Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Resurrecting The Problems Of The Resurrection Of Jesus


RHEMtron

Recommended Posts

Will each persons story be the same?

Any yet, from many of the stories in the gospels the disciples were all pretty much standing in a group so your example isn't quite up to task of explaining things. Just a sorry attempt to cover up a sorry job by a supposedly perfect being.

 

Additionally, not all the gospels are first hand accounts and not all parts of the supposed first hand accounts are, and never could be, eyewitness accounts and no accounting for those stories are done by the authors.

 

Of course you can add to this what Han says and you have a real mess. Something god should have thought through a little better when bringing this wonderful story to the masses.

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Ouroboros

    23

  • mwc

    16

  • RHEMtron

    16

  • SkepticOfBible

    7

Wait a minute Paul. There's no gap in the story in Matthew. May and Mary get to the tomb and see the Angel. They don't run away. Do you really mean the story goes like this:

 

Matthew 1-4, Mary and Mary goes to the tomb. And the angle do his stuff, and earthquake etc.

(Matthew forgot to write that Mary and Mary take a hike to return much later)

Matthew 5, "And the Angel told the women"

 

I would love to see a play made from your timeline. It would be quite a running back and forth for the women. :HaHa:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

Just a sorry attempt to cover up a sorry job by a supposedly perfect being.

 

 

Yes. I understand your positions. Why did Jesus speak in parables to the masses? Why would the church lie about Christ, then put Pauls writtings that would come to no avail until a thousand years later. I mean the early church is the applicant for this decietfullness, residing mainly around the Roman Catholic, headed from the works of Peter, yet the writtings that were supposedly altered were not even applied until thousand years later by Martin Luther.

 

The point is people were lost then and are still lost today. Jesus, was the same as the God of Samuel, and Solomon. Yet the people wanted a King in Samuels day, and wouldnt turn to the temple as God had ordained to be appropiate in Solomons day. Sects began to form, ever since Judges. People forgot God, and empowered thereselves, which is possible, via mediums, spiritualists, etc.

 

If there is any Christian that denies the actuallity of these spiritual consultants, need to read more about Saul. Even in Isaiah, God speaks of His despise of the offerings. There are many links to God trying to intervine into a world of humans that He created with choice, to show them the true way to a relationship with Him before Christ.

 

Christ is a the most direct and attributing factor of Gods concern and direction to us in our finite state throughout the entire Bible, in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there is any Christian that denies the actuallity of these spiritual consultants, need to read more about Saul. Even in Isaiah, God speaks of His despise of the offerings. There are many links to God trying to intervine into a world of humans that He created with choice, to show them the true way to a relationship with Him before Christ.

If I understand what you're saying the RCC is evil and corrupted the teachings of the bible and god teaches us other ways or something? Then you speak of spiritualism like it is bad but good maybe?

 

I take it back, I really don't know what you're trying to say. :scratch:

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

This is relevant how?

 

A better question to answer would be how John the Baptist didn't recognize his own special god-cousin in John's gospel (considering the stink made at the beginning of Matthew about it). I guess they lost touch with one another despite the whole special mission thing? I guess John just knew he'd have to baptize the god-man cousin so that the god-man would get his special powers delivered to him via carrier dove because bastardized OT prophecies said something like this would happen.

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there is any Christian that denies the actuallity of these spiritual consultants, need to read more about Saul. Even in Isaiah, God speaks of His despise of the offerings. There are many links to God trying to intervine into a world of humans that He created with choice, to show them the true way to a relationship with Him before Christ.

If I understand what you're saying the RCC is evil and corrupted the teachings of the bible and god teaches us other ways or something? Then you speak of spiritualism like it is bad but good maybe?

 

I take it back, I really don't know what you're trying to say. :scratch:

 

mwc

 

My take on spiritualists is that they are not good, yet they do exist and there are psychics and meduims even today that are correct in their predictions or visions whatnot, refering to when Saul consulted a meduim and the meduim rose Samuels soul? possiblily, nevertheless communicated with him. Then later, Saul died, in which the writter expressed that the death was the result of the meduim contact and early disobedience.

 

The RCC thing was a thought that I have that maybe only makes sense to me. If the early church, structured around Peter, early Christian movement tampered and altered the writtings about Christ; why didnt they just ditch Pauls writtings. Even the lead man, Peter, said it was hard to hear his writtings and doings. Martin Luthers direct impact on the Protestant movement, which is the umbrella for most modern day denominations, in general, are based around Pauls writtings and teachings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hat'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

 

There is big problem with the eyewitness theory. Normal eyewitness do not have the luxury of having the Holy Spirit guiding them, which Jesus said will teach them ALL THING(John 16:13-14;John 14:16-17,26).

 

Yet somehow we must believe that hese unknown authors of the Gospels, cannot even tell a coherant narrative on the most important event of the universe. They have to rely on their personal bias and their POV, just like normal people.

 

This means that either

 

1)The HS did not guide to all things, hence they have to rely on their bias

2)These Gospel writers were not HS filled christians

 

The fact that three apologist have come with 3 different narratives speaks volume for the "simple pieces of puzzle" theory

 

The Agnostic Review of Christianity sums up the whole fiasco nicely

 

http://www.geocities.com/b_r_a_d_99/jesusappear.htm

 

This is the type of rewrite that's required to reconcile the text so that apologists can claim that the Bible contains no contradictions and is the inspired word of an infallible tribal deity.

 

Since the resurrection of Jesus is supposed to be the most important event that ever happened in the universe, and represents a "fact" upon which the entire Christian doctrine of salvation rests, one would expect God to see to it that this event was precisely and clearly recorded.

God had no problem taking time to inspire a high level of precise detail and information in the following areas:

 

*God devotes 36 verses of specific detail on how to decorate and furnish an important ceremonial tent in Exo 26.

*God devotes 42 verses of specific detail on how he wants priests to dress in Exo 28.

*God devotes 46 verses of specific detail on how priests are to be consecrated in Exo 29.

*God devotes 85 verses of specific detail on how offerings are to be made in Lev 1-Lev 4.

*God devotes 38 verses of specific detail on how to deal with mildew(yes, mildew) in Lev 13:47-59 and Lev 14:33-57.

*God devotes 39 verses of specific detail on how the Temple was furnished in 1 Kings 7:13-51.

 

It's certainly reasonable to expect that God would see to it that a far, far, more important topic than any of these would be recorded without gross inconsistencies and a confusing timeline.

That's what would be expected of God if the Gospels were really his holy word. If they aren't, then that opens up a can of worms that fundamentalists don't want opened under any circumstances.

Professional apologetics are part of the industry which is set up to ensure that believers and potential converts will accept the industrial manual(the Bible) as the inspired word of an infallible deity.

Fundamentalist Christians don't really have any other option than to turn to aggressive sermonizing and acrobatic apologetics in order to expand their kingdom. Since they already have the absolute truth from God, there are no other avenues or shades of gray for them to investigate or consider. Fundamentalism is so rigid by nature that it leaves itself only one approach, which is to claim Biblical texts are 100% accurate and the epitome of written truth.

 

The all powerful, invisible tribal God that fundamentalists claim to work for also created job security for his followers because his holy word requires legions of ministers and professional apologists to explain and clarify what his original alleged word can't seem to present without displaying gross inconsistencies.

Apologists in effect become God's editors, generously adding qualifiers/words to the scriptures and creating scenarios in order to reconcile contradictions and explain to the masses what God really meant to say all along.

However, if all this edification and adding of words and qualifiers to scripture are really what God wanted people to do with his word, then apologists routinely and conveniently ignore one of God's rules.

 

Prov 30:5-6

Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

 

Would an all powerful deity really need human help to rationalize and mentally rewrite his scriptures about such an important event in his plan for the universe?

Is this the type of product an all powerful deity would put forth in order to convince people of a vital truth?

Perhaps the Gospels aren't really what fundamentalist Christians say they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why did Jesus speak in parables to the masses?

 

Ah yes. The parables of Jesus. Tell me which parable it was that conveyed to all mankind the most important message in the history of the world: the message that Christ came to die for our sins, and that simply by believing this message a person would earn a ticket to eternal paradise.

 

Funny how there are no parables in the gospel of John.

 

The criterion of dissimilarity strikes again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, you did not answer any of my points. All you have done to respond is resort to self-deprecation. Go back and respond to the point accordingly: http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?act=...st&p=194693

 

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

Amy, how do you interpret the bible?

 

Mythra stated that the bible claims Jesus appeared to the 12 apostles. He then asked what 12, in which you responded the 11 plus Matthias, the disciple chosen to replace Judas, as written in Acts 1:23-26.

 

The problem is that Matthias didnt become one of the 12 until after Jesus ascended, which is written in Acts 1:9.

 

<edit>

Youve been posting on this thread, but you still havent reponded to the initial challenge in my Opening Post. Still waiting for that timeline....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Youve been posting on this thread, but you still havent reponded to the initial challenge in my Opening Post. Still waiting for that timeline....

Good luck. Should we start taking bets on whether you'll get her to sincerely answer this or whether jesus will return first? Hmmm...I'm going with jesus (although I bet he can't even come up with a logical timeline). :lmao:

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not if Mohammed comes back first. :scratch:

 

Or Buddha...

 

Or maybe the Holy Cute Bunny will come back too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully He'll return first. Glad you're going with Jesus. YE HAAA! That's what I've been wanting to hear! JESUS!!!!! YA GOTTA LOVE THAT GUY!!!!

 

Then you all will say, "No argument here."

So we're agreed. A mythological character will appear before you give a sincere response to RHEMtron. Now, I know that you said you wouldn't give a timeline because <blah blah blah> (I don't recall the excuse) as opposed the real reason of we both know it's impossible to provide one but don't tell me that since I'm not asking you anymore. As I said...I'd sooner expect an imaginary character to come to life than have you actually follow through on something.

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geez.... i didnt even realize this post was here... right smack dab in the middle of all 108 posts.

 

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.

 

You didnt even read the challenge right! Here's what it clearly said:

 

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.

Write out a narrative of what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You didnt even read the challenge right! Here's what it clearly said:

 

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.

Write out a narrative of what happened.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Whom in the Bible ever wrote that these things were suppose to be in a perfect, agreed upon order?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geez.... i didnt even realize this post was here... right smack dab in the middle of all 108 posts.

 

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.

 

You didnt even read the challenge right! Here's what it clearly said:

 

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.

Write out a narrative of what happened.

I read it right. I just gave you the outline for a choronololgical narrative of those events. It was a simple way to do it. But I see it is not what you understood and what you and the writer wanted. I'll think about it. No promises.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read it right. I just gave you the outline for a choronololgical narrative of those events. It was a simple way to do it. But I see it is not what you understood and what you and the writer wanted. I'll think about it. No promises.

You did everything except NARRATE the events. But i understand why you didnt do it. You cant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whom in the Bible ever wrote that these things were suppose to be in a perfect, agreed upon order?

 

you didn't read my last post.

 

You are telling me for a God,l who spends 38 freaking verses on how to handle a mildew, is not able to guide his HS filled writers to the information to correctly write down the most important event in the entire universe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Bump.

 

Still awaiting new/old challengers. Paul_S, would you like to follow the rules this time and give it a shot? How bout you YoYo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whom in the Bible ever wrote that these things were suppose to be in a perfect, agreed upon order?

 

you didn't read my last post.

 

You are telling me for a God,l who spends 38 freaking verses on how to handle a mildew, is not able to guide his HS filled writers to the information to correctly write down the most important event in the entire universe?

 

let me give it a go.

 

suposidly a while ago, there were some texts uncovered at the tibetan monastary of himis in the hymilayas stating that jesus studied there durring the ages of 13-30. the period of his life that has no mention in the bible.

 

the church declared the documents to be false, and not much else has really been done about them. if you wish to read them they are compiled in a book called "the lost years of jesus".

 

lets aply buddhist meditation to the crucifiction. jesus could have used a deep meditation or trance while he was on the cross, slowing his heart rate and breathing to the point that it apeared he was dead. at the temple he would have had access to such meditations so it may have looked like he rose from the dead, and indeed he may have even thought he had died.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're claiming he didn't actually die? He was whipped to the near point of death, nailed to a cross, had a spear shoved in him, had his entrails fall out and still managed to get up afterwards and leave his tomb? Wow, that's even more impressive than being resurrected from the dead. I think I saw something like that once on a George Romero movie. :HaHa:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're claiming he didn't actually die? He was whipped to the near point of death, nailed to a cross, had a spear shoved in him, had his entrails fall out and still managed to get up afterwards and leave his tomb? Wow, that's even more impressive than being resurrected from the dead. I think I saw something like that once on a George Romero movie. :HaHa:

 

who says that his entrails ever fell out? its suposed the spear penetrated the lungs. not to mention this is a bible writen by people who wish to have other people follow the religion. so wouldent things be blown out of proportion? probably likely. yeah he was probably whiped badly but probably not worse than the other two that were crucified. so i would be guessing that the spear missed any vital organs.

 

the crucifiction itself was not what killed the person. it was incredibly painful yes. and if you put enough strain on the arms like that, it is hard to breath. the way that people were killed is that their legs were broken with a mace... rock... whatever... while they were on the cross so they couldent suport their weight with their legs (suporting yourself with feet that have been impaled would probably be excruciating..) and basically couldent get oxygen to the brain, at least not enough to keep you alive. however to slow your breathing and heart rate that much could possibly keep you alive if you did not have your legs broken, and suposidly jesus did not have his legs broken which only furthers my argument.

 

of course there were other ways that people were killed on the cross which usually involved more than one spear piercing the body at one time. though they could have been mercyfull, but not too mercyfull... and decided to let them die of blood loss (which is quicker than dying of slow suffication) with the one spear piercing his side. and they wouldent have broken his legs then either, but again such a meditation could save his life, as his heart rate would be dramatically lower giving the wound a longer time to clot to stop the bleeding.

 

though ive heard other stories where jesus was suposidly already dead before they stabed him with the spear. and again that would only suport my theory as he WOULD have appeard dead already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you assume it was his lungs pierced when it could have just as easily been his internal organs and even heart. In fact I would suggest they were trying to pierce his heart, because that's what you would do to make sure he was properly dead.

 

John 19:34-35 "But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side,

and forthwith came there out blood and water.

 

Ok, entrails falling out may be a stretch, but it does say Blood and water. This either suggests he was well and truly dead, or more than just his lungs were pierced. If he was still alive, there would have been no water, just warm blood.

 

But even if we did assume it was just his lungs, there was no way back in those days the temple or even a physician would have had the ability to fix a wound like that. It would have been fatal. That was the reason why they thrust the spear into him to make sure he was well and truly dead. At the very least he would have bled to death before he got any medical attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you assume it was his lungs pierced when it could have just as easily been his internal organs and even heart. In fact I would suggest they were trying to pierce his heart, because that's what you would do to make sure he was properly dead.

 

John 19:34-35 "But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side,

and forthwith came there out blood and water.

 

Ok, entrails falling out may be a stretch, but it does say Blood and water. This either suggests he was well and truly dead, or more than just his lungs were pierced. If he was still alive, there would have been no water, just warm gushing blood, which would have been a dead giveaway that he was still alive.

 

But even if we did assume it was just his lungs, there was no way back in those days the temple or even a physician would have had the ability to fix a wound like that. It would have been fatal. That was the reason why they thrust the spear into him to make sure he was well and truly dead. At the very least he would have bled to death before he got any medical attention.

 

again, its possible that the clotting process had indeed stoped the wound before he had bled to death seeing as his heart rate was so slow. though i agree if any vital organs had been hit, he would probably have died. it really depends on how deep the wound was. but again, the first gospel was writen about 60 years after the crucifiction. and we dont have any origional pages. so one would of course assume that if someone was dead then of course there would be water instead of blood. so again the bible could just be flawed in that sense.

 

also i assume it was his lungs because that is what i have heard from christian sources. specifically the bible study group i was in at one point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry took me so long to respond to it. here is my best interpritation of what happened,

 

1 violent earthquake, angels appear and remove stone. gaurds are scared and go tell pharasees what happened.

 

2. mary mag shows up at dark and sees stone removed. she goes and gets desciples.

 

3. desciples and mary show up at empty tomb. peter see's linens laying around.

 

4. desciples leave, but mary stays at tomb.

 

5. other women show up (although some authors have them all coming at the same time)

 

6. the women see 2 angels, that tell them the tomb is empty. (one gospel states only 1 angel)

 

7. the women go to tell the disciples what had happened.

 

8. Jesus appears to the women on thier way. i assume this is when Jesus drives out the demons of mary mag.

 

9. Jesus appears to two dudes and eats with them and reveals himself to them.

 

10. women tell desciples what happened, but the don't beleive.

 

11. in the evening Jesus appears to the disciples and reveals himself and gives them the great commision.

 

there are a couple of other things, but i don't think they are relevant to the discussioin. each writer focuses on something different, leaving other things out, making it difficult to piece together. this is my interpritation of it. did i leave something out. please let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok RHEMtron, i took your baite.

 

still waiting........ :scratch:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.