gracebkr

Three days after passover, Jesus would have only been dead for 3 days. That is when the rumors started. It would be nice if you gave the exact passage you were referring to.

Steven Carr

So why would people in Corinth convert to Christianity and still scoff at the idea of God choosing to raise a corpse?


Why does Paul tell them that Jesus became a spirit, and call them idiots for wondering how a corpse even could be resurrected, and them remind them that earthly things and heavenly things are as different as a fish and the moon?

Why does he pre-empt the obvious question of how a corpse can be reformed from the dust of the earth it dissolves into with this statement 'As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear the likeness of the man from heaven.'

Why would Paul say in Romans 6:6 that our body of sin would be done away with and plead in Romans 7:24 that he needs somebody to rescue him from his body of death?

Because neither Paul nor the converts to Christianity in Corinth had heard of stories of corpses rising.

Even the early converts to Jesus-worship in Thessalonika were apparently getting twitchy about their fallen brethren, who were now corpses. They had no great confidence in the idea of a corpse rising.

The Gospel stories are later ,anonymous stories.

Perhaps they are some of the many false stories about the false Jesus that Paul warned about in 2 Corinthians 11.

James Brown

Do you see some of the inconsistencies here? Matthew has the angel (singular) moving the stone away from the tomb while Mary was watching, but John has Mary arriving at the tomb with the stone already rolled away.

Matthew has the angel tell Mary, "Jesus' body is not here, he has risen. Go tell the disciples he'll meet up with you in Galilee."

John has Mary go to the disciples and declare, "The stone's missing from his tomb!" Note: she didn't tell the disciples about the angel moving the stone away and the tomb being empty, nor the angel's instructions about Jesus' resurrection and pending meet-n-greet; she only tells them that the stone is rolled away. Peter freaks and checks it out for himself, along with the "other" disciple" (apparently Mary's eyewitness testimony is unreliable). Anyway they wander away, and Mary sticks around to cry, because she still can't remember what the angel told her about where Jesus' body is. She looks into the tomb and sees two angels this time who ask her why she's crying. She complains that someone has carried off Jesus' body somewhere. After this, the angels don't say a word. Jesus walks right up to her, but Mary doesn't recognize him, for some reason. Jesus gets rhetorical and asks who she's looking for and why she's crying, and she says she just wants to know where Jesus' body is so she can get it and rebury him, showing that once again, she can't remember what the angel told her just a few minutes earlier.

Does that make sense?

gracebkr

Well, this seems odd, either you want to use the gospels or not. But to say that what you refer to in the Bible good and accurate and what I do possible lies.

Matthew is before Mark. So it is stated in there before Mark as your original claim.

I don't know why Corinth's would scoff at it, maybe because believing without seeing is difficult?

John 20:24-29

24Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!"
But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."

26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."

28Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

29Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

gracebkr

Have you ever studied the way memory works. I can see an event and you see the same one and both of come to two different conclusions. It it also something like if we see 15 seconds of something happening, our mind turns it into 1 second and all we remember is the gist of what happened.

quick link to explain http://www.religioustolerance.org/rmt_memo.htm
I have no idea what this website is, it just had what I needed.

I think a resurrection might throw us all off a little bit, if not a lot. I think this would be consistent with people trying to understand what they thought impossible. You have to remember, they did not think their God would die. They were thinking what they thought might be true was not when he was crucified. They took a big blow. Their leader was brutally killed and they did not believe that would have happened to the Messiah. So they are in a spot not many can imagine. To judge their inconsistencies instead of understanding psychologically how this would make sense.

James Brown

Sure, different people can see things differently. That's why eyewitness testimony is so unreliable in modern courts of law, and why its disingenuous to say that eyewitness testimony is proof of miracles.

But this isn't about two different people seeing the same thing and reporting slightly different sets of facts; this is about one person seeing something and immediately forgetting it when questioned on three separate occasions (disciples, pair of angels, and Jesus). So if Mary's memory is so frazzled by what she saw, how can anyone say that she's a reliable eyewitness?

After all, no one else who "witnessed" this resurrection seems to be flummoxed. Peter and the other disciple look at an empty tomb (where are the angels and Jesus, by the way?) and deduce the only possible conclusion: a corpse has risen and wandered away. Tombs are never empty otherwise. They go back home and gear up to meet Jesus again, alive and well. It's Mary who stays behind and weeps because Jesus is dead and the body has been swiped. Why did Peter immediately conclude that Jesus was resurrected based solely on investigating an empty tomb, whereas Mary watched an angel roll the stone away, had a conversation with it about how Jesus was alive, and still couldn't figure out where the body was?

gracebkr

There seems to be one consistency, the tomb was empty. It was stated earlier in this thread that the tomb being empty was only accounted for in Mark where it was just an analogy and not what others claimed to have happened. That point has been forgotten without any correction or admitting of error.

Please if you are going to paraphrase the Bible you have to give the verse. How am I to verify what you are talking about? It's better to just quote what it says then to draw your own gist and retell it, is this not the reason why the Bible is (NT) already confusing? The fact that these stories were written on different eye witness' accounts after being retold then wrote down by someone else and how much they all have in common after this shows that it is more reliable, not less.

RareBird

w/e you have to tell yourself to make yourself seem right. I already am clear that it's nonsense. Cheers.

Cege

Hello again, grace. I'm still interested in what Biblical prophesies you believe foretold that the messiah would be laid in a rich man's tomb. Like you, I find it easier to follow and discuss if the exact chapter and verse are provided.

Cege

grace, do you realize that the books/letters of the New Testament are not in chronological order? You seem to say that Matthew was written before Mark...