Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary

[Gary]

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

The apostles should have written a blog detailing everything that happened on each day from the Resurrection to Pentecost. They should have also embedded videos in it. Or Jesus should have messed with the space time continuum and provided an indestructible laptop with infinite battery life and storage space in the Pbs

When Mary met Jesus for the first time after the resurrection, had the angel(s) already informed her that Jesus had arisen from the dead? According to Matthew, the angels did they did notGod, however, is not this sloppy.

There is another significant difference between conflicting accounts of a traffic accident and contradictory stories of the resurrection narratives. The testimonies of a traffic accident are believable because they are likely to have occurred, and make sense in our world. The resurrection story, on the other hand, is a biological and scientific impossibility. Thus,

[One Bad Pig]

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

Wow! You're right!!! How could everyone have missed that for 1900 years?

[Christianbookworm]

Wait. How could someone think that giving the disciples a laptop would have been better than them having to use scrolls? Remember the prime directive from Star Trek? Or any sci fi story that you NEVER give advanced technology to people in the past? You do not want to mess with the time stream!

[One Bad Pig]

Jesus didn't say when he was ascending.

If "de" doesn't imply a passage of time (and it doesn't), nothing in the text implies that there was a passage of time. So with what does the concept of a passage of time arise?

Acts 1:3. I assume that the same person who wrote the end of Luke wrote the beginning of Acts (or at least the writer of Acts pretending to be the same person as the writer of Luke) was bright enough to not start off with a glaring contradiction.

[William]

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

Wow! You're right!!! How could everyone have missed that for 1900 years?

peopled believed Aristotle's claim that two objects of differing weights would fall at different speeds for around 1500 years before Newton showed he was wrong. SO people do believe wrong things for long periods of time - look at all the other religions.

But the Jews have been around longer than the gospels and they didnt believe it.

I have heard some people say, "it's such an obvious problem that someone would have caught it." First all, I dont think it makes good sense to say that something is such a glaring problem that it couldn't be a problem. And secondly, people did catch it.

But if that can be easily reconciled, then have at it.

[William]

Jesus didn't say when he was ascending.

Acts 1:3. I assume that the same person who wrote the end of Luke wrote the beginning of Acts (or at least the writer of Acts pretending to be the same person as the writer of Luke) was bright enough to not start off with a glaring contradiction.

well, you'd think that would be the case.

[Gary]

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

Wow! You're right!!! How could everyone have missed that for 1900 years?

Oh it hasn't been missed. Skeptics have been pointing it out since Celsus, and Christians have been frantically creating harmonizations (otherwise known as "spin") ever since.

[Gary]

Jesus didn't say when he was ascending.

Acts 1:3. I assume that the same person who wrote the end of Luke wrote the beginning of Acts (or at least the writer of Acts pretending to be the same person as the writer of Luke) was bright enough to not start off with a glaring contradiction.

Even if you are correct, and the author of Luke/Acts used the word "then" in Luke chapter 24 meaning 40 days later, it still doesn't explain why Jesus would appear to disobedient disciples in Galilee, to cook them a tasty, toasted fish breakfast on the shores of the Sea of Tiberias, when he had previous ordered these dimwits to remain in Jerusalem until the arrival of the Holy Spirit!

A Mexican novella doesn't have as many plot twists as this story!

[One Bad Pig]

Even if you are correct, and the author of Luke/Acts used the word "then" in Luke chapter 24 meaning 40 days later, it still doesn't explain why Jesus would appear to disobedient disciples in Galilee, to cook them a tasty, toasted fish breakfast on the shores of the Sea of Tiberias, when he had previous ordered these dimwits to remain in Jerusalem until the arrival of the Holy Spirit!

My position (but I repeat myself) is that vv. 44-49 cover the 40 days; the command to tarry in Jerusalem comes toward the end of that range, and so could easily have been given after the trip to Galilee with no contradiction.

A Mexican novella doesn't have as many plot twists as this story!

A Mexican novella would be much more entertaining than your contrived, imaginative "contradictions." If I adopted your method of interpretation, every single account written from more than one POV would be found to contain contradictions.

[tabibito]

Because humans are fallible, and are therefore likely to make all sorts of errors for a variety of reasons. Accordingly, when we read descriptions of what transpired during a historical event, such as the assassination of JFK, disparities will inevitably exist among the accounts. Therefore, when various individuals witness a traffic accident and then attempt to clearly transmit the information they saw, errors will be made. This is what we expect from imperfect humans!

The Church, however, does not make this claim. Its authors and those who promoted the Christian religion claim that its content was divinely inspired, i.e. every word is from God!

No - a variety of churches, perhaps almost all, claim that the authors claimed everything in the Bible was inspired. No Biblical author ever said as much. All sorts of kludges get used to sweep the glaringly obvious (fact that there are errors in the Bible) under the carpet, expecting that no one will notice the lump.

[Gary]

No - a variety of churches, perhaps almost all, claim that the authors claimed everything in the Bible was inspired. No Biblical author ever said as much. All sorts of kludges get used to sweep the glaringly obvious (fact that there are errors in the Bible) under the carpet, expecting that no one will notice the lump.

When confronted with the plethora of discrepancies in the four Gospels, many Christians trot out the "Eyewitness Reports to a Car Accident" analogy:

"The authors of the Bible were human beings. God didn't dictate their stories. There are, therefore, bound to be a few minor discrepancies as each author recounted his personal experience of the event. These discrepancies are actually reassuring as they rule out any collusion among the authors!"

Hmm.

Let's check this out. Can the four Resurrection accounts in the Gospels be compared to four different eyewitnesses recounting what they saw about the same "car accident" (the Resurrection of Jesus = the car accident)? Here we go:

What information do all four eyewitnesses agree upon which a prosecutor could present to a judge in a court of law:

Location of accident: Jerusalem.
Day, month, and year of accident: sometime in the spring in the year 30 AD...or 33 AD...at Passover.
Description of accident: (not available)

Judge: What do you mean, "There is no description of the accident"? I thought you said there were four eyewitnesses!

Prosecutor: Well, Your Honor, none of the witnesses actually saw the accident (resurrection). They only saw the aftermath of the accident. They saw the wrecked car (the tomb) and they say that later in the day they saw the driver walking around alive; he even ate a broiled fish lunch with them; but none of them saw the accident itself.

Judge: Good grief. Ok. So all four eyewitnesses saw the empty car and the driver alive again?

Prosecutor: No, Your Honor. Actually, only two of the witnesses saw the aftermath of this accident and the deceased alive again later in the day. The other two witnesses state that they both received their information from "eyewitnesses"...

Judge: to the accident?

Prosecutor: No, to the aftermath of the accident. But these two witnesses are unable to specify exactly WHO these eyewitnesses are.

Judge: What?? So all these two guys have to offer is hearsay? I will not allow their testimony in my court!

So what about the other two witnesses? Do their stories corroborate?

Prosecutor: Well, the remaining witnesses are Matthew and John. They both allege that they were present...at the aftermath of the accident. Both their stories have the basic facts...about the aftermath of the accident...in agreement, but there are some major discrepancies.

Judge: Like what?

Prosecutor: Well, they both have this woman Mary being the first person to find the empty car but the details from there are wildly different. One says Mary was told by 'angels' that the driver of the car had been brought back to life and the other says that this Mary was told this incredible fact by the driver himself, in person.

Judge: But they both saw Mary find the empty car?

Prosecutor: No...Mary must have told them that.

Judge: So this Mary told them she was the first to find the empty car but then gives each one of them a different story of what happened next?? Sounds like a very unreliable witness. What else?

Prosecutor: Well, this Matthew character seems to know some things that are pretty strange.

Judge: Such as?

Prosecutor: Well, Matthew says that three days before the car accident, a bunch of dead people were reanimated back to life in their graves, but, they didn't come out of their graves until the exact minute of the car accident. He also claims that the owners of the car had plotted with the police to give a falsified report of the cause of the accident.

Judge: And how on earth does he claim to know all this?

Prosecutor: He says that God told him, Your Honor.

And the other witness, John, says the same thing about some of the details in his testimony...

Judge: What?? GOD told them?

Are you telling me that these two guys believe that God told them secret details of this car accident, details that no human could possibly know, but yet God couldn't keep the rest of the details straight in their two testimonies???

Get these jokers out of my court!

[tabibito]

people believed Aristotle's claim that two objects of differing weights would fall at different speeds for around 1500 years before Newton showed he was wrong.

And yet: when some years ago, my daughter's class was being given a practical demonstration of the principle, the lighter object in fact landed some seconds after the heavier object - the teacher was not happy.

[One Bad Pig]

well, you'd think that would be the case.

I think it's the height of arrogance to assume otherwise.

[Pentecost]

Oh it hasn't been missed. Skeptics have been pointing it out since Celsus, and Christians have been frantically creating harmonizations (otherwise known as "spin") ever since.

The only reason we even have Celsus is because Origen quoted him and met him point by point. Not an argument, just a note.

[tabibito]

The only reason we even have Celsus is because Origen quoted him and met him point by point. Not an argument, just a note.

My~y my. Imagine that - What? None of his writing exists? How is it then that, with but one witness to declare his existence, and a Christian witness at that, Gary yet affirms the existence of Celsus.