally posted by inquisitor_11:

Id say that youre right in that you probably can't get a correct sequence of events from all 4 accounts. However, there is a core of events they agree on.



You cannot correct them as much as Christians claim you can. They will not admit ANY contradiction.

quote:Originally posted by inquisitor_11:

I know it sounds funny, but in some ways i think the divergence is a good thing- i.e. if it was a conspiracy to create a myth of a risen Jesus, you think they would have got the story straight- but thats another issue.

They claim this too. And it is a good argument for differences, but not for contradictions.

Yeah, i agree that the main issue of contention is the mary M sees Jesus then goes to Peter vs. Mary M sees Jesus after Peter's been to the tomb.

Aside from the "aha! contradiction" side of things, what importance does it have for the resurrection claim?

I personally, don't have any major problems with John saying "it happened like this" and Luke saying "it was like this", as essentially they both still say that Mary M was the first person Jesus met with, and that Peter/John found an empty tomb.

From the 4 accounts what would you say is the most likley course of events that is constructable?

edit 1:Added last 3 paragraphs

[This message has been edited by inquisitor_11 (edited 03-11-2004).]

According to Christians, the Bible itself is supposed to be a miracle. I believe in II Timothy it claims to be the inspired word of God. That is why they take everything as true even if there is little evidence other than an offhand claim. Take for instance Matthew 28: 11-15. This says the guards were bribed by the elders to say that the disciples stole the body at night. Now how would Matthew know if there was a bribe and who offered it? He certainly was not there to witness it. Christians would say that since the Bible is inspired by God, then God told Matt to write that. But if God was guiding the pen of the authors, then why is there a contradiction? If not, then are you going to believe 2nd and 3rd hand testimony that Jesus came back to life? I wonder how many 2nd and 3rd hand Elvis sightings you could find?

What actually happened? Who knows? Maybe the disciples did steal the body. Maybe the elders did and blamed the disciples. There were many witness sightings reported after the resurrection, but some are strange. Mary M does not even recognize him at first in John. In Mark 16:12 it says he appeared to two “in another form.” What the hell dose that mean? If I came up to you and said I was your dead grandpa, only in a different form, would you believe me?

One of the best witness accounts that identify the man as Jesus is the one by “doubting” Thomas in John. It says he put his fingers in the holes in his hands and his hand in the hole in his side. There are many “encounters” that are written in several or all the gospels, but this one is just in John. Now get this, the part about them stabbing with him with the spear is just in John too. Maybe the other 3 missed that, but they did all seem to get him being given vinegar to drink right before that. Why would they remember the “drink” but not the stabbing a few minutes later? Was it an important detail? Well, if it happened, it did fulfill prophecy. Maybe that is why John said it happened. I think I said earlier in “reasons for the existence of God” thread that when miracles happened, that is when the passages got less consistent, or appeared in less books. (Kind of like how all the gospels have the guard losing his ear in the garden when they take Jesus, but only one says he was healed.) To me at least, the fact that the best identifying witness of Jesus post death identified him by a scar that 3 of the gospels don’t even record he got, and the one that did had a motive to put it there (fulfilled prophecy), looks suspicious.

My main points are:

1. The Bible is not perfect like Christians say.

2. The evidence for the resurrection is not quite as strong as they would have you to believe.

3. If you started to believe claims this outrageous on this little evidence, then what else would you have to believe? ::cough:: elvis ::cough::



[This message has been edited by Easy Going (edited 03-11-2004).]

1. The majority of protestant evangelical churches claim the scriptures to be "the infallible and inerrant Word of God" as this example demonstrates, that is definately arguable, especially if it is a presuppostion. In 2 Timothy Paul says that all scripture is "God-breathed" (there is also a ref in 2 Peter that i cant think of) whether or not infallability and inerrence is a natural extension- i am dubious. However it is a very common view, and this does cast some serious doubt on it.



Im sure there a quite a number of people who will take an off hand claim as fact on only that basis. However, im also sure that for many the legitamcy of an off hand claim is often established by a claim that is verifiable.

Also, it is not a question of whether the authors remember an event, but wether they decided it was worth including. This comes back to the purposes of writing discussed eleswhere.

In Luke's gospel there is also an account of Jesus telling the disciples (but not specificly Tom) to look at his wounds, before eating food before them.

2. In your dealing with the resurrection, whilst most of your ideas have truth in them, i think youve made a few leaps and jumps (i think we need another thread!)

3.Again, there is a marked difference between being a 2nd or 3rd hand testimony and a writing something using secondary sources. Once you begin discrediting secondary sources as legit. the problem is that if you throw out the gospel accounts on the basis that you propsose, you starting to look at tossing away most of the books in every history dept.

For instance the example you gave of Matt. "knowing about the bribe" there are plenty of feasible explanations- however we will probably never know if he is recording it as a historical incident or as an explanation for the Jewish claim that the disciples stole the body. *If* his other claims tend to check out, then it would be fair to view his "off-hand" claims with a bit more favour.

Found some more interesting sites that contribute to the thread (and their by an aussie which is an added bonus)

Inerrency issue: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~pballard/errancy.html

There is also another resurrection reconstruction on the site, and a top notch "America's Cup Myth" (very funny- u probably have to be an aussie or kiwi to get some of the jokes though).

[This message has been edited by inquisitor_11 (edited 03-12-2004).]

quote:Originally posted by Easy Going:

The 4 different stories of what happened the morning that Jesus was found missing from his grave don't correspond. I have seen several Christians try to come up with a version of that morning that accounts for all scripture without contradiction, but so far I have not seen anyone be able to do it. If anyone thinks they can, give it a shot. I highly doubt it’s possible though.

[This message has been edited by Easy Going (edited 03-04-2004).]

first of all its called passover

easter is a man made holiday

where in the bible does it say easter bunnys and shit roaming around dropping chacolate eggs

thats blasfimy (sp?)



u come here looking for answer when u cant even get the facts straight

learn 2 chew the fat nigger child

http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mclennan/BA/JO-Eo.html

quote:Originally posted by Mact10-|-2-da-grave:

first of all its called passover



Passover has been around longer than Easter. It was from the story where all the first born sons in Egypt were killed except for the Jewish sons in homes with blood on the doors so the angel of death would "Passover" those homes.

Look up Easter in a dictionary. Although it may have more than one use, using it to describe the day that Jesus was supposed to have come back to life is the most common use of that term.

All holidays are man made, idiot.

quote:Originally posted by inquisitor_11:

3.Again, there is a marked difference between being a 2nd or 3rd hand testimony and a writing something using secondary sources. Once you begin discrediting secondary sources as legit. the problem is that if you throw out the gospel accounts on the basis that you propsose, you starting to look at tossing away most of the books in every history dept.



Most history texts don't claim someone rose from the dead. You need much stronger evidence for a claim like that.

What sort of evidence would you suggest for a claim that Yeshua was resurrected? If it did occur in the period that it did what other forms of evidence would be available today?

Off the top of my head, and i know craftian often makes this point, is that you would expect confirmation from/in other period sources. I pulled these names off some website, and ive seen most of the names before, however i cant find a good link for the texts-

Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas, Flavius Josephus, Thallus, Pliny the Younger, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and the Jewish Sanhedrin

These, *i think* only refer to the fact that a resurection story was being circulated/preached by the early church, so it doesent help develop a supernatural account. Some of them are later authors, but some were contemporaries.

However, what is most interesting to note is the Talmud accounts, that seek to explain why the tomb was empty. So even the question of an empty tomb isnt in dispute. If it was , the Jewish or Roman authorities would simply have produced the body and killed the resurrection myth, and christanity wouldnt have exploded as the early christians wouldnt have a leg to stand on . The tomb/body would have become a shrine and Yeshua would be considered either a dead prophet or heretic within 10 years time.

Extra-evidence would be needed to support claims of miracles or supernatural. From a historical point of view, without a supernatural claim, what can we construct?

Yeshua existed, was put to death, and the tomb where he was buried was found to be empty shortly after.