Jump to content

Don't Mistakes Like These Prove Tampering?


Recommended Posts

I never noticed this before but in Matthew it says this:

52 The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. 53 After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many. 54 Now when the centurion and those with him, who were keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were terrified and said, "Truly this man was God's Son!" (NRSV)

Ignoring the obvious silliness about the zombies, each and every translation I've looked at so far reads similar to what I have in bold.

 

The key part is underlined. Well, he hasn't even been taken off the cross at this point. This is just sloppy work and I've never even noticed it thanks to all the harmonizing I've been subjugated to over the years.

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Note: All Regularly Contributing Patrons enjoy Ex-Christian.net advertisement free.
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I never noticed this before but in Matthew it says this:
52 The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. 53 After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many. 54 Now when the centurion and those with him, who were keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were terrified and said, "Truly this man was God's Son!" (NRSV)

Ignoring the obvious silliness about the zombies, each and every translation I've looked at so far reads similar to what I have in bold.

 

The key part is underlined. Well, he hasn't even been taken off the cross at this point. This is just sloppy work and I've never even noticed it thanks to all the harmonizing I've been subjugated to over the years.

 

mwc

Come on mwc...it says that the saints arose. It doesn't say they came out yet. They just sat there in their tombs playing bone catch with themselves for three more days until they decided to go frolicking around the town the same time as Jesus. :HaHa:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah exactly. The tombs opened. They came back to life. Then it talks about what they do after he comes back to life all before they even yank his body off the cross.

 

Either these guys weren't supposed to make their appearance until later or whoever added all these other dramatic points didn't want to screw up the order of the story they were modifying and jesus should have came back to life by now. It doesn't really matter since I'm already pretty much convinced the story isn't altogether an eyewitness account of anything. ;)

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah exactly. The tombs opened. They came back to life. Then it talks about what they do after he comes back to life all before they even yank his body off the cross.

 

Either these guys weren't supposed to make their appearance until later or whoever added all these other dramatic points didn't want to screw up the order of the story they were modifying and jesus should have came back to life by now. It doesn't really matter since I'm already pretty much convinced the story isn't altogether an eyewitness account of anything. ;)

 

mwc

HA! You know, I wasn't even thinking about the chronology of the story. I was more looking at the chronology of the event itself. There's a couple of problems there isn't there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the opening post. I have since childhood wondered about that very odd passage. It's as though someone had a night-mare and stuck it in there and then went back to sleep. And ever since it's been part of inspired scripture.

 

Okay, just now I checked to see if the HarperCollins Study Bible comments on it. Nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the opening post. I have since childhood wondered about that very odd passage. It's as though someone had a night-mare and stuck it in there and then went back to sleep. And ever since it's been part of inspired scripture.

 

Okay, just now I checked to see if the HarperCollins Study Bible comments on it. Nothing.

But the passage IS there...

 

I'd recommend Bart Ehrman's books on Scriptural inconsistencies...

 

Study bibles are aimed at the Believer, not the student...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Infidels.org...

http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/...1/1saint92.html

 

A few extrabiblical sources did expand Matthew's tale of the many raised saints. These expansions were composed over one hundred years after Matthew's gospel was written. Remarkably, they even mentioned the names of some of the "many saints" raised, like Simeon and his sons, Adam and Eve, the patriarchs and prophets, etc., names that Matthew neglected to include. Of course, these expansions of the two extraordinary verses in Matthew and the list of names are found only in apocryphal gospels, which are full of all sorts of marvelous miracles that even surpass the ones attributed to Jesus in the four gospels that the church now endorses (like the story of the talking cross that followed Jesus out of his tomb in the Gospel of Peter).

 

And Jesus cried again with a loud voice, and yielded up his spirit. And behold, the veil of the temple was rent in two from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake; and the rocks were rent; and the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep were raised: and coming forth out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many (27:50-53).

 

The verses make more sense without that phrase than with it. Without it, they would simply state that the raised saints immediately entered the city upon Jesus' death. But some Christian copyist, or perhaps the gospel's chief editor, felt obligated to add the phrase "after his resurrection" to ensure the priority of Jesus' resurrection, regardless of the literal consequences.

 

Great article. I can't say it better.

 

Mongo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Infidels.org...

http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/...1/1saint92.html

 

A few extrabiblical sources did expand Matthew's tale of the many raised saints. These expansions were composed over one hundred years after Matthew's gospel was written. Remarkably, they even mentioned the names of some of the "many saints" raised, like Simeon and his sons, Adam and Eve, the patriarchs and prophets, etc., names that Matthew neglected to include. Of course, these expansions of the two extraordinary verses in Matthew and the list of names are found only in apocryphal gospels, which are full of all sorts of marvelous miracles that even surpass the ones attributed to Jesus in the four gospels that the church now endorses (like the story of the talking cross that followed Jesus out of his tomb in the Gospel of Peter).

 

And Jesus cried again with a loud voice, and yielded up his spirit. And behold, the veil of the temple was rent in two from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake; and the rocks were rent; and the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep were raised: and coming forth out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many (27:50-53).

 

The verses make more sense without that phrase than with it. Without it, they would simply state that the raised saints immediately entered the city upon Jesus' death. But some Christian copyist, or perhaps the gospel's chief editor, felt obligated to add the phrase "after his resurrection" to ensure the priority of Jesus' resurrection, regardless of the literal consequences.

 

Great article. I can't say it better.

 

Mongo

Until after Nicea, there was no such thing as a 'chief editor', just amateur copyists of greater or lesser Greek literacy (some were wholly illiterate to what they were copying). It reads as an part-literate enthusiast's interpolation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Infidels did a follow-up article. Equally interesting.

 

http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/...3/3saint92.html

 

In comparing versions of the crucifiction from Mark and Matthew this is said:

 

[quoteI could have started the quotations several verses earlier and extended them several more, and the results would have been the same. The two accounts are alike detail for detail, except for Matthew's statement about the earthquake that opened the graves of the resurrected saints.

 

This startling fact requires bibliolaters to believe that the Holy Spirit in his omniscient wisdom guided Mark to record such trivial details as the casting of lots for Jesus's garments (mentioned earlier in both accounts) and the offering of sour wine (vinegar) to Jesus, just as Matthew reported, but for some reason chose not to have Mark tell about the resurrection of many saints who later went into the holy city and appeared to many!

 

Mongo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the bible employs a collage-style storytelling, rather than a linear narrative.Kind of like Pulp Fiction or any number of movies today.

 

Jesus hanging on the cross

Zombie saint army marches

baby jesus is born

Jesus rides on two donkeys

 

Kind of adds dramatic effect know what I'm sayin'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just sloppy writing. The Bible is full of it (in both senses of the term :HaHa:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the bible employs a collage-style storytelling, rather than a linear narrative.Kind of like Pulp Fiction or any number of movies today.

 

Jesus hanging on the cross

Zombie saint army marches

baby jesus is born

Jesus rides on two donkeys

 

Kind of adds dramatic effect know what I'm sayin'?

Don't I wish they were that clever?

 

I'd love to see jesus taken out in the back seat of a car(t) and then have the cleanup guy called in to fix it. That would have been too much. But no...

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the bible employs a collage-style storytelling, rather than a linear narrative.Kind of like Pulp Fiction or any number of movies today.

 

Jesus hanging on the cross

Zombie saint army marches

baby jesus is born

Jesus rides on two donkeys

 

Kind of adds dramatic effect know what I'm sayin'?

Give it a few more years, and Christians will throw this theory into their long, long, loooooooong list of apologetic techniques. :mellow:

 

 

Mark my words, dude. :Hmm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Infidels did a follow-up article. Equally interesting.

 

http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/...3/3saint92.html

 

In comparing versions of the crucifiction from Mark and Matthew this is said:

 

I could have started the quotations several verses earlier and extended them several more, and the results would have been the same. The two accounts are alike detail for detail, except for Matthew's statement about the earthquake that opened the graves of the resurrected saints.

 

This startling fact requires bibliolaters to believe that the Holy Spirit in his omniscient wisdom guided Mark to record such trivial details as the casting of lots for Jesus's garments (mentioned earlier in both accounts) and the offering of sour wine (vinegar) to Jesus, just as Matthew reported, but for some reason chose not to have Mark tell about the resurrection of many saints who later went into the holy city and appeared to many!

 

Mongo

BTW the vinegar and gall mixture was given as a stimulant/emetic... they were trying to kep Jesus alive up there... he was dying way too quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never noticed this before but in Matthew it says this:
52 The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. 53 After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many. 54 Now when the centurion and those with him, who were keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were terrified and said, "Truly this man was God's Son!" (NRSV)

Something struck me about this in red. Suppose this march of the dead into Jerusalem occured after this one criminal among several other had been put to death by the Romans, why would anyone make a leap to connect zombies in the street to some guy they executed a full three days earlier?

 

I think the sheer terror of seeing multiplied dead walking towards you would pretty much occupy your thoughts, and as a Roman soldier with weapons in hand, you would be more prone to trying to defend against some invasion of non-living beings into your streets, rather than trying to look for causal explainations. I honestly don't think his first thought would be, "Hey this must be related to that one dude we executed! Let's not do anything about these un-dead creatures terrifying the people of Jerusalem and instead let's become beleivers in the Jewish God and his Son Jesus!"

 

I can't believe I used to believe this all really happened. Faith is a hood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never noticed this before but in Matthew it says this:
52 The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. 53 After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many. 54 Now when the centurion and those with him, who were keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were terrified and said, "Truly this man was God's Son!" (NRSV)

Something struck me about this in red. Suppose this march of the dead into Jerusalem occured after this one criminal among several other had been put to death by the Romans, why would anyone make a leap to connect zombies in the street to some guy they executed a full three days earlier?

 

I think the sheer terror of seeing multiplied dead walking towards you would pretty much occupy your thoughts, and as a Roman soldier with weapons in hand, you would be more prone to trying to defend against some invasion of non-living beings into your streets, rather than trying to look for causal explainations. I honestly don't think his first thought would be, "Hey this must be related to that one dude we executed! Let's not do anything about these un-dead creatures terrifying the people of Jerusalem and instead let's become beleivers in the Jewish God and his Son Jesus!"

 

I can't believe I used to believe this all really happened. Faith is a hood.

since Josephus' father was in the temple at that time, you'd have thought he'd have mentioned it. He mentions all sorts of other stuff, most of it pretty dull, so you'd think the dead invading town would warrant a mention

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW the vinegar and gall mixture was given as a stimulant/emetic... they were trying to kep Jesus alive up there... he was dying way too quickly.

The god can't even survive as long as a human, and this is the God we are told that we are supposed to follow?

 

The more I read, the less I get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW the vinegar and gall mixture was given as a stimulant/emetic... they were trying to kep Jesus alive up there... he was dying way too quickly.

The god can't even survive as long as a human, and this is the God we are told that we are supposed to follow?

 

The more I read, the less I get it.

Average time for a scourged man to survive on the cross was 2.5 days... if they lasted too long they'd break their knees and ankles (shock, blood loss and fluid collection on the lungs would finish the job) Jesus lasted the 4 to 6 hour mark... not impressive

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Average time for a scourged man to survive on the cross was 2.5 days...Jesus lasted the 4 to 6 hour mark... not impressive

You miss the point. Jesus is perfect and so is everything he does therefore the PERFECT time it takes to die upon a cross would be 4 to 6 hours. Us sinful beings take much longer however. Why must we prolong our own suffering in all things in our imperfect state? :shrug: If we truly took after the christ we too could die on a cross in such a short time. Dare to dream my friends. Dare to dream.

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Average time for a scourged man to survive on the cross was 2.5 days...Jesus lasted the 4 to 6 hour mark... not impressive

You miss the point. Jesus is perfect and so is everything he does therefore the PERFECT time it takes to die upon a cross would be 4 to 6 hours. Us sinful beings take much longer however. Why must we prolong our own suffering in all things in our imperfect state? :shrug: If we truly took after the christ we too could die on a cross in such a short time. Dare to dream my friends. Dare to dream.

 

mwc

:lmao:

 

don't take this personally... have you ever considered the clergy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the sheer terror of seeing multiplied dead walking towards you would pretty much occupy your thoughts, and as a Roman soldier with weapons in hand, you would be more prone to trying to defend against some invasion of non-living beings into your streets, rather than trying to look for causal explainations.

Now I don't know a tremendous amount about the Romans but I think retreat would win out over fighting zombies. Also would the zombies, being Jewish, be able to observe the rest of the festival?

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When faced with zombies, I think I'd turn and run... but I've seen what happens when you play the worng tape... and most of the works of a certain Mr. Romero....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.