bacht

It never stops does it?

I suspect the early church leaders more or less stumbled into this thing without realizing what a robust piece of myth they had in their hands.

Susan2

Of course there were guards. While some were making money off the fixtion (tomb/meme/mind), there were two others looking at/for the truth. All they found were the graves of the slain.


Iow's there are three words for tomb in the NT.

Strongs: 3419 mnhmeiÛon

Transliterated: Mnemeion

Definition: any visible object for preserving or recalling the memory of any person or thing
1. a memorial, monument, specifically, a sepulchral monument
a sepulchre, a tomb


Strongs 3418 mnh=ma

Transliterated: mnema

Definition: 1. a monument or memorial to perpetuate the memory of any person or thing

2. a sepulcharl monument

3. a sepulachre or tomb.




While the fathers were building the meme’s, the two Mary’s were watching the real tombs, of their (the fathers) creations.

Strongs 5028 ta/fov

Transliterated word:Taphos

Definition: sepulchre, tomb.

Matthew 28:1

In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the speulchre (ta/fov), truth.

Susan2

Patently absurd, or frightfully true?

sschlichter

It is also equally plausible to include the 60's in the range of possible dates. You exclude it because it is a problem for you if the gospels were written before AD 70. There is no internal or external evidence that makes you (and some modern scholars) suggest that specific date. it is based solely on your beleif that Jesus did not predict the future. Using that criteria, it will be impossible for you to get proof of something that you pre-choose not to beleive.

James the Just dates the author of Acts, the book of Acts, and therefore the book of Luke. When Luke is written in the life time of the eye-witnesses of Jesus life, it is not hard to imagine him finding witnesses to guards at the tomb. It is even harder for the collaboration of the guards to occur among the 3 later gospels.

Doug Shaver

Right. Lying involves intention to deceive. I don't believe the gospel authors intended to deceive anyone.

You can suggest it all you like. There is no evidence regarding the immediacy with which the texts were accepted. There is only Christian dogma that they were accepted as soon as they were written.

Until you produce some evidence about the lives of the first people to read those texts, there is no contradiction.

And in order to produce that evidence, you need evidence showing exactly when they were written and establishing the identities of the people who read them immediately after they were written. You can't do that, and I suspect you know you can't. You're just blowing so much apologetic smoke.

aa5874

It is a useless exercise to try and use internal information which is filled with fiction and implausibilities to date the very information under scrutiny.

You must use credible external sources to corroborate the information coming from the Church.

The Church writers have made their claims, all that is needed now are external corroborative sources. None can be found up to now.

The only "corroborative" source for Jesus are forgeries found in "Antiquities of the Jews" 18.3.3 and 20.9.1.

Now, if James the Just was claimed by the Church to be the brother of Jesus and there is no external evidence that there was a NT Jesus in the 1st century then it is most obvious that the character called James the Just cannot be even considered to have existed in the 1st century.

You seem to be confusing "claims" with "evidence".

The claims by the Church that the body of Jesus was not in the tomb or that Jesus had siblings are not evidence at all, but mere unsupported claims. And it is absurd to use unsupported claims to confirm the date of writings of any book in the NT.

sschlichter

I thought Justin Martyr was one of the first people. How early do you think they were written?

Off the top of my head, these people appear to beleive that Jesus rose from the dead.

the author of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, Philippians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Hebrews, Revelation, JustinMartyr, Ireneaus, Papias, all the co-authors, traveling companions, converts, house church fellowships, and martyrs described in each of these books, christians blamed by Nero in Tacitus, Christians described by Lucian, Christians described by Pliny, etc, etc.

There is evidence that these christians were being persecuted as early as AD 64, yet the gospels were writing in the non-lie, intentional un-truth historical narrative genre that you seem to beleive exists decades after this. I find it fascinating that the genre you made up seems to only exist in canonized books. you do not appear to beleive that Justin Martyr was writing in the non-lie, intentional un-truth historical narrative genre.

Since the number of converts that attest to this same belief grow expontentially in numbers as well as region in the 2nd-3rd century, it is logical to conclude that there must have been some subset of those numbers in the 1st and 2nd century.

The gospel writers either believed what they were writing or they were the worst of people telling the most damaging lies. Your other option is simply a ploy to avoid the need for coming up with a motivation and logistics necessary for such a disparate group to come up with the same lies.

~Steve

sschlichter

I am only discussing claims, not evidence, you are the one confusing them. It appears that you agree with me that the gospel writers want their readers to beleive these claims. What do you suppose the motive would be for that (taking into account all of them - the early church that is)?

aa5874

Once you state that James the Just dates the author of Acts, the book of Acts and the book of Luke, you are obviously and blatantly using unsupported claims as evidence.

Net2004

Now R1255 on the first day of the week Mary R1256 Magdalene came early to the tomb, while it was still dark, and saw the R1257 stone already taken away from the tomb. 2 So she ran and came to Simon Peter and to the other disciple R1258 whom Jesus loved, and said to them, "They R1259 have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him."


11 But R1269 Mary was standing outside the tomb weeping; and so, as she wept, she stooped R1270 and looked into the tomb; 12 and she saw two R1271 angels in white sitting, one at the head and one at the feet, where the body of Jesus had been lying. 13 And they said to her, "Woman, R1272 why are you weeping?" She said to them, "Because they R1273 have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid Him."

who is "they" refering to?


Now while they were on their way, some of the R1158 guard came into the city and reported to the chief priests all that had happened. 12 And when they had assembled with the elders and consulted together, they gave a large sum of money to the soldiers, 13 and said, "You are to say, `His disciples came by night and stole Him away while we were asleep.' 14 "And if this should come to the R1159 governor's ears, we will win him over and keep F613 you out of trouble." 15 And they took the money and did as they had been instructed; and this story was widely spread R1160 among the Jews...

why didn't mary point fingers at pete and the other deciple? why didn't she tell them about the charges which were made against the deciples ? in johns account she clings to the stolen body claim even after she sees jesus.