Resurrecting The Problems Of The Resurrection Of Jesus

[SkepticOfBible]

I know the authors of the gospels don't actually name themselves. So that proves your point? And Paul's statements about the 500 hundred who saw Jesus at one time that was just a mass hulucination, riiiiiiiiiiight? And because Matt and Mark doesn't add that Jesus hung out for forty days that proves the resurrection is a hoax. The whole story is just a big gigantic lie. Oh yeah. I'm a liar also because I wasn't more clear when I said that Jesus appeared to Mary first and the disciples first even though I insisted that's not what I meant.

 

You've got your heart and mind made up. Jesus is dead, dead, dead. There ain't no convincing ya. Like I've heard time and time again, you've thought these things through and you're way smarter than me. You've been to the websites. You've have read what everyone has to say ~ even those idiotic pro-Jesus people, and you still came up with no resurrection.

 

Just tell me something, if you don't believe that Angel Moroni appeared to Joseph Smith(just in the way Paul did) and gave him a book of mormon, then why do expect us to believe the resurrection?

 

After all Millions of Mormons believe in it, why don't you?

 

And the eyewitness evidence is far better than your 4 gospels

 

http://www.inu.net/skeptic/mormon.htm

 

The Christian claim of authenticity relies to a large extent on the validity of Old Testament prophecy. It is claimed by Christian apologists that these prophecies, said to have been given by God to selected men long before the birth of Jesus, foretell not only his coming but also many important events which took place during his brief lifetime. So, it’s all a part of God’s grand plan. But what about the prophecies of other holy books and their fulfillment? Are they legitimate? Do they have any claim on authenticity? In that regard, let us take a brief look at one example in the Book of Mormon.

 

In the Book of Mormon there is a very interesting prophecy foretelling its coming. The prediction is spelled out in language far more explicit and conclusive than can be found anywhere in Bible prophecies. In 2nd Nephi 11 verse 125 of the Revised Authorized Version*, it reads as follows:

And it shall come to pass that the Lord God shall bring forth to you the words of a book, and they shall be the words of them that have slumbered.

 

The book is described in the next seven verses. But, in Nephi 133 we are told:

 

Wherefore, at that day when the book shall be delivered to the man of whom I have spoken, the book shall be hidden from the eyes of the world, that the eyes of none shall behold it, save it be that three witnesses shall behold it by the power of God, besides him to whom the book shall be delivered; and they shall testify to the truth of the book and the things therein.

 

Sure enough, in the front of every Book of Mormon in a section appropriately titled "The Testimony of Three Witnesses" is a statement signed by Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris swearing in the name of God that they had seen the actual plates with the engravings on them from which the book came. Prophecy made; prophecy fulfilled.

As if that weren’t enough, on the facing page is the testimony of eight additional witnesses who swear, also in the name of God, that they not only saw the golden plates but actually handled them. I understand that at the headquarters of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints in Salt Lake City, Utah they still have the official signed affidavits of all of these witnesses. They are there for anyone and everyone to see.

 

Now, here is an example of a prophecy made and fulfilled with confirming witnesses. Yet I’m sure that most non-Mormons, particularly fundamentalist Christians, will put no credence what so ever in any of it. In fact, they might even scoff at it. When confronted with this evidence they quickly switch their demeanor from that of a true believer to that of a bonafide skeptic. Yet the evidence here is many times more convincing than anything they can come up with from the Bible. In fact, if Bible believers had anything even close to this confirming evidence they would be shouting it from the roof tops.

 

In reality, however, the Mormon claims of prophecy fulfillment are just as open to question as are any others. The reason is obvious. It is the common sense principal declaring that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof. In the matter of a prophetic claim like this one, mere human testimony is inadequate. We are going to demand something far more convincing than a few words written in a book, particularly a book of dubious origin like the Bible. We are sensible enough to realize that there are more reasonable explanations than the one offered. We understand that men can be sincere but honestly mistaken. We understand also that men can deliberately lie.

 

So, I would suggest to those hinging their faith on the claim of Old Testament prophecy fulfillment that they apply the same common sense judgment to their beliefs that they so readily apply to similar claims cited in the holy books of other religions. Just ask yourself, "Why should I believe a thing simply because it is written in a book?"

 

 

I don't believe in Jesus because his resurrection did not happen, I don't believe in Jesus because he was not the Jewish Messiah

[Golden Meadows]

Hey, talking about magical answer to every possible question, I heard the answer to how gravity works.

 

You all know that Evolution is JUST a theory, just like Gravity.

 

So since Evolution is false and evil, then Theory of Gravity is also evil and completely wrong.

 

So here is the answer why an apple falls to the ground when you drop it:

 

There are billions of tiny angels all over the world, and each time you drop something, they see it and they gather around the thing and pull it fast down to the ground.

Hah! I bet you didn't know!

 

And what's cool is that the micro-angels do it according to Newtons formula of course, because their tiny wings can only accelerate the object so much before they get tire, and more micro-angels come to help so it moves faster.

 

Hans,

You are a man with many talents! have you ever thought of writing stuff for children? Even though you joke you show a wonderful imagination. Regarding comedy, I just watched "The Life of Brian" for the first time and I haven't laughed so much at a movie in a long time. The humour was of the same kind you used regarding the resurrection account in an early post. Humours a great way of bypassing all the barriers we through up. Anyhow I prefer your account of gravity to Newtons principia anyday

 

Sorry for this digression!

[Ouroboros]

I know the authors of the gospels don't actually name themselves. So that proves your point? And Paul's statements about the 500 hundred who saw Jesus at one time that was just a mass hulucination, riiiiiiiiiiight?

What's their names? Did they write any Gospels? Is there any list of names of these 500? And that list confirmed with anyone else? Why don't we have 500 gospels instead of only 4?

 

And because Matt and Mark doesn't add that Jesus hung out for forty days that proves the resurrection is a hoax. The whole story is just a big gigantic lie.

It is just as plausible, even more, it is more likely that it is not true than it is true.

 

Besides, the stories might not be "lies" or "truth" but myths. Which is a different thing when it comes to religious beliefs. It's about what the stories do for you, now if the stories are historical truths.

 

Oh yeah. I'm a liar also because I wasn't more clear when I said that Jesus appeared to Mary first and the disciples first even though I insisted that's not what I meant.

I never accused you of lying. Just to be clear. I don't think you are lying, but you might be living a lie.

 

You've got your heart and mind made up. Jesus is dead, dead, dead. There ain't no convincing ya.

It takes more to convince someone that was in the fold, and not in there anymore.

 

Like I've heard time and time again, you've thought these things through and you're way smarter than me. You've been to the websites. You've have read what everyone has to say ~ even those idiotic pro-Jesus people, and you still came up with no resurrection.

Have been Christian for 30 years, with many years of studies in the Christian religion, but it took me less than a year to learn the arguments against. What does it say about how strong they are?

 

Ok that's what you believe.

And? You didn't figure that out until now?

[SkepticOfBible]

The 500? Paul's witnesses. When he wrote about them he said most of them were still alive. So anyone could have checked the facts.

Like who?

 

Seems like Paul did a foolish thing if he was lyin' because few would be buyin' his story.

How is Paul different than Joseph Smith?

 

And you still haven't told me how 3 holy spirit led christian can come up with 3 different narratives?

 

Since you claim that you have been a christian for the last 30 years. Your Gospel's say that Jesus died because he had fulfill a prophecy, just like the so called "virgin" birth prophecy of Is 7:14

 

Luke 24:46

He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day,

 

Just point me to the Old Testament Scripture which says this?

 

Otherwise I have to presume they made it up.

 

This should be simple for you.

[Mythra]

Well Amy, since you're so sure that the "500" thing is accurate - what about the immediately preceding statement -

 

that the re-animated Christ first revealed himself to the twelve?

 

What twelve?

 

Wasn't Judas hanged / with his guts fallen out - prior to this?

 

Or did Judas hang himself after he met with the re-animated Jesus, and got his butt chewed out for being a rat?

[Checkmate]

............

Just tell me something, if you don't believe that Angel Moroni appeared to Joseph Smith(just in the way Paul did) and gave him a book of mormon, then why do expect us to believe the resurrection?

 

After all Millions of Mormons believe in it, why don't you?

 

And the eyewitness evidence is far better than your 4 gospels

 

http://www.inu.net/skeptic/mormon.htm

 

..................

"So, I would suggest to those hinging their faith on the claim of Old Testament prophecy fulfillment that they apply the same common sense judgment to their beliefs that they so readily apply to similar claims cited in the holy books of other religions. Just ask yourself, "Why should I believe a thing simply because it is written in a book?"

 

 

I don't believe in Jesus because his resurrection did not happen, I don't believe in Jesus because he was not the Jewish Messiah

Skeptic, thank you for returning to an OFTEN avoided topic/question. We've brought this up NUMEROUS times, (I did it myself in this very thread) and yet Amy Marie and her brethren studiously ignore us. (As she has yet again done with your post.)

 

Amy Marie, you keep claiming that NOTHING "matters". Not bible inconsistencies, not your proofs, or the lack thereof, and certainly not our many objections. None of it matters. We should all just bend over and smile and believe in your "god". (Or more accurately, we're to believe what YOU say about "god".)

 

Well, if THAT is true, then WHY NOT APPLY THIS SAME ILLOGICAL THINKING TO ALL OTHER RELIGIONS? On what basis have YOU, Amy Marie, decided to reject Mormonism? I REALLY want to have an answer from you on this issue.

 

How have you concluded that the unprovable claims of Christianity are "True", while concluding that the equally unprovable claims of Mormonism (insert any religion here) are "False"? What yardstick have you used to justify your decision? And why can't it be used AGAINST you?

 

(Note for the record that I have used NO profanity, have not "blasphemed" against your god, nor have I insulted your intelligence. Nothing to distract or offend your Christian sensibilities. NOW can I have an answer to my DIRECT questions?)

[Ouroboros]

The 500? Paul's witnesses. When he wrote about them he said most of them were still alive. So anyone could have checked the facts. Seems like Paul did a foolish thing if he was lyin' because few would be buyin' his story.

They're still alive? I don't know if I have met anyone of them. Do you have any names?

 

"And why do you think I keep risking my neck in this dangerous work? I look at death in the face practically every day I live. Do you think if I wasn't convinced of your resurrection and mine as guaranteed by the resurrected Messiah Jesus? Do you think I was just trying to act heroic when I fought the wild beasts at Ephesus, hoping it wouldn't be the end of me? Not on your life! It's resurrection, resurrection, always resurrection, that undergirds what I do and say, the way I live. If there is no resurrection, "We eat, we drink, the next day we die," and that's all there is to it. But don't fool yourselves. Don't let yourselves be poisoned by this anti-resurrection talk."

 

My good brother Paul.

The message Bible.

Was Paul at the resurrection? Did Paul meet Jesus during the 40 days?

[mwc]

I know the authors of the gospels don't actually name themselves. So that proves your point?

Proves my point. The names of the books are arbitrary. Thanks for conceding it.

 

Now that the names are arbitrary, and we already know that two of the accounts are not eyewitness accounts, then what are the other two tellings? Since they can't be assigned names, beyond tradition, and they're third person narrations, it would appear they too are not first person eyewitness accounts. My opinion is that the synoptics are three versions of the same play modified for three different sects. John is a "rewrite" if you will.

 

It would appear that you decided to gloss over my statements about eyewitness testimony. The problems with your "gospel". Your take on resurrected bodies and maybe other things. You have so many nifty ideas that bring to mind so many questions that I would just love to have answers for.

 

mwc

[Checkmate]

*sigh* Here we go again...

 

Amy Marie, you keep saying that we are trying to "wrap our minds around" something supernatural, and thus we fail. NO WE ARE NOT.

 

We are TRYING to get YOU to "wrap your mind around" something NATURAL and painfully obvious for anyone with eyesight to read/see. While YOU would have us short-circuit our common sense and give YOUR faith a free pass.

 

Once more, WHY should I grant that what YOU claim has validity, while denying what other religions claim? When BOTH positions are spurious and BOTH demand that I take it on faith that what they claim is Truth?

 

Why should I believe you, your so-called witnesses and your Bible/god? And you can't keep saying because your Bible says so! Just because your BOOK says to trust it, is no reason for anyone to trust it. Do YOU trust the well-intentioned, kindly, loving MORMON when they claim that THEIR Holy Book says thus-and-so and therefore should be trusted?

 

I changed my signature link at the bottom just in case you hung around. Give it a read. Just read "Under Delusion" for now. I don't want to overload you with information.

 

Claiming that YOUR outrageous claims are TRUE while saying another's outrageous claims are FALSE, JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY SO, (or your Book says so) is being disingenuous and irrational. Even DELUSIONAL.

[Ouroboros]

Was Paul at the resurrection? Did Paul meet Jesus during the 40 days?

 

You were a Christian for thirty years. You know the answer to that question.

Yes I was, and I do. And since you didn't answer, I suspect that you don't know the answer.

 

Paul never met Jesus personally, only in a vision in his head, yet he counts himself into the group of people who had witnessed him. He consider his own vision of Jesus just as valid as the other witnesses. So in his mind what the other ones saw were nothing but visions of Jesus and not the bodily Jesus. Remember, Paul's vision was only seen by him. The people with him didn't see Jesus. It was all in his head, Amy! And that is one of the accounts for an eyewitness of Jesus' resurrection! Come on. Realize it. There are patients in hospitals that see things like this today. They see Buddha, Mohammed, Jesus, Satan, UFO's, ET, Yoda, Alien, you name it! Should we take all these people seriously?

 

Well Amy, since you're so sure that the "500" thing is accurate - what about the immediately preceding statement -

 

that the re-animated Christ first revealed himself to the twelve?

 

What twelve?

 

 

The twelve member was Matthias, the disciple chosen to replace Judas. "The replacement must come from the company of men who stayed together with us from the time Jesus was baptized by John up to the day of His ascension, designated along with us as a witnes to His resurrection." Acts 1:21-22

That was after Jesus went up in the sky, Acts 1:9.

 

So is the Acts wrong in the order of events?

[Kuroikaze]

I know the authors of the gospels don't actually name themselves. So that proves your point? And Paul's statements about the 500 hundred who saw Jesus at one time that was just a mass hulucination, riiiiiiiiiiight? And because Matt and Mark doesn't add that Jesus hung out for forty days that proves the resurrection is a hoax. The whole story is just a big gigantic lie. Oh yeah. I'm a liar also because I wasn't more clear when I said that Jesus appeared to Mary first and the disciples first even though I insisted that's not what I meant.

 

You've got your heart and mind made up. Jesus is dead, dead, dead. There ain't no convincing ya. Like I've heard time and time again, you've thought these things through and you're way smarter than me. You've been to the websites. You've have read what everyone has to say ~ even those idiotic pro-Jesus people, and you still came up with no resurrection.

 

Ok that's what you believe.

 

 

Can I just say this....Please get down off that cross you've put yourself on.

 

None of us choose to reject christianity just to piss you off...I know you think your the center of the universe, but honestly your not important enough to any of us to change our whole belief system JUST TO MAKE YOU HAPPY, or mad for that matter.

 

You are NOT a martyr...you have no idea what its like to suffer for your beliefs.

 

Why is it so hard to believe that we looked at the same data and came to a different conclusion?

 

 

The 500? Paul's witnesses. When he wrote about them he said most of them were still alive. So anyone could have checked the facts. Seems like Paul did a foolish thing if he was lyin' because few would be buyin' his story.

 

 

 

I bet I could find 500 people living in the U.S. right now, who say they saw Elvis since he died

[Thackerie]

So it's a matter of choice, what one chooses to believe. That's all. I can't make anyone believe in the Resurrection. I agree.

 

Right. Round and round it goes. Nothing changes. The exchristians have already heard everything you have to say and we've rejected it. It seems like you reject all our arguments, too, because you've made up your mind that you're going to believe no matter what.

 

So what's the point? Why are you here? Wouldn't you feel more comfortable on a christian forum basking in your "relationship" with Jesus and "sharing" with like-minded folks?

 

Or, do you want to feel persecuted for your religion so you can be a martyr and shine brighter in heaven?

 

Or, can it be that you are secretly/subconsciously questioning your religion and trying to learn something from those who been there, done that, and got out?

 

Not trying to be offensive. Just baffled as to what motivates people like you.

[Checkmate]

So it's a matter of choice, what one chooses to believe. That's all. I can't make anyone believe in the Resurrection. I agree.

Do you? I think you missed the point. It's so much more than "a matter of choice." It's a matter of DELUSION and Compartmentalization. Deceiving oneself and playing mind games. Pretending NOT to see the obvious nonsense right before your nose. Playing favorites with YOUR ideas, while vilifying another's.

 

This is so much more than "choosing" what to believe. We're not talking about picking the best cold remedy in the Pharmacy Aisle. It is about being intellectually (dis)honest. Why choose to reject a lie, and then accept/promote a similar lie? And then congratulate yourself for being "honest" or "intelligent" or "led by the Spirit"? You're fooling yourself.

 

For me, it doesn't make sense to reject all other religions as spurious and silly, and then turn a blind eye when it comes to Christianity when it is equally silly and spurious. That is why I quit being a Christian and quit believing in god. I refused to lie to myself. I refused to allow people to lie to me. "What ifs", emotional blackmail, threats of damnation and fanciful stories won't cut it. Give me Objective Proof that can withstand rigorous criticism, or just leave me alone.

 

I value Honesty and Truth amongst the Higher Virtues in Life. "Blind Obedience" and "Submission to Retarded Beliefs" didn't even make the list.

[mwc]

I know the authors of the gospels don't actually name themselves. So that proves your point?

Proves my point. The names of the books are arbitrary. Thanks for conceding it.

 

Now that the names are arbitrary, and we already know that two of the accounts are not eyewitness accounts, then what are the other two tellings? Since they can't be assigned names, beyond tradition, and they're third person narrations, it would appear they too are not first person eyewitness accounts. My opinion is that the synoptics are three versions of the same play modified for three different sects. John is a "rewrite" if you will.

 

As you already know mwc I don't agree with your opinopn. I have read that John wrote his gospel to refute the teachings of Gnosticism.

So, again, you leave me a bit confused. It appears that when a point is proven to your disadvantage it turns to opinion. Strange that. Nonetheless, I leave the quotes above so that you can follow the conversation and point out where I left the course of logic and you can correct me. I'm sure you'll be able to show me the proper names of the authors of the gospels in context and how this is a matter of opinion rather than fact.

 

As for the statement about "John," well, you missed my point altogether. You seem to have a one track mind. Rather than simply copy and re-copy the same old play as the authors of the synoptics did (with minor changes for their particular sects) the author of John decided to rework the whole thing for his group. I wasn't trying to argue what the purpose was for his rewrite. I can do that if you like I guess.

 

As I said to the Grinch, you're trying to wrap you brain around a supernatural even that cannot be explained in the natural.

But YOU keep telling me that YOU understand the supernatural. There's this book and it's full of this supernatural stuff and it's all true and you know it is and you can tell me what it all means and stuff. And then there's these other books and they have supernatural things and you can tell me how they are all fake or that they are real but of evil origin. You have the ability to know the real supernatural from the fake supernatural from the good supernatural from the evil supernatural. YOU, Amy, possess these very skills. Whenever we try to understand them and explain them in a reasonable and logical manner apparently get them wrong more often than not. You, on the other hand, have the ability to divine the correct response and point this out to us even if, to us, it looks contradictory and illogical. This is why we keep asking you the same questions over and over and over again. You are the oracle Amy.

 

Speaking of which, you know of the oracles, right? They babbled nonsense that needed to be interpreted? You are our oracle, Amy!

 

I would welcome your questions and try my best to answer them.

Hmmm...Didn't I write some other messages? I thought so? I just wrote the stuff I did the last time to remind you that I did. Whatever.

 

mwc

[♦ ficino ♦]

So it's a matter of choice, what one chooses to believe. That's all. I can't make anyone believe in the Resurrection. I agree.

 

People don't just "choose" to believe things. The mind is compelled by evidence to give assent to what it perceives as true. One person doesn't choose to believe that 2 + 2 = 4 and another, that 2 + 2 = 5. I don't just choose or not choose to believe whether the laptop I'm typing on exists. And so on.

 

On the other hand, I've started to think there's some choice involved in our emotional states. I think I can choose - up to a certain point at least - to be happy or depressed.

 

I think choice of religious belief, when there's no way to verify or falsify the doctrines, is like choice of what emotional world I want. On the other hand, though, some doctrines just entail contradictions, and no one can choose them without annihilating all language.

 

Believing in the literal inerrancy of the resurrection narratives is an instance of the latter error, as even you have admitted, Amy, when you admit that details like how many angels, or what time of the morning, or when the stone was rolled back, don't matter.

 

Like Antlerman, I wonder where your abandonment of biblical literalism will take you. Exciting places within yourself and with others, I hope.

[Mythra]

The twelve member was Matthias, the disciple chosen to replace Judas. "The replacement must come from the company of men who stayed together with us from the time Jesus was baptized by John up to the day of His ascension, designated along with us as a witnes to His resurrection." Acts 1:21-22

 

So, according to this passage - Matthias was present throughout the entire gospel, along with the other twelve apostles? Was he at the last supper? Why didn't they call it the thirteen disciples then? Although Barsabbas was also in the running - so he was also there from the time of John the Baptist until Jesus floated up into the air. So now we have fourteen disciples.

 

Was Matthias also one of the twelve to whom Jesus said that - "you will be seated on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel" ? Hmmmm?

 

Keep after it, Amy. Kinda hard to keep explaining these things, isn't it?

 

p.s. : I don't buy your Matthias explanation. But I do understand the nature of christian apologetics.

[Checkmate]

Dear Amy Marie (and to everyone else that this shoe fits),

 

Read THIS!!!!

 

I'm getting tired of this rampant forum violation. STOP IT!!!!

[Ouroboros]

And Mythra, you saw that Matthias wasn't elected as a apostle until after the air-show by Jesus, right? So he wasn't considered one of the 12 at the time when Jesus took off.

 

--edit--

 

Our new label should be Unapologetics, that's what we are. We don't believe in excuses.

[SkepticOfBible]

Of course you think my thinking is illogical because you don't even believe Jesus was the Son of God. The resurrection makes perfect sense.

 

You still haven't provided me the OT scripture, which I asked for?Are the NT writers lying?

 

Why does the ressurrection makes perfect sense?

 

Mormonism denies some of the basic doctrines of my faith

...

contradicts the scripture.

 

So we agree that if a scripture contradicts a already revealed scripture, then it can be accepted as a valid scripture from the same God.

 

That is a excellent criteria, Amy Marie. However how many times have I shown you how the NT undermines and contradict the Hebrew Scriptures, yet you choose to believe it?

 

Why should the Jews accept the NT as valid continued revelation from the God, when it contradict their scripture?

 

 

The NT tells us we should be careful that we are not following a false Jesus,

 

The Old Testament also warns the Isrealite to keep a lookout for false prophets(Deaut 18;13), who want to redefine the God and his holy laws. Please explain to me how Jesus, Paul and the NT do not fit the Bill?

 

 

. They believe Jesus was a created being.

So does the writer of Hebrews and Paul

 

Hebrew 1:4

Being(Jesus) made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

 

1 Cor 1:15

(Jesus), who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

 

Jesus' brother was Satan

 

But you see this information is all part of the new information, just like the way the NT introduces Devil/Satan as being the enemy of God, whereas in the Old Testament he is servant of God.

 

and the whole story of Satan's rebellion in heaven contradicts the scripture.

 

I am not sure what you mean by this. Doesn't your NT says that Satan rebelled against God?

 

BTW there is no support for this rebellion in heaven in the hebrew scripture

 

I don't agree with anything that undermines who Jesus is.

Then I hope you understand the position of the Jews, when they don't agree with the NT, because it undermines their scripture and their God.

 

Christ addressed the issue when people demanded proof. "I have alread told you that I am He but you refused to believe."

 

So just because Christ said he is Jewish Messiah, therefore he is. That's like me saying that I am the President of The United States, therefore I become one.

 

Making a claim is easy. proving it is another Ball game

 

1)Jesus never Sat on the Davidic Throne

2)His own genealogies show that he cannot be messiah and both contradict each other

3)He never ushered a era of compliance with the law of God(Ezek 37:24). Jesus on the contrary preached against the law and promoted practices which was abomination to the Jewish God, eg Blood Drinking is a sin (Lev 11), yet Jesus had no problem preaching this as new formula to obtain salvation.

4)He also broke many of the Old Testament laws.

I have read that John wrote his gospel to refute the teachings of Gnosticism.

 

The author of John himself admit that he writing a second testimony of unknown disciple John 21:20-24

[Mythra]

And Mythra, you saw that Matthias wasn't elected as a apostle until after the air-show by Jesus, right? So he wasn't considered one of the 12 at the time when Jesus took off.

 

Sure I did, Hans. But I already knew what Amy's answer would be:

 

Well, just because Matthias hadn't been voted in yet to replace Judas means nothing. He saw the risen christ, and he became the 12th disciple by vote.

 

Therefore, Paul's account is true. Jesus revealed himself to the twelve.

 

Simple. There's no contradiction or errors here.

[ThePureOne]

You've got your heart and mind made up. Jesus is dead, dead, dead. There ain't no convincing ya. Like I've heard time and time again, you've thought these things through and you're way smarter than me. You've been to the websites. You've have read what everyone has to say ~ even those idiotic pro-Jesus people, and you still came up with no resurrection.

 

Ok that's what you believe.

 

Amy,

 

This isn't an equal situation, what you believe is not just as likely to be true. Have you heard the phrase "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"? Resurrections are not exactly normal day to day fare, wouldn't you say? If I tell you the moon is made of green cheese, and you disagree, is your position not vastly more reasonable than mine? Being at an impasse of stubbornness would not make my cheese theory any more sound or put it on equal footing with the "that's a silly load of bollocks" opinion.

 

Furthermore, these discussions of what was written in support of something else, all in the same book, are simply ridiculous. Any book from Harry Potter to Tom Clancy can support itself internally all it likes. It can invent 50,000,000 people who all vouch for the protagonist, it still means nothing. IT'S A BOOK. There is NOTHING remotely documented outside that book that gives credence to any supernatural event having occurred. Ever. No big flood, no six day creation, no resurrection, none of it. And that book isn't particularly well-written or consistent. Examples are endless. Genesis is a hoot. In 4:1 Eve gives birth to Cain, then Abel. Then Cain killed Abel. God was not happy. Then Cain went to the land of Nod, East of Eden, found his wife and had a son Enoch. OK, back up a second. Adam and Eve were the first humans, Cain and Abel their first offspring...then Cain goes to another land and finds a woman? Who is she, his sister that they forgot to mention? Then so-and-so begat what'shisname, and lo! in the land of Nod there were more women to marry and have kids with. This stuff was WRITTEN BY RETARDS. Or more accurately, by exactly the kind of uneducated, clueless buffoons who would be entertained by stories that have no logical consistency. The rules of rational thought were not well disseminated in those days like they are today. Are you going to tell me that the God who was capable of creating the universe can't put together better stories?? Heck, He should leave Shakespeare in the dust, and yet obviously the Bible is a barely readable work of obviously primitive heathens. And this is the source that we should believe because IT vouches for ITSELF? Hello? It never ceases to amaze me that people can argue the minutia of such a book seriously as if it has any bearing on its truth or falsehood. The non-sequiturs, contradictions, and complete nonsense show that it's badly written and not the work of a supernatural being, but even if it were well-written it does nothing to show that any of its more outlandish claims are remotely true. It's a book you choose to believe because you want to, nothing more.

[Ouroboros]

Sure I did, Hans. But I already knew what Amy's answer would be:

...

Well, just because Matthias hadn't been voted in yet to replace Judas means nothing. He saw the risen christ, and he became the 12th disciple by vote.

 

Therefore, Paul's account is true. Jesus revealed himself to the twelve.

 

Simple. There's no contradiction or errors here.

Aarg! Of course she would.

[Paul_S]

Paul_S and HanSolo were discussing the problems of Jesus' Resurrection in this thread: http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...659&st=800#

 

Paul_S, you might be familiar with this challenge, and i want to see you, and other Christians, respond to it.

 

Leave No Stone Unturned

An Easter Challenge For Christians

 

I HAVE AN EASTER challenge for Christians. My challenge is simply this: tell me what happened on Easter. I am not asking for proof. My straightforward request is merely that Christians tell me exactly what happened on the day that their most important doctrine was born.

 

Believers should eagerly take up this challenge, since without the resurrection, there is no Christianity. Paul wrote, "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not." (I Corinthians 15:14-15)

 

The conditions of the challenge are simple and reasonable. In each of the four Gospels, begin at Easter morning and read to the end of the book: Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, and John 20-21. Also read Acts 1:3-12 and Paul's tiny version of the story in I Corinthians 15:3-8. These 165 verses can be read in a few moments. Then, without omitting a single detail from these separate accounts, write a simple, chronological narrative of the events between the resurrection and the ascension: what happened first, second, and so on; who said what, when; and where these things happened.

 

Since the gospels do not always give precise times of day, it is permissible to make educated guesses. The narrative does not have to pretend to present a perfect picture--it only needs to give at least one plausible account of all of the facts. Additional explanation of the narrative may be set apart in parentheses. The important condition to the challenge, however, is that not one single biblical detail be omitted. Fair enough?

 

I have tried this challenge myself. I failed. An Assembly of God minister whom I was debating a couple of years ago on a Florida radio show loudly proclaimed over the air that he would send me the narrative in a few days. I am still waiting. After my debate at the University of Wisconsin, "Jesus of Nazareth: Messiah or Myth," a Lutheran graduate student told me he accepted the challenge and would be contacting me in about a week. I have never heard from him. Both of these people, and others, agreed that the request was reasonable and crucial. Maybe they are slow readers.

 

Many bible stories are given only once or twice, and are therefore hard to confirm. The author of Matthew, for example, was the only one to mention that at the crucifixion dead people emerged from the graves of Jerusalem, walking around showing themselves to everyone--an amazing event that could hardly escape the notice of the other Gospel writers, or any other historians of the period. But though the silence of others might weaken the likelihood of a story, it does not disprove it. Disconfirmation comes with contradictions.

 

Thomas Paine tackled this matter two hundred years ago in The Age of Reason, stumbling across dozens of New Testament discrepancies:

 

"I lay it down as a position which cannot be controverted," he wrote, "first, that the agreement of all the parts of a story does not prove that story to be true, because the parts may agree and the whole may be false; secondly, that the disagreement of the parts of a story proves the whole cannot be true."

 

Here is my outline of the order of events, begining that Sunday morning (4/9/0030):

 

Women head for the tomb: Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1, John 20:1

 

Yet dark: Luke 24:1, John 20:1

Resurrection: Matthew 28:2-4

 

Past sunrise: Mark 16:2, 3

 

Tomb seen was already open: Mark 16:4, Luke 24:2

Mary M runs away: John 20:2

The other women go in: Mark 16:5 Luke 24:3

and see angels: Matthew 28:5,6, Mark 16:5, 6, Luke 24:4-8

Matthew 28:7, Mark 16:7

Women run out: Matthew 28:8, Mark 16:8, Luke 24:9

Some told none: Mark 16:8

some told all: Luke 24:9-11, John 20:2

disciples wondered: Luke 24:12 John 20:3-10

Mark 16:9

Mary M sees Jesus: John 20:11-17

disciples unbelief: Mark 16:10, 11, John 20:18

Women meet Jesus: Matthew 28:9, 10

 

The lie: Matthew 28:11-15

 

Two disiples meet Jesus: Mark 16:12, Luke 24:13-32

 

disciples unbelief: Mark 16:13, Luke 24:33-35

the eleven see Jesus: Mark 16:14, Luke 24:36, 37, John 20:19

Mark 16:14, Luke 24:38-43

Mark 16:14, John 20:20

Jesus gives comission: John 20:21-23

Luke 24:44-49

Mark 16:15-18

Thomas doubts: John 20:24, 25

Thomas sees Jesus: John 20:26-29 (1 Corinthians 15:5)

 

Jesus gives commission: Matthew 28:16-20.

 

This out line is from/based on my personal notes and study.

[Abiyoyo]

This is no better than the fundamental Christian that comes in here fired up about a certain proof or point they have to offer. If the Easter story is thast crucial in direct accuracy to whether or not someone believes, then they better find something else to believe.

 

Yes. There are many variations of the resurrection of Christ. Though this is evident, so are the many others in the Bible, such as Chronicles and Kings. there are many different variations and contradictions especially between the Apostle Peter, the Gospels, and the writtings of Paul. The cold hard fact is that even if all these Easter story factors played out perfectly, there would be others somewhere that would be in the waiting.

 

So, I will give two explanations to satisfy this reply to this topic. The first will be typical for a typical question, the next will be what I think. I think both apply as fit.

 

You and your friends; Mike, Bill, Bob, and Jimmy. You guys are at an airshow. Your friends, including yourself are training pilots. Your teacher was there talking to you for days before the show, telling you the important things to consider in the process of flying. These are days of endless following and noting from this pilot teacher.

 

At the airshow, your teahcer is one of the pilots. There are thousands of people there. Bill is steadily watching every move the teacher pilot is making, even sometimes hearing his conversation, as he moved in closer to him. Mike is observing yet is well away from the pilot teacher, yet close enough to see him and his every move. Bob is trying to watch but is getting caught up in all the comotion, yet seeing the pilot every once and a while. Jimmy is totally away from vision of the teacher, yet can see his friend Bob, and hear his friend Mike.

 

The teacher pilot jumps in his plane, and takes off. The friends all gather around, talk a minute about the pilot then split up some together, some by theirselves. All of a sudden, everyone screams!

 

A plane went down! 500 feet from take off. Bill runs as fast as he can and sees the fiery mass, sitting there melting engulfed in flames. Bill runs as fast as he can to tell the others. Mike soon after Bill starts running from a different direction to the wreckage in which was still on fire, yet all the jet fuel was already consumed causing the feiry filled plane to just seem to be on fire. Bob is freaking out, and ran behind the tower then slowly went half way in pure shakeness, to see the plane, which at this point was just barely on fire, with firetrucks hosing it down. Now, Jimmy had run down the street to get a burger, when he looked back in the direction of the airshow to notice the smoke. In a panic, he quickly jumped in his car and was in route to return when this man in a jumpsuit ran infront of his car waiving him down. It was the teacher pilot.

 

Now, these friends did not see each other again for a few days, because of the hype, then reunited with the teacher. After this, the friends went their own ways communicating only by postal mail. These same individuals, 30 years later were to write a documentary in regards to this experience with their teacher on this day.

 

Will each persons story be the same?

 

 

 

Next. I would like to say that though this variation is evident; I would like to present the Son challenge. In all 4 Gospels, was it written that God spoke saying that Jesus was His Son as He was being baptised?

[Ouroboros]

Will each persons story be the same?

That's very true, besides a few minor details. It was the Son of God the Creator of the Universe, Time, Existence and Life that was Resurrected. The 9/11 would be considered a fraction of infitisimal small in comparison to the importance of the event. Why did God let them rest on the story for 30 years? Did they have to go to school to learn to write? Why didn't Jesus pick out some disciples that could write instead? Supposedly Jesus could read, so why not the others? It doesn't sound that Jesus or God took the mission seriously.

 

Another detail, most of the events in the resurrection story is not told by the actual people that saw the events. Mary didn't write the Gospel, the guards didn't write the Gospel, etc... so how can anyone be sure these stories aren't just urban legends?