buckshot23

What version are you looking at? Luke doesn't tell us any such thing. Luke records NO words from the women to the disciples. That is in direct contradiction to what you claim here.
Admit defeat. You cannot preclude an event as impossible because you do not know enough to do so.

There is nothing to harmonize in this case. You incorrectly label it as a contradiction because YOU think there should have been a mention of an event.
I do have a life and I don't think I have to provide any such chronology in this type of setting. If the rest of them are this ridiculous then I have nothing to worry about.

Patriot7

Sounds incredibly intolerant.

By definition, we can't even begin to tolerate other people, unless we disagree with their views. We don't tolerate people we agree with. They are on our side. I can only thank God that our country was not founded by people who share your view.

Kosh

But it was you who insisted that modern archaeology disproves TBOM. That same science also disproves the Bible (READ THE BOOK). If you're going to accept DTC's premise, then you can no longer reject the TBOM on the grounds that you stated.

Which is it?

It's not necessary, you can read the book!

So far, all you've shown us you can do is evasion through nitpicking.

Patriot7

If you can refer me to where I made a formal agreement with any of you to answer every post and every question, no matter how silly and non-sensical, and to reply to every insult, please direct me. Otherwise, please understand I'm not selling Patriot7. If you find my tacitic evasive, perhaps, you can demonstrate how horrible I am by showing everyone how great you are and post an argument that starts with a premise and logically flows to your conclusion supported by empirical evidence?

Otherwise I can only assume you don't have one beyond your implied argument that your view of the evidence is right, because you've read a book. Yeh. So have I. Should I post the books I've read and then you can post another and then I can post another?.....and so on ad nauseum?

Diogenes the Cynic

It's an assertion. assertions, in themselves, are evidence of nothing. Homer says that Oddyseus escaped from a giant, man-eating cyclops. Does that mean we have empirical evidence for the existence of cyclopes?
They aren't.
There's nothing self-contradictory about it, you just don't know what "evidence" means.
That's correct. We can, however, investigate the claims to see if we can find any empirical evidence to support them.
Read the book, The Bible Unearthed. To give a thorough presentation of the evidence and the arguments against such mythical events as the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan cannot be given in a two paragraph post.

When are you going to answer some of those questions you've been ducking?

Patriot7

When are you going to stop cheating on your taxes?

cognac

This has nothing to do with tolerance or freedom of belief. The fact that you throw that in now is completely off base. If you want to have a conversation about freedom, I'll be glad to. However, we're talking about reality here and whether or not worldviews have any correspondence to it.

If a view of reality is correct is it better than another view of reality that is incorrect. It's that simple. I dare say you believe the same. If you get mortally ill, you go to the doctor, not the witch doctor. Given the choice between buying a car built by engineers and one that was constructed based on voodoo, I bet you're going to buy the one built by engineers. There's a clear difference.

Diogenes the Cynic

I think you're dancing, Buckshot. Let's look at the text:

Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.
[2] And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.
[3] And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.
[4] And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:
[5] And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?
[6] He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,
[7] Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.
[8] And they remembered his words,
[9] And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest.
[10] It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.
[11] And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not.
(KJV)

It says they told "these things" to the apostles. It sounds like you're trying to equivocate by saying that we don't know what "these things" are but clearly they refer to the stuff in the preceding verses. The women go to the tomb. They find the stone rolled away with no body in it. Two angels appear and tell them Jesus is risen. They then go and tell the apostles "all these things." Do you really expect to be taken seriously with your suggestion that Luke just didn't bother to mention an appearance by Jesus to the women and that "all these things" includes that appearance?
I can preclude two or more mutually contradictory claims from being simultaneously true and that's what I'm doing with the resurrection narratives (even though the impossibility of "resurrections" should go without saying.)
You say that, and yet you decline to show us how these accounts can be reconciled even if there's money in it for you.

Patriot7

Of course you do, because with the exception of Atheos, all that is posted here is a bunch of arguments congratulating each other for how right you are, but nothing specific to the topic - BC&H. The criticism is supposed to be of the Bible and not "The Bible Unearthed" is it not? Then why not post an argument about the Bible and use "The Bible Unearthed" as a reference? Have you even read the Bible? Or have only read "The Bible Unearthed"?

Diogenes the Cynic

You have no evidence and no reason to believe that I cheat on my taxes. I can demonstrate easily that you're avoiding questions.