Amaleq13

Nonsense. There is nothing "natural" about Mary completely ignoring the message from the angel and her joy in hearing it to the point where she is exclusively concerned about the location of his dead body only minutes later.

The obtusity of the disciples is not in dispute and does nothing to suggest that Mary doubted the message of the angel to such a dramatic extent.

If you had been actually following the discussion, you would have seen that this has already been covered.

You didn't mention one that is plausible to anyone lacking faith in the stories.

Sheshbazzar

agreeing with;
We are told by John that they were still in the city eight days after the resurrection, although according to his account they had recieved the Holy Spirit the very evening following the resurrection (v.22) And some unspecified time latter (John 21:1-25) we find them returned to The Sea of Tiberius, being again some quite ignorant and uninspired fishermen when he yet again (for the third time) "appears" to them.
(21:14)
Such wording of a statement "shewed" or "appeared" does not normally indicate any presence of a protracted 40 day stay- rather a limited appearance.

But then lets do a little simple addition, John has told us that the -second- appearance was "after eight days" and while they were still in Jerusalem, and we are also told that he was "assembled with them" for 40 days, but -where-? and -when-?
(Acts 1:3-4)
So lets see, He was "was assembled with them" for forty days, and "commanded that they should not depart from Jerusalem" but sometime after staying eight days in Jerusalem, they all took off on 50+ mile long fishing trip to Lake Tiberius, where they took out time to go fishing, spending that night and following morning on the lake, But upon arriving at the lake he hasn't been with them since they last saw him in Jerusalem, and they don't know where he is, until he suddenly makes his -third- "appearance".
Even forgetting any travel time, at least 9 days have already passed since His -first- "appearance", and they still need make that trip to some unidentified mountain somewhere in Galilee. (per Matt 28:16-17) now if He "assembled" with them for the next 40 days in Galilee, then at least 49 days would have passed since His resurrection "on the first day of the week" and The Day of Pentecost is celebrated in Jerusalem on the 50th day.

Now perhaps you can claim that they all just ran like hell both ways and thus covered that 100+ mile round trip (including time out for fishing and going to the "mountain of their doubt", (Matt 28:16-17)-(where he yet -again - for the -fourth- time?) appeared to them. ("when they saw him" implies that he has not been traveling with them)
Perhaps the Bible's writers just forgot include the story of their miraculously and conveniently being teleported about. Hey! I'll bet they were waiting for YOU to make up that story!
But even if you do propose such a solution, it hardly answers to the express commandment to "remain in Jerusalem" and still contradicts the accounts as given in Luke and Acts.

Moreover you need to deal with when the Apostles recieved The Holy Spirit, was it on X's -first- "appearance" (Jn 20:22) or was it Fifty days latter, on The Day of Pentecost? (Acts 2:1-4) And if the former, -why- they continued to conduct themselves as though ignorant of that gift in the rest of John's narrative? and were still doubting in Matthew 28:17?
The" Holy Spirt" must not have been very effective if John and Matthew's tales are to be taken as true accounts.

Please explain.

sschlichter

I thought this would have been clear in my harmonization, but perhaps not.

I suspect that it occurred like this (although my arrangement is certainly not infallible)

Matt 28:7 Jesus told the women to tell the disciples to go to Galilee (he did not say anything about a mountain at this point)

The disciples seemed to have hung around for a short time in Jerusalem. Everything up to Mark 16:14, Luke 24:43, and John 20 occurred prior to going to Galilee. John 21 occurs at the Sea of Tiberius, which is in Galilee. I suspect it is here that Jesus did the most ‘appearing’ and hung around for a longer number of days. John records many events that occurred in Galilee and Jesus taught them the meaning of his resurrection during that time.

Then, they went to a mountain in Galilee (Matt 28:16) where Jesus seemed fond of teaching. This is the first mention of a mountain in Galilee. Then they left the mountain and in heading back to Jerusalem, Jesus continued to teach them and took them to the vicinity of Bethany (Mount of Olives) (Luke 24:50) where he told them to stay in Jerusalem where they would be clothed with power.

from there, He ascended (Mark 16:19, Luke 24:51) and they returned to Jerusalem.

Luk 24:52 So they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy, Luk 24:53 and were continually in the temple courts blessing God.

What part of this is not plausible to you?

dr lazer blast

As per the last post, you did not logically refute why it could not be akin to an oxymoron, you also did not prove why it needs to be synonymous, so you really aren't making any logical claims at this moment, just personal opinions.

So you are unable to logically explain why it can't be an oxymoron, and also unable to logically explain why it needs to by synonymous.


You have made an incorrect assertion, I will post it there for the 3rd time.





Both accounts state that they had fear and joy.

Now I will combine matthew and mark

as my narrative states.

Once again you have found yourself back at square 1:wave:

Amaleq13

Your bizarre oxymoronic appeals notwithstanding, this continues to be false since Mark does not state "joy" but "amazed" which is not synonymous.

This also continues to be irrelevant to correcting the implausibility in your narrative.

Yes, your narrative implausibly ignores the previously described joyful reaction. And where is the initial meeting between Mary and Peter? The opening scene of John 20 clearly depicts Mary's initial response to seeing an empty tomb without any angelic message. Does your narrative still have this taking place after the message?

dr lazer blast

strawman and you have not answered my original statement. Once again you stating that joy and amazed need to be synonymous is a strawman fallacy. They do not need to be synonymous.

So for the 3rd time you have failed to logically explain why they can't be akin to oxymorons, and you have also failed to explain why it needs to be synonymous.

All you are doing is repeating the same bald assertion each post.




incorrect, as matthew stating joy and mark stating amazement are 2 words describing what happened. Akin to an oxymoron. I am combining all accounts as stated in the challenge and creating a plausible narrative.

Matthew says joy
Mark says amazement
Both of these words combined are akin to an oxymoron describing something. A love hate relationship describes a relationship. Jumbo shrimp describes a piece of food, so I see no logical reason why joy and amazement can't describe an event.

If you think otherwise you're going to have to logically defend your position. A bald assertion is not a logical defense. If you are going to state that they need to be synonymous then you need to state why with valid logical reasons.

My narrative states that the meeting between mary and peter happens after the angelic message.

Sheshbazzar

Nice job of avoiding the implausibilities by the gambit of making sweeping generalizations about large blocks of texts, while studiously ignoring all of the details within those texts that are patently conflicting.
While this may serve your purpose in avoiding addressing those conflicting details, this avoidance maneuver is not intellectually honest.
Simply attempting to rearrange the order of events does not affect the narratives plausibility significantly in any case.

It is still NOT plausible that the eleven recieved the gift of the Holy Spirit on the evening following the resurrection (John 20:22) and continued to act as ignorant, unenlightened, and doubting as the following narrative (and Matthew) portrays them to be afterwards.
You write
"UP TO"??? Come now, these events had to also have happened PRIOR to any going to Galilee, and there is no valid reason to split the narrative of Luke at 24:43 when verse 44 is an obvious continuation.
And John 20 takes place on the day and evening following the resurrection, and most certainly would have had to take place before any departure for Galilee, moreover we are clearly TOLD that they remained at Jerusalem for at least eight more days. (John 20:26)
I can only conclude that your above statement is erronous, intentionally or not. Not only NOT plausible, it is just downright sloppy.

You also ignore the need for a reasonable time span within which all of this could have taken place.
The -four- noted separate "appearances" implies that he was not otherwise present with them, and all normal Biblical usages of the words "assembled together" (Acts 1:4- 2:1) indicate a gathering together in one fixed location, not wandering around the countryside or embarking upon a 50+ mile journey. Again, NOT a plausible explaination.

Duh, how ever did you figure that one out?


And I suspect that some half-baked redactor fabricated all of those "fish stories" found in John chapters 20 and 21, and that NONE of these events or dialog were in the original narrative.
The original text ended with John 20:10. He did NO "appearing"; Not once, not twice, not thrice, not four times, and not for forty entire days.
Every Gospel originally ended, and was complete, with finding the tomb empty.

sschlichter

every verse is in order.


not a clue as to what you are talking about. All of the events in all 4 gospels occurred prior to the gift of the holy spirit in Acts 2.

when I say prior I mean before in the same sense as you. All of these events happened before. I am a little confused that when I say these events happened prior, you say 'come now, these events must have happened prior'.

I have every reason to beleive that Luk 24:44 is a break in thought or the author of Luke was on drugs and had one continuous conversation that started during dinner and ended up on a mountain in another town all in the same conversation. The greek 'de' (translated then in the version I am using) at the beginning of 44 marks an obvious break in thought. the english then in v 45 is from a different word.

are you sure you are reading the right thread. As I said John 20 happens prior to going to Galilee. Prior means before. Please re-read my post with this new understanding of the word prior.

[/quote]

No, I am not. 50 miles is a 1-3 day walk depending on your pace. People walk at about 4 miles / hour. This is just over 12 hours - what is the big deal with the 50 miles.

There is also no reason to assume that Acts 1:4 - 2 are all in the same assemblage. As a matter of fact it is awkward to do so. They went outside, inside, outside, and there is obvious breaks in thought. Picking a replacement for Judas, for example is a completely different episode.

~Steve

sschlichter

Acts 1:3 is a summary of his entire appearance

Acts 1:4-11 seems to be the same conversation /ascension as Mar 16:19 and Luk 24:51.

1:12 is the same thought as Mar 16:20 and Luk 24:52

I Cor 15:5 is the appearance to the twelve in John 20:26, including Judas' replacement (bringing the number to twelve)

1 Cor 15:6, not a clue - possibly in Galilee. there is no other record of this to harmonize or contradict with.

1 Cor 15:7 again, no other appearance with James to conflict with. The word apostles here is obviously not the 12, since he used that term prior in v 5. I can only surmise that this is separated because Jesus made a point to appear to James separately, since he was not a believer before the resurrection.

1 Cor 15:8 is in no need of harmonization.

So, what is a necessary contradiction in the 4 gospels and these 2 passages that I missed?

~Steve

Toto

Judas was not replaced until after Jesus ascended, according to Acts.

You can't even reconcile the end of Luke with the beginning of Acts - how long did Jesus hang around after he resurrected?