|
Post by Gene on Feb 4, 2021 12:46:00 GMT -5
The important question is how did the author of Mark find out that “Christ has risen”? If the bible is true then we know that the three women at the tomb didn’t tell anyone what they had seen or had heard in relation to Jesus having risen for “they went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid”. If they told no one then how did the author of Mark come to learn of it? And if they told someone then clearly this part of the gospel isn’t true which raises the question of whether other parts of the gospel also aren’t true. And how do we know that the bloke in the white robe told the women the truth when he said “he has risen”? The original version of Mark’s Gospel only tells us that this is what he told the women. It doesn’t tell us that this is what actually happened. Could he have removed the body and put it elsewhere. It certainly seems peculiar for a man to be found sitting in an empty tomb. If he wasn’t there to interfere with the body what was he doing there? Why was he hanging around in an empty tomb after the body had up and left? It all seems peculiar. Referring to other gospels which were written later and which used Mark as one of their sources does not explain away the hugely inconvenient fact that the original version of Mark omits to say anything about anyone having seen the resurrected Jesus which is surely the most crucial event of his life. This is akin to writing a biography of JF Kennedy and forgetting to mention the assassination or of Neil Armstrong and failing to mention the moon landing. Why this should be requires some explanation. The most credible explanation is that the resurrection didn’t happen. And if you are referencing Matthew or Luke because you believe them to be true independent accounts which corroborate Mark’s account then we need to be clear that it is well established that they aren’t independent of Mark. It is also clear that the accounts of Mark, Matthew and Luke can’t all be true for Mark tells us that it was a young man in a white robe who the women encountered at the tomb, Matthew tells us that it was an angel of the Lord while Luke tells us that it was two men in dazzling apparel. Clearly at least two of these accounts are false. Why this should be also requires some explaining. The most credible explanation is that the stories are all made up. Which brings us to John. The author of John would have us believe that it was Mary Magdalene who went to the tomb alone. And when she found it empty she thought the body had been removed and then ran and brought Peter and another disciple to the tomb. But instead of seeing a young man in a white robe inside they see only the linen wrappings. And they go home. But Mary stayed on and then after a short conversation with some angels she turned around to find Jesus. The Bible is either 100% factually correct or it isn’t. And based on the accounts of the resurrection it clearly isn’t. And if the accounts aren’t true then what basis is there to believe in the rather far fetched story of the resurrection other than religious conditioning and wishful thinking. Matt10 how "selective" of you when you try and quote scripture...here is what mark actually says Mar 16:7 But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you. Mar 16:8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid. its obvious here from scripture that they went and told peter and the others as ordered, what verse 8 is relaying is that they probably said nothing to anyone near the tomb nor on their way to peter and the others... Read carefully Mark 16:7 and I think you'll see that it is totally NOT obvious from that scripture that they went and told Peter and the others. What is obvious is that they were TOLD to go and tell Peter and the others. To derive from the scripture you quoted that they OBEYED that direction is purely an assumption on your part. Maybe you had some other scripture in mind that proves they obeyed that direction?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Feb 4, 2021 13:23:09 GMT -5
We could debate details of the gospels what each said, -when the were written etc, ad infinitum
But we need to remember there are multiple stories of "resurrections" of the many gods in the history of mankind. They differ a bit here & there but basically follow the same narrative.
What I think that we need to ask ourselves is the question as to why mankind wants to believe in a "resurrection" after death.
I think it is simply that it is very, very difficult for us to face the fact that once we are DEAD that is the end of us. Period.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Feb 4, 2021 13:53:25 GMT -5
I wonder why it is that there are so many people like David Zublick with the conspiracy theory blog Dark Outpost who seem to have nothing more interesting to do in life than to put such inflammatory lies about people on the internet?
What do they get out of it?
None of that is true about George Bush!
Maybe if David Zublick and a few others like him had a few defamation of character lawsuits filed against them it would detour them at least for a bit.
Dmich This topic is terrifying in it corruption and volume and what these sons/daughters of Cain have been doing to our children. Why are you not enraged? I am very passionate at the danger we have been living and not known All the messengers are doing is bringing the truth to the people and the question is were they falsely accused as so many patriots are being accused. eg Lin Wood you will hear it from other sources and you will be alarmed I have tried to soften the blow It is true GH Bush confessed and there is loads about others from his confession Hey, he is just one of the many there are 220,000 indictments One indictment is 90 people you can find this online your problem and silly excuses are personal attacks on the messengers. Who have done you no harm btw It is very difficult to deal with. Last nite I saw a link with lots of photos. It is the time for the truth to be known I am not "enraged" because what you are claiming just isn't happening! I don't care HOW many "sources" you are hearing it from because they are all full of baloney!
And I will continue to expose the those "messengers" who spout such crap that can destroy the lives and reputations of innocent people.
YOU shushy, should start being concerned about THOSE people!
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 4, 2021 14:34:39 GMT -5
We could debate details of the gospels what each said, -when the were written etc, ad infinitum
But we need to remember there are multiple stories of "resurrections" of the many gods in the history of mankind. They differ a bit here & there but basically follow the same narrative.
What I think that we need to ask ourselves is the question as to why mankind wants to believe in a "resurrection" after death.
I think it is simply that it is very, very difficult for us to face the fact that once we are DEAD that is the end of us. Period. *** Christ has promised the TRUE believers of receiving the Resurrection bodies like He has so, they could RULE and REIGN with Him on earth 1000 yrs when he comes back the second time to establish His eternal kingdom on earth.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 4, 2021 14:39:40 GMT -5
Dmich This topic is terrifying in it corruption and volume and what these sons/daughters of Cain have been doing to our children. Why are you not enraged? I am very passionate at the danger we have been living and not known All the messengers are doing is bringing the truth to the people and the question is were they falsely accused as so many patriots are being accused. eg Lin Wood you will hear it from other sources and you will be alarmed I have tried to soften the blow It is true GH Bush confessed and there is loads about others from his confession Hey, he is just one of the many there are 220,000 indictments One indictment is 90 people you can find this online your problem and silly excuses are personal attacks on the messengers. Who have done you no harm btw It is very difficult to deal with. Last nite I saw a link with lots of photos. It is the time for the truth to be known I am not "enraged" because what you are claiming just isn't happening! I don't care HOW many "sources" you are hearing it from because they are all full of baloney!
And I will continue to expose the those "messengers" who spout such crap that can destroy the lives and reputations of innocent people.
YOU shushy, should start being concerned about THOSE people! ** I have been telling you folks about these things for 10 years on here... You didn't believe back then, surely you will NOT believe NOW! To the days to die. Shushy, has been waken up! By reading and studying these things for herself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2021 15:24:44 GMT -5
how "selective" of you when you try and quote scripture...here is what mark actually says Mar 16:7 But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you. Mar 16:8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid. its obvious here from scripture that they went and told peter and the others as ordered, what verse 8 is relaying is that they probably said nothing to anyone near the tomb nor on their way to peter and the others... Read carefully Mark 16:7 and I think you'll see that it is totally NOT obvious from that scripture that they went and told Peter and the others. What is obvious is that they were TOLD to go and tell Peter and the others. To derive from the scripture you quoted that they OBEYED that direction is purely an assumption on your part. Maybe you had some other scripture in mind that proves they obeyed that direction? sorry if you carefully read just a few verses later and what mary actually did..it becomes even more obvious that they did as they were told....
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 4, 2021 18:15:13 GMT -5
*** Oh, my goodness! People/Americans should listen to the 4 Amigos Kev. the Russian president 1959 speech about how the Communists are going to take over America fits exactly to our current situation. WOW! Thanks! Shushy, your are the best.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 4, 2021 18:52:48 GMT -5
We could debate details of the gospels what each said, -when the were written etc, ad infinitum
But we need to remember there are multiple stories of "resurrections" of the many gods in the history of mankind. They differ a bit here & there but basically follow the same narrative.
What I think that we need to ask ourselves is the question as to why mankind wants to believe in a "resurrection" after death.
I think it is simply that it is very, very difficult for us to face the fact that once we are DEAD that is the end of us. Period. If a Christian today was shown another 2,000 year old book, having multiple fragments that are preserved to this day, which was filled with stories that; contradicts the laws of nature, details how to navigate the underworld, and makes use of some 192 spells, they would likely say that book is a work of fiction. Yet they believe the Bible is literally true and The Book Of The Dead is myth. The difference is culture, tradition and early indoctrination; not evidence, science or reason.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Feb 5, 2021 16:11:23 GMT -5
We could debate details of the gospels what each said, -when the were written etc, ad infinitum
But we need to remember there are multiple stories of "resurrections" of the many gods in the history of mankind. They differ a bit here & there but basically follow the same narrative.
What I think that we need to ask ourselves is the question as to why mankind wants to believe in a "resurrection" after death.
I think it is simply that it is very, very difficult for us to face the fact that once we are DEAD that is the end of us. Period. Perhaps it's very, very difficult because there's a spiritual dimension to us that is very, very difficult to deny?
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Feb 5, 2021 16:26:03 GMT -5
I have spoken some of these things in Sunday morning and Union meetings but many 2x2s did NOT understand or believe it just like many of you doubting Thomas and unbelievers on TMB.... That is understandable. Oh so you have spoken about JC living in Venus, in a Sunday meeting have you nathan ? Hw would not have the balls to do so.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 5, 2021 17:09:10 GMT -5
If a Christian today was shown another 2,000 year old book, having multiple fragments that are preserved to this day, which was filled with stories that; contradicts the laws of nature, details how to navigate the underworld, and makes use of some 192 spells, they would likely say that book is a work of fiction. Yet they believe the Bible is literally true and The Book Of The Dead is myth. The difference is culture, tradition and early indoctrination; not evidence, science or reason. There is life after death Its called faith Get it right You will be illuminated soon Divinely So says the Fong Gong lady.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Feb 5, 2021 17:21:57 GMT -5
If a Christian today was shown another 2,000 year old book, having multiple fragments that are preserved to this day, which was filled with stories that; contradicts the laws of nature, details how to navigate the underworld, and makes use of some 192 spells, they would likely say that book is a work of fiction. Yet they believe the Bible is literally true and The Book Of The Dead is myth. The difference is culture, tradition and early indoctrination; not evidence, science or reason. There is life after death Its called faith Get it right You will be illuminated soon Divinely Humans are like any other animal. Once dead, that is it. You rot away and the worms get you.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 5, 2021 18:53:30 GMT -5
Dmmich yes I know you will be kicking and screaming when you are shown the truth I know the iron armour you wear is just that it looks like it can not be penetrated but what is hidden beneath it is a heart that beats and softens rarely, for the most part from many. There is hope *** Amen, Shushy... Just like someone receives a crown with full precious gems at a garbage sales for 20 dollars. Some deceiver came along and said it was really good fake diamonds and sell the crown to him for couple 100s dollars. And that person believed and took 200 dollars but the crown was worth millions of dollars. Many ex-2×2 atheists will regret for selling their crown jewels for couples hundreds dollars. €Yes, there is hope, to buy back the crown jewels while there is life.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Feb 5, 2021 20:21:55 GMT -5
Humans are like any other animal. Once dead, that is it. You rot away and the worms get you. I think you are in for a shock I live my life based on facts supported by scientifically gained evidence. Not some bronze age cowboy making shi.t up.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 5, 2021 21:04:03 GMT -5
So says the Fong Gong lady. Deep breathing is good for you
Id love to bang that gong close to your earso said the Fong Gong Q-Anon lady
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 5, 2021 23:37:06 GMT -5
Deep breathing is good for you
Id love to bang that gong close to your ear so said the Fong Gong Q-Anon lady *** Oh, ye doubting Thomas, how often we have tried to gather you chicks under the wings of Our Almighty God Christ but he would NOT! Your house/souls shall be left unto you desolated.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Feb 5, 2021 23:39:52 GMT -5
so said the Fong Gong Q-Anon lady *** Oh, ye doubting Thomas, how often we have tried to gather you chicks under the wings of Our Almighty God Christ but he would NOT! Your house/souls shall be left unto you desolated. When are you going to wake up to the fact you are following bronze age mythology and taking it as fact. Duhhhhh.......
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Feb 5, 2021 23:45:16 GMT -5
I doubt that Shushy or Nathan -either one, -even knows the words "Fong Gong," - let alone what the Fong Gong are about
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Feb 6, 2021 0:30:02 GMT -5
I doubt that Shushy or Nathan -either one, -even knows the words "Fong Gong," - let alone what the Fong Gong are about Maybe Sushi has been indulging in too much Dong Guan.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Feb 6, 2021 1:15:46 GMT -5
I doubt that Shushy or Nathan -either one, -even knows the words "Fong Gong," - let alone what the Fong Gong are about yea right dont be a numbskull en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_GongI can do a dmich I had international students for yrs inlcuding from china, never coukld master mandarin, vowel sounds are difficult on the tongue Its all in the way you hold your tongue My great grand father was a China government official in 1900s, he left China before the Communist took over and came to Vietnam. He was a governor in China town of Saigon, Vietnam. I know a lot of Chinese and Vietnam history and I am NOT a Chinese or Vietnamese communist either. Yes, I know about Falun Gong.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Feb 6, 2021 1:23:52 GMT -5
I doubt that Shushy or Nathan -either one, -even knows the words "Fong Gong," - let alone what the Fong Gong are about yea right dont be a numbskull en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_GongI can do a dmich I had international students for yrs inlcuding from china, never coukld master mandarin, vowel sounds are difficult on the tongue Its all in the way you hold your tongue There is your problem “ the way you hold your tongue” Try taking your hand out of your mouth🙂
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Feb 6, 2021 1:31:22 GMT -5
yea right dont be a numbskull en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_GongI can do a dmich I had international students for yrs inlcuding from china, never coukld master mandarin, vowel sounds are difficult on the tongue Its all in the way you hold your tongue There is your problem “ the way you hold your tongue” Try taking your hand out of your mouth🙂 When I first met her the boys at convention were not complaining.
|
|
|
Post by Ross.Bowden on Feb 25, 2021 0:53:11 GMT -5
It would be more correct to say that Mark is the earliest gospel by nearly two decades - not several. Whilst there is little doubt that Mark 16:9-20 was not in his original manuscript (which virtually every Bible translation references), Mark clearly mentions in verses 6 and 7 (completely undisputed text) that: - Christ had risen from the place where he was buried; - That he was going ahead of Peter and the disciples into Galilee and that "there you will see him, just as he told you.” In other words, Mark clearly and unequivocally references the resurrection of Jesus and where He would appear to the disciples. Other gospels have more detailed accounts of the risen Lord. John goes into particular detail regarding Thomas which adds to the information of what Christ did after His resurrection and before His ascension. The important question is how did the author of Mark find out that “Christ has risen”? If the bible is true then we know that the three women at the tomb didn’t tell anyone what they had seen or had heard in relation to Jesus having risen for “they went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid”. If they told no one then how did the author of Mark come to learn of it? And if they told someone then clearly this part of the gospel isn’t true which raises the question of whether other parts of the gospel also aren’t true. And how do we know that the bloke in the white robe told the women the truth when he said “he has risen”? The original version of Mark’s Gospel only tells us that this is what he told the women. It doesn’t tell us that this is what actually happened. Could he have removed the body and put it elsewhere. It certainly seems peculiar for a man to be found sitting in an empty tomb. If he wasn’t there to interfere with the body what was he doing there? Why was he hanging around in an empty tomb after the body had up and left? It all seems peculiar. Referring to other gospels which were written later and which used Mark as one of their sources does not explain away the hugely inconvenient fact that the original version of Mark omits to say anything about anyone having seen the resurrected Jesus which is surely the most crucial event of his life. This is akin to writing a biography of JF Kennedy and forgetting to mention the assassination or of Neil Armstrong and failing to mention the moon landing. Why this should be requires some explanation. The most credible explanation is that the resurrection didn’t happen. And if you are referencing Matthew or Luke because you believe them to be true independent accounts which corroborate Mark’s account then we need to be clear that it is well established that they aren’t independent of Mark. It is also clear that the accounts of Mark, Matthew and Luke can’t all be true for Mark tells us that it was a young man in a white robe who the women encountered at the tomb, Matthew tells us that it was an angel of the Lord while Luke tells us that it was two men in dazzling apparel. Clearly at least two of these accounts are false. Why this should be also requires some explaining. The most credible explanation is that the stories are all made up. Which brings us to John. The author of John would have us believe that it was Mary Magdalene who went to the tomb alone. And when she found it empty she thought the body had been removed and then ran and brought Peter and another disciple to the tomb. But instead of seeing a young man in a white robe inside they see only the linen wrappings. And they go home. But Mary stayed on and then after a short conversation with some angels she turned around to find Jesus. The Bible is either 100% factually correct or it isn’t. And based on the accounts of the resurrection it clearly isn’t. And if the accounts aren’t true then what basis is there to believe in the rather far fetched story of the resurrection other than religious conditioning and wishful thinking. Matt10 It's fairly obvious, based on reading all of the accounts, that the women didn't tell anyone they met on the way until they reached Peter. We have multiple accounts of Jesus' life, death and ressurection, the authors of which all had different perspectives, language styles and both themes and details they wanted to emphasise. If you talk to any respected historian, he/she will quickly verify that in key events in history, different writers provide different perspectives, emphasise different themes and details and details do vary between writers. Of course, it doesn't negate the event at all. The fact that there are different accounts adds to both the veracity of the event and the depth and detail of it. I enjoy Mark's clear but plain writing style. He clearly states in two places in Mark 8 and 9 that Jesus said he must die but after three days he would rise again. Which is exactly what he recounts in Mark 16. I should have responded earlier but have been away on holidays for three weeks and have a rule of not looking at TMB during those times
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Feb 25, 2021 2:23:53 GMT -5
The important question is how did the author of Mark find out that “Christ has risen”? If the bible is true then we know that the three women at the tomb didn’t tell anyone what they had seen or had heard in relation to Jesus having risen for “they went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid”. If they told no one then how did the author of Mark come to learn of it? And if they told someone then clearly this part of the gospel isn’t true which raises the question of whether other parts of the gospel also aren’t true. And how do we know that the bloke in the white robe told the women the truth when he said “he has risen”? The original version of Mark’s Gospel only tells us that this is what he told the women. It doesn’t tell us that this is what actually happened. Could he have removed the body and put it elsewhere. It certainly seems peculiar for a man to be found sitting in an empty tomb. If he wasn’t there to interfere with the body what was he doing there? Why was he hanging around in an empty tomb after the body had up and left? It all seems peculiar. Referring to other gospels which were written later and which used Mark as one of their sources does not explain away the hugely inconvenient fact that the original version of Mark omits to say anything about anyone having seen the resurrected Jesus which is surely the most crucial event of his life. This is akin to writing a biography of JF Kennedy and forgetting to mention the assassination or of Neil Armstrong and failing to mention the moon landing. Why this should be requires some explanation. The most credible explanation is that the resurrection didn’t happen. And if you are referencing Matthew or Luke because you believe them to be true independent accounts which corroborate Mark’s account then we need to be clear that it is well established that they aren’t independent of Mark. It is also clear that the accounts of Mark, Matthew and Luke can’t all be true for Mark tells us that it was a young man in a white robe who the women encountered at the tomb, Matthew tells us that it was an angel of the Lord while Luke tells us that it was two men in dazzling apparel. Clearly at least two of these accounts are false. Why this should be also requires some explaining. The most credible explanation is that the stories are all made up. Which brings us to John. The author of John would have us believe that it was Mary Magdalene who went to the tomb alone. And when she found it empty she thought the body had been removed and then ran and brought Peter and another disciple to the tomb. But instead of seeing a young man in a white robe inside they see only the linen wrappings. And they go home. But Mary stayed on and then after a short conversation with some angels she turned around to find Jesus. The Bible is either 100% factually correct or it isn’t. And based on the accounts of the resurrection it clearly isn’t. And if the accounts aren’t true then what basis is there to believe in the rather far fetched story of the resurrection other than religious conditioning and wishful thinking. Matt10 It's fairly obvious, based on reading all of the accounts, that the women didn't tell anyone they met on the way until they reached Peter. We have multiple accounts of Jesus' life, death and ressurection, the authors of which all had different perspectives, language styles and both themes and details they wanted to emphasise. If you talk to any respected historian, he/she will quickly verify that in key events in history, different writers provide different perspectives, emphasise different themes and details and details do vary between writers. Of course, it doesn't negate the event at all. The fact that there are different accounts adds to both the veracity of the event and the depth and detail of it. I enjoy Mark's clear but plain writing style. He clearly states in two places in Mark 8 and 9 that Jesus said he must die but after three days he would rise again. Which is exactly what he recounts in Mark 16. I should have responded earlier but have been away on holidays for three weeks and have a rule of not looking at TMB during those times True, no contradictions in any of the gospels.
There were 2 angels at the tomb. Matthew 28:5-6 quotes one angel who spoke to the women outside of the tomb, saying; "He is not here... come see". Mark 16:5 quotes another angel inside the sepulcher who told the women; "He is risen...go tell his disciples". But Luke 24:4 and John 20:12 both confirm there were 2 angels at the tomb.
A partial report is not a false report. Just because each gospel author doesn’t report every detail of a story doesn’t mean it’s inaccurate. A divergent account is not a false account. For example, Matthew speaks of one angel at Christ’s tomb whereas John mentions two. A contradiction? Not at all. Simple math says if you have two, you also have one. Matthew did not say there was only one angel; if he had then we would have a true contradiction. Instead, he just records the words of the one who spoke. The same critics who try and point out contradictions in the gospels would no doubt cry 'collusion' if they found exact verbal parallelism and a singular account of the resurrection. The recordings of the resurrection found in the four gospels are found to harmonize quite well upon closer examination.
1. An angel rolls away stone from tomb before sunrise (Matt. 28:2-4). The guards are seized with fear and eventually flee 2. Women disciples visit the tomb and discover Christ missing (Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:1-4; Luke 24:1-3; John 20:1) 3. Mary Magdalene leaves to tell Peter and John (John 20:1-2) 4. Other women remain at tomb; they see two angels who tell them of Christ’s resurrection (Matt. 18:5-7, Mark 16:5-7, Luke 24:4-8) 5. Peter and John run to the tomb and then leave (Luke 24:12; John 20:3-10) 6. Mary Magdalene returns to the tomb; She see's 2 angels standing at the head and feet of where the body had lain (John 20:12). Christ appears to her (Mark 16:9-11; John 20:11-18). 7. Jesus appears to the other women (Mary, mother of James, Salome, and Joanna) (Matt. 28:8-10).
The fact that John only mentions Mary Magdalene going to the tomb is not a contradiction, because its true. John chose to just focus on Mary Magdalene, but failing to mention the other women does not constitute a contradiction or even a discrepancy. Mark mentions 3 women, Luke just specifies women, and Matthew mentioned the 2 Mary's. Having something mentioned in one gospel but not another does not constitute a contradiction. Now if one gospel said that 'no' women went to the sepulcher while the others said they did, then you would have a contradiction.
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Feb 25, 2021 2:59:15 GMT -5
The important question is how did the author of Mark find out that “Christ has risen”? If the bible is true then we know that the three women at the tomb didn’t tell anyone what they had seen or had heard in relation to Jesus having risen for “they went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid”. If they told no one then how did the author of Mark come to learn of it? And if they told someone then clearly this part of the gospel isn’t true which raises the question of whether other parts of the gospel also aren’t true. And how do we know that the bloke in the white robe told the women the truth when he said “he has risen”? The original version of Mark’s Gospel only tells us that this is what he told the women. It doesn’t tell us that this is what actually happened. Could he have removed the body and put it elsewhere. It certainly seems peculiar for a man to be found sitting in an empty tomb. If he wasn’t there to interfere with the body what was he doing there? Why was he hanging around in an empty tomb after the body had up and left? It all seems peculiar. Referring to other gospels which were written later and which used Mark as one of their sources does not explain away the hugely inconvenient fact that the original version of Mark omits to say anything about anyone having seen the resurrected Jesus which is surely the most crucial event of his life. This is akin to writing a biography of JF Kennedy and forgetting to mention the assassination or of Neil Armstrong and failing to mention the moon landing. Why this should be requires some explanation. The most credible explanation is that the resurrection didn’t happen. And if you are referencing Matthew or Luke because you believe them to be true independent accounts which corroborate Mark’s account then we need to be clear that it is well established that they aren’t independent of Mark. It is also clear that the accounts of Mark, Matthew and Luke can’t all be true for Mark tells us that it was a young man in a white robe who the women encountered at the tomb, Matthew tells us that it was an angel of the Lord while Luke tells us that it was two men in dazzling apparel. Clearly at least two of these accounts are false. Why this should be also requires some explaining. The most credible explanation is that the stories are all made up. Which brings us to John. The author of John would have us believe that it was Mary Magdalene who went to the tomb alone. And when she found it empty she thought the body had been removed and then ran and brought Peter and another disciple to the tomb. But instead of seeing a young man in a white robe inside they see only the linen wrappings. And they go home. But Mary stayed on and then after a short conversation with some angels she turned around to find Jesus. The Bible is either 100% factually correct or it isn’t. And based on the accounts of the resurrection it clearly isn’t. And if the accounts aren’t true then what basis is there to believe in the rather far fetched story of the resurrection other than religious conditioning and wishful thinking. Matt10 It's fairly obvious, based on reading all of the accounts, that the women didn't tell anyone they met on the way until they reached Peter. We have multiple accounts of Jesus' life, death and ressurection, the authors of which all had different perspectives, language styles and both themes and details they wanted to emphasise. If you talk to any respected historian, he/she will quickly verify that in key events in history, different writers provide different perspectives, emphasise different themes and details and details do vary between writers. Of course, it doesn't negate the event at all. The fact that there are different accounts adds to both the veracity of the event and the depth and detail of it. I enjoy Mark's clear but plain writing style. He clearly states in two places in Mark 8 and 9 that Jesus said he must die but after three days he would rise again. Which is exactly what he recounts in Mark 16. I should have responded earlier but have been away on holidays for three weeks and have a rule of not looking at TMB during those times There is reason to doubt Mark 16:9-20, it seems it was added in at a later date by someone else. It seems Chrisitanity is Dogmatic about the physical ressurection of Christ. A question to ponder is are you following Jesus because he rose from the dead? or are you following Jesus because his Character lived out in your life leads to the best outcomes in life?. If Jesus didn't physically rise from the dead would you still follow him?. Lazarus rose from the dead, should we follow him?. Maybe there is a reason Mark never included the physical ressurection. People will hate me for even suggesting these things, back to my original question, why follow Jesus?. Would it ruin your faith it Jesus never physically rose from the dead?. Why?. Tough questions but I feel "Christianity" is lost in General, and has been lost for a long long long time. youtu.be/mRi3l_pIKOA
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2021 12:12:54 GMT -5
It's fairly obvious, based on reading all of the accounts, that the women didn't tell anyone they met on the way until they reached Peter. We have multiple accounts of Jesus' life, death and ressurection, the authors of which all had different perspectives, language styles and both themes and details they wanted to emphasise. If you talk to any respected historian, he/she will quickly verify that in key events in history, different writers provide different perspectives, emphasise different themes and details and details do vary between writers. Of course, it doesn't negate the event at all. The fact that there are different accounts adds to both the veracity of the event and the depth and detail of it. I enjoy Mark's clear but plain writing style. He clearly states in two places in Mark 8 and 9 that Jesus said he must die but after three days he would rise again. Which is exactly what he recounts in Mark 16. I should have responded earlier but have been away on holidays for three weeks and have a rule of not looking at TMB during those times There is reason to doubt Mark 16:9-20, it seems it was added in at a later date by someone else. It seems Chrisitanity is Dogmatic about the physical ressurection of Christ. A question to ponder is are you following Jesus because he rose from the dead? or are you following Jesus because his Character lived out in your life leads to the best outcomes in life?. If Jesus didn't physically rise from the dead would you still follow him?. Lazarus rose from the dead, should we follow him?. Maybe there is a reason Mark never included the physical ressurection. People will hate me for even suggesting these things, back to my original question, why follow Jesus?. Would it ruin your faith it Jesus never physically rose from the dead?. Why?. Tough questions but I feel "Christianity" is lost in General, and has been lost for a long long long time. youtu.be/mRi3l_pIKOAmore babble by you atheist... we follow Christ for everything he did including raising from the dead which in the hierarchy of things is the single most important thing he did as it concerns everyone's salvation. no, if he did not raise from the dead he was not the savior, if he was not the savior we are still dead in our sins. 1Co_15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. just being good doesn't get you into heaven. its a combo of believing in Christ, Obeying God and bearing fruit. even Christ told us evil people can do good things to those they love. lazarus WAS raised by Jesus, he did NOT raise himself. why follow Jesus? Mat_16:24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. there would be nothing to have faith in if he did not live, die and resurrect. its a complete packaged deal... these are not tough questions if you actually knew the bible... yes we know you pretended to be a 2x2, then a Christian, but you have revealed your atheism....
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Feb 25, 2021 22:25:35 GMT -5
There is reason to doubt Mark 16:9-20, it seems it was added in at a later date by someone else. It seems Chrisitanity is Dogmatic about the physical ressurection of Christ. A question to ponder is are you following Jesus because he rose from the dead? or are you following Jesus because his Character lived out in your life leads to the best outcomes in life?. If Jesus didn't physically rise from the dead would you still follow him?. Lazarus rose from the dead, should we follow him?. Maybe there is a reason Mark never included the physical ressurection. People will hate me for even suggesting these things, back to my original question, why follow Jesus?. Would it ruin your faith it Jesus never physically rose from the dead?. Why?. Tough questions but I feel "Christianity" is lost in General, and has been lost for a long long long time. youtu.be/mRi3l_pIKOAmore babble by you atheist... we follow Christ for everything he did including raising from the dead which in the hierarchy of things is the single most important thing he did as it concerns everyone's salvation. no, if he did not raise from the dead he was not the savior, if he was not the savior we are still dead in our sins. 1Co_15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. just being good doesn't get you into heaven. its a combo of believing in Christ, Obeying God and bearing fruit. even Christ told us evil people can do good things to those they love. lazarus WAS raised by Jesus, he did NOT raise himself. why follow Jesus? Mat_16:24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. there would be nothing to have faith in if he did not live, die and resurrect. its a complete packaged deal... these are not tough questions if you actually knew the bible... yes we know you pretended to be a 2x2, then a Christian, but you have revealed your atheism.... Wally when you have God all defined in a box, no question is difficult for you. Except the one question you can't bring yourself to answer because that God doesn't fit in your box.....that God is too nice because he doesn't burn people not like you.... You need to actually explain what the physical ressurection did for you?. And not just some religious word salad. Actually explain how the physical ressurection did something for you. The lamb was slain before the foundation of the world......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2021 22:51:35 GMT -5
more babble by you atheist... we follow Christ for everything he did including raising from the dead which in the hierarchy of things is the single most important thing he did as it concerns everyone's salvation. no, if he did not raise from the dead he was not the savior, if he was not the savior we are still dead in our sins. 1Co_15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. just being good doesn't get you into heaven. its a combo of believing in Christ, Obeying God and bearing fruit. even Christ told us evil people can do good things to those they love. lazarus WAS raised by Jesus, he did NOT raise himself. why follow Jesus? Mat_16:24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. there would be nothing to have faith in if he did not live, die and resurrect. its a complete packaged deal... these are not tough questions if you actually knew the bible... yes we know you pretended to be a 2x2, then a Christian, but you have revealed your atheism.... Wally when you have God all defined in a box, no question is difficult for you. Except the one question you can't bring yourself to answer because that God doesn't fit in your box.....that God is too nice because he doesn't burn people not like you.... You need to actually explain what the physical ressurection did for you?. And not just some religious word salad. Actually explain how the physical ressurection did something for you. The lamb was slain before the foundation of the world...... 1. Jesus's physical resurrection proved that there is in fact life for all of us(that follow him)beyond the grave/death. 2. Jesus's physical resurrection showed us(that follow him)what type of body we would have after death. 3. The lamb was FOREORDAINED to be slain before the foundation of the world. -meditation, prayer, bible study, revelation and the Holy Spirit is the only way you'll understand anything about the bible simple enough and no word salad needed....
|
|