sschlichter

I did not say anyone forgot. There are a myriad of possibilities. Only certain people heard certain things or only certain things were recorded in this book by this specific author. Nowhere in the text does it make any attempt to lead you to beleive it is important that you understand that jesus spoke these words and then immediately died and spoke nothing else.

Here is one possibility, John knew what was already written by the others, so he wrote about different details highlighting things that the others did not put in their writings. Maybe he had also had an idea that some would come along later and confuse his account with a police interrogation, so he wrote this in John 21:25.

There are many other things that Jesus did. If every one of them were written down, I suppose the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

~Steve

Deus Ex

There is no problem if you are a Christian who believes the bible was written by fallible men and subject to some errors, and occasional inconsistencies. The problem comes if you believe that God literally wrote the bible through some kind of Holy Ghost Possession.

If God directly controlled the writing of the bible, then He did a piss poor job of it.

sschlichter

the orthodox christian view of inspiration has nothing to do with possession and the omission of events is not indicative of errors. If the phrases matched, you would argue that it does not state what direction he was looking when he said it, or it did not include the language, or the decible level. If there was one account, you would argue that one is not enough, but there are 4 and you argue that they are not detailed enough.

You think he did a bad job because you think they are written in an effort to convince you of something. That is not the purpose at all.

~Steve

dr lazer blast

I assert something, you tell me it isn't true because keep in mind I'm more than a little familiar with traumatic experiences. By profession and for nearly 20 years.
that is a text book argument from authority. Instead of providing evidence, for why I am wrong, you said the reason I am wrong is because you're familiar with traumatic experiences by profession.


according to my narrative he opened up the understanding for EVERYONE since he did it when everyone was there, including the women.

ya thats great, but they don't understand how He came to be alive, they don't know if the angels ressurected him or what, they don't know where he is at. So once again, they have hope that he's alive, but don't understand since they have not seen proof.


Jesus was not referred to as 'the body' so that is incorrect. Yes one wonders where the live person has been 'laid' if they don't understand the resurrection, there are many definitions of 'laid' and all of them aren't laying someone down on their back in a resting position

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/laid

3. to put or place in a particular position: The dog laid its ears back.
6. to dispose or place in proper position or in an orderly fashion: to lay bricks.
20. to place, set, or locate: The scene is laid in France.

bald assertion, 'joy and fear are incompatible reactions' wheres your evidence? you no evidence to support your claim, you're just asserting with no evidence other than 'beleive what I say because I do this for 20 years' ya right. Evidence please.


wrong, according to my narrative, the hope that what the angels said was true.

wrong, there are 2 fears. The first fear is because of the angels, and since they were STILL SCARED after what the angels said, the fear could've possibly been they had no proof of what the angels said.
once again, they knew he was alive, but they didn't know where, or how.



incorrect, as obviously the 'reassurance'(i am not agreeing there was any reassurance) did nothing to soothe their fears as they still DEPARTED with fear, so what is stopping them from departing with perplexment as well?
There was no reassurance because they still had fear.
so according to the narrative they were scared before the angel appeared, and they were scared after the angel appeared.
If there was reassurance, then they would not be scared after the angels told them.


wrong. Joyful reaction is hope that Jesus might be alive, the fear was from being discovered, and that she didn't understand the story of the resurrection. She departed with joy and fear and arrived at peter. and said the following. 'They have taken our Lord' there is the hope that Jesus was alive, she might've thought that the angels ressurected Him, 'But we do not know where they have lain him' there is the fear in the form of doubt that Mary experienced, as she doesn't know the exact location of Christ at the moment.

Half-Life

Well, if there was one perfectly written account that was written during the life of Jesus by people literally watching him, and we still saw Jesus floating in the sky today somewhere, we can probably conclude that the story is more than likely true.

Sine we have none of these things, the excuses must come out in full force.

Half-Life

Dr lazer blast,

why would the disciples and the women be wondering how Jesus was resurrected if he was God Himself?

Wouldn't they be more inclined to say, "Oh of course! Jesus is God! Of course he can rise from the dead. He raised that Lazarus guy a few weeks ago."

Unless you want to argue that the disciples and the women were stupid beyond belief, despite hanging out with Jesus for 3 years.

sschlichter

I understand that, but according to these same accounts, even many of those that saw first hand while Jesus was still 'floating around' did not beleive. Many of those that once beleived, fell away. Apostasy is not a new trend. The evidence is sufficent. It is the message of the Bible that it is our own willful alienation from God that keeps us from recognizing him (myself included). (Romans 1 for starters). Disbelief was the prophectic expectation and the means of fulfillment.

I expect that if Jesus was floating around, it would not change anything for most.

~Steve

Deus Ex

I expect that you would be wrong.

Stories from the bible are not sufficient evidence that supernatural events happened. Why not believe in the Quran or the Hindu Vedas?

This is the difference between skeptics and True Believers. We, skeptics need more than anecdotal stories to convince us that Jesus was or is God.

Doug Shaver

Nobody is ignoring that. Nobody is denying it.

What we are denying is that the four accounts of that one event are consistent with one another.

Doug Shaver

You didn't say simply that she was afraid. You said that she feared it not being true that Jesus had risen.

You're begging the question. If I believed in the Bible's inerrancy, we wouldn't be having this debate, would we?