The Historicity of the New Testament – Dr. Robert Price & Br. Ijaz Ahmad

A quick half an hour conversation between Dr. Robert M. Price and myself on the Historicity of the New Testament, this includes social formation, mythmaking, ipssisima vox, NTTC, and more!

Facebook Mirror: Click Here

and God knows best.

Advertisements


Categories: Atheism, Bible, Biblical scholarship, Christianity, Islam

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

102 replies

  1. All of Robert Price’s presuppositions about miracles, myth-making, supernatural revelation, (especially the virgin birth of Jesus – which you as a Muslim believe, and that is based on Luke chapters 1-2 and Matthew chapters 1-2, etc.) would destroy the Qur’an and Muhammad’s claims also. And even worse, since the Qur’an is partially based on oral testimony (since Muhammad is illiterate and his information is just coming to him by hearing things orally taught, etc. ) of the “Christians” (mostly nominal and heretical Gnostics) and Jews around the Arabs in Arabia in the late 6th and 7th Century AD, then using Price as any kind of authority on the New Testament text, just gutted the Qur’an and your religion of any historical validity. The Qur’an affirms the disciples of Jesus ( حواریون = “Hawareeyoon”) as the ones who persevered and overcame and became the superior ones, dominant ones, the manifest ones – Surah 3:55 (superior, high, above, dominant فوق ); Surah 61:14 ظاهرین = dominant, manifest ones, obvious ones, known ones), and we know from both the New Testament, all first century documents and the history of the church, the testimony of Peter, John, etc. is firm.

    John 19:35
    And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you also may believe.

    Do you think the author of the Gospel of John is so dumb that he does not tell us who he is?
    It is obvious it is John the disciple, “whom Jesus loved”, by the context and all the other verses throughout the gospel.

    John 19:25- 26 – just a few verses earlier, he tells us who he is.

    “Therefore the soldiers did these things.
    But standing by the cross of Jesus were His mother, and His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus then saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He *said to His mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” 27 Then He *said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” From that hour the disciple took her into his own household.

    This phrase, “the disciple whom Jesus loved” is repeated throughout the book, so that you know who he is talking about.

    John 13:23
    John 19:26
    John 20:2 – came with Peter to the empty tomb and so was an eyewitness.
    John 21:7
    John 21:20

    There is an excellent article at Triablogue that gives examples of historical examples of people who deliberately write in third person, though they are the author and eyewitness of the events. Many people have done that and do that today also, in their books, in order to avoid repeating their own names and “I” all the time throughout the work.

    see here:
    http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2018/05/illeism.html

    Like

    • “The Qur’an affirms the disciples of Jesus ( حواریون = “Hawareeyoon”) as the ones who persevered and overcame and became the superior ones, dominant ones, the manifest ones – Surah 3:55 (superior, high, above, dominant فوق ); Surah 61:14 ظاهرین = dominant, manifest ones, obvious ones, known ones), and we know from both the New Testament, all first century documents and the history of the church, the testimony of Peter, John, etc. is firm.”

      We have answered you in this very point , Ken! Remember?

      The promise of God to Jesus about his disciples in Surah 3 has been fulfilled in Qur’an by praising them. In contrast, your prophet Paul considered them nothing! The true legacy of those true disciples has been revived in Islam, which is in contrast to their legacy in christianity.

      Surah 61 is talking about 2 parties (among jews). The one which believed in Jesus was the victorious one even in your bible. Jews who didn’t believe in Jesus couldn’t prevent Jesus’ disciples, and the disciples kept worshiping God and (persevering the law) of God in Jerusalem. Paul was thrown out of Jerusalem. He has no rule in the equation here.

      Liked by 1 person

    • You did not refute anything and still cannot. Even Yusuf Ali, in his notes of the Qur’an, affirmed that the disciples of Jesus who became dominant, superior , and manifest are the ones who grew and converted the Roman Empire – the disciples of Jesus and the apostle Paul were completely unified in their message about the atonement on the cross, the resurrection of Jesus, salvation and justification, grace, etc. – Galatians 2:7-9 and 1 Cor. 15:1-9 proves this. (see Yusuf Ali’s comments on page 1742 of his version of Qur’an, at Surah 61:14 about the manifest ones ظاهرین

      Like

    • Ken can never bring any substantive argument. He always has to resort to the same old propaganda that’s been debunked dozens of times.

      Like

    • No one has yet to refute my points.

      Like

    • LOL are you the same Ken as in the youtube comment section of that video?
      You got refuted there and now you come here and spew the same nonsense.

      Like

    • No; I am not that “Ken”. That is a different Ken – see the last name is different.

      No one has refuted what I have been saying.

      Like

    • [[[
      No; I am not that “Ken”. That is a different Ken – see the last name is different.

      ]]]

      And yet you two made the exact same points and got smacked across the face :).

      [[[
      No one has refuted what I have been saying
      ]]]

      O poor Kenny! Living the delusional life are we? Just reread the answer to the other Kenny.

      Like

    • If you are talking about “Ken McCraken”, he did not get “smacked across the face”; rather McCraken offered logical and reasonable evidence and responded well.

      Like

    • Ken McCraken wrote:
      “The principle of embarrassment is one of the reasons that Ehrman accepts the actual historical evidence. In his debate with Price he clearly stated that it’s because of multiple independent attestation also that he accepts the evidence.”

      So, you lost that one big time.

      Like

    • Keep reading Ken, keep reading.
      And just like he brought up Q 3:55 en 61:14 (I mean what a coincidence right, it’s almost a copy paste)
      he (and/or you) got refuted.
      Bam bam boom Kenny!!!!

      Like

    • Not at all; problem for you is that Peter, John, and James were unified with Paul in Galatians 2:7-9 and 1 Cor. 15:1-9; and there is no evidence that the Ebionites are the ones that became “superior” فوق or manifest / obvious ظاهرین – it is obvious it is the Christianity of the NT and that Peter, John, James, Paul, etc. were all unified and that became the dominant form of Christianity in early centuries. You lost the argument, even Yusuf Ali agreed. see earlier reference I gave you.

      Like

    • In the Qur’an, Allah promises Jesus that his followers would be superior to unbelievers until the Day of Resurrection. Notice that Allah doesn’t say to Jesus, “Sorry, but your disciples will be immediately overpowered by the Apostle Paul.” Instead, Allah promises victory for the Christians:

      Qur’an 3:55—Behold! Allah said: “O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection.”

      Since the Day of Resurrection hasn’t arrived yet, Christians must still be “superior to those who reject faith”!

      Like

    • Superior in status or superior in power?
      The verse doesn’t say. You’re adding things into the text that aren’t there.

      “Not at all; problem for you is that Peter, John, and James were unified with Paul”

      According to who? To Paul? And that’s supposed to be evidence?
      This is you: I have proven that the biblical narrative is the truth by quoting the bible!
      Damn you got me!

      “and there is no evidence that the Ebionites are the ones that became “superior” فوق or manifest / obvious ظاهرین – it is obvious it is the Christianity of the NT and that Peter, John, James, Paul, etc. were all unified and that became the dominant form of Christianity in early centuries”

      And yet there is no evidence for this either.
      I don’t claim that we have evidence that the Ebionites were victorious. I don’t even claim that’s a possibility (it could be)!
      All I am saying is is that they fit the description of ‘a Muslim’. That’s it!

      And I find it absolutely mind boggling that you have people like this who say:
      “They were a heretical sect first mentioned by Irenaeus around 180 in Against Heresies. Abdul Haqq could not refute that.” in the article.

      As if this is some kind of proof! 150 years after Jesus, someone makes a claim: they are heretical and boom that’s evidence!

      This is exactly why I can’t take Christians seriously. You say things are evidence when they are clearly not.

      Like

    • “the Qur’an affirmed that the disciples of Jesus who became dominant, superior , and manifest”
      Amen! Have you read my comment even? This’ what we are saying for you!

      We disagree with your nonsense interpretation for that superiority. If you try to use Yousef Ali against me. I’m using the founder of your sect that there’s a huge gap between your prophet Paul and the true disciple of Jesus. This nonsense that you try to adopt as an argument is an the clown’ vomit! I have told you! David’s is just a clown in the real apologetic field. You have to avoid those men if you want us to take you seriously.

      “You did not refute anything and still cannot.”
      As if I’m waiting an approval from a blind christian fundamentalist!

      Like

    • Qur’an 3:55—Behold! Allah said: “O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection.”

      The expression, “those who follow thee” refers to the Muslims, who followed Jesus on the straight path accepting him and then later the next messenger in the revelatory chain, Prophet Muhammad. Rather than following Jesus, majority of Christianity traded the teachings of Jesus for the teachings of Paul, and thus followed Paul not Jesus.

      An alternative and expanded interpretation could understand “those who follow thee” as a reference to all those who “profess allegiance” to Jesus, including both Christians AND Muslims.

      Like

    • “In the Qur’an, Allah promises Jesus that his followers would be superior to unbelievers until the Day of Resurrection. Notice that Allah doesn’t say to Jesus, “Sorry, but your disciples will be immediately overpowered by the Apostle Paul.” Instead, Allah promises victory for the Christians:”

      Ken, Jesus’s disciples were immediately superior to Paul….Paul was put in jail last time he is spoken of and perhaps died there.

      The Church of James which was basically a part of the Temple in Jerusalem was the Church that was the only one giving the teachings of Jesus in Jerusalem and so it overpowered Paul….Paul came to Jerusalem but he had to be saved by Roman soldiers according to the New Testament.

      Please get your history correct.

      Like

    • So the Ebionites led by James, brother of Jesus were superior for decades!

      Like

    • There is no evidence that James founded or led the heretical group, the Ebionites, which Epiphanius and Irenaeus mentions. Most of them denied the virgin birth of Christ; and they died out, being very small. Hardly victorious or superior or manifest.

      Muslims attempt to say that the Ebionites were the “original Christians” that the Qur’an speaks about.
      However, Dr. Anthony McRoy, lecturer at the Wales Evangelical School of Theology, fully refutes a Muslim convert, Abdul Haqq (a British man who converted to Islam) and his book,
      Before Nicaea and the idea that the early true Christians were the Ebionites.
      Scroll down and find the Unbelievable Radio program on June 20, 2009. (“Before Nicaea”) (Thanks to Dr. James White for pointing me to this.)
      Some of Dr. McRoy’s key points:
      1. where is the evidence that the Ebionites were the early Christians or even around in the first century? Abdul Haqq, a Muslim could never answer that question.
      2. They were a heretical sect first mentioned by Irenaeus around 180 in Against Heresies. Abdul Haqq could not refute that.
      3. Several early church fathers note that the Ebionites were like the docetist Cerinthus and other Gnostics who denied the virgin birth of Christ and separated the man Jesus from the divine logos, the Christ, and that the logos left the man Jesus before He was crucified.
      Notice what Irenaeus, around 180 AD, says about the Ebionites and their belief about Jesus was similar to Cerinthus who was called by Polycarp a heretic and “son of Satan”; and other heretics. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 1, chapter 26, paragraph 1-2:
      1. Cerinthus, again, a man who was educated in the wisdom of the Egyptians, taught that the world was not made by the primary God, but by a certain Power far separated from him, and at a distance from that Principality who is supreme over the universe, and ignorant of him who is above all. He represented Jesus as having not been born of a virgin, but as being the son of Joseph and Mary according to the ordinary course of human generation, while he nevertheless was more righteous, prudent, and wise than other men. Moreover, after his baptism, Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler, and that then he proclaimed the unknown Father, and performed miracles. But at last Christ departed from Jesus, and that then Jesus suffered and rose again, while Christ remained impassible, inasmuch as he was a spiritual being.

      2. Those who are called Ebionites agree that the world was made by God; but their opinions with respect to the Lord are similar to those of Cerinthus and Carpocrates. [see above] They use the Gospel according to Matthew only, and repudiate the Apostle Paul, maintaining that he was an apostate from the law. As to the prophetical writings, they endeavour to expound them in a somewhat singular manner: they practise circumcision, persevere in the observance of those customs which are enjoined by the law, and are so Judaic in their style of life, that they even adore Jerusalem as if it were the house of God. [ my emphasis]

      It is inconsistent for Muslims to use the Ebionites, as most of them did deny the virgin birth of Christ, yet Islam affirms the virgin birth of Christ. (Surah 3:45-48; 19:19-21)

      See the details here:
      https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2011/08/05/desperate-and-dubious-muslim-apologetic-methods/

      Like

  2. The content of Steve Hays article at Triablogue, entitled “Illeism”:

    According to traditional attribution, at least two (Matthew, John) and arguably three (plus Mark) of the four Gospels were written by eyewitnesses. (I’d say Mark was probably a partial eyewitness.) Yet all four Gospels were written in the third-person, which is often taken to be evidence that they were not by eyewitnesses. John is a partial exception: at a few strategic points in the account, the narrator explicitly identifies himself as a participant.

    Yet there’s a literary convention in ancient historiography where an authorial observer adopts the voice of a third-person narrator even when–or especially when–describing events of which he has firsthand knowledge. The technical term for this historiographical convention is illeism.

    Therefore, the use of third-person narration carries no presumption that it wasn’t written by an eyewitness. Illeism has certain motivations (see below).

    Hecataeus of Miletus (ca. 550-476 BC) begins his work by identifying himself in the third person…Herodotus (484-425) also conveys his representation of history in the third person…Mole writes that “the effect is double: the naming suggests that Herodotus himself will be in an important figure in his History (as indeed he is); the use of the third person suggests objectivity and detachment.

    Thudycides (ca. 460-398 BC) begins his work The Peloponnesian War with the third-person self-reference…Thucydides also presents himself in the third person in order to present himself as a character within the history in which he was a participant…Grant writes that Thucydides “seeks to emphasize his objectivity by writing of himself in the third person, like Julius Caesar”.

    Xenophon (ca 430-350 BC), a student of Socrates, records in the Anabasis his march with the Ten Thousand as they travel into and back from Persia in an effort to aid Cyrus. Like Thucydides he refers to himself in the third person when referring to his own participation in events.

    In the Hellenistic period, Polybius (ca. 200-118 BC) prefers the use of the third person for self-reference when describing events in which he is a participant. Campbell notes that “as with Thucydides, the effect of narrating Polybius’s participation in events in the third person is to distance the author/actor from the narrator and, in so doing, to increase the sense of historical objectivity”.

    Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) refers to himself in the third person throughout his work Gallic War…Josephus (AD 37 to ca. 100), in War of the Jews, presents himself as a participant in the historical events conveyed by referring to himself in the third person. R. Elledge, Use of the Third Person for Self-Reference by Jesus and Yahweh: A Study of Illeism in the Bible and Ancient Near Eastern Texts and Its Implications (T&T Clark 2017), 17-21.

    Like

  3. Scholars have identified the town of Arimathea with “Ha-Ramathaia” – the “h” at the beginning of Greek is a breathing mark, so you don’t see it.
    ‘Αριμαθαια = “he” = “the” , “Rama” (the height”, the name of several cities in Palestine/Israel, ha-Ramathaim, and Ramatha – mentioned in Josephus Antiquities 13, 4, i. )

    Joseph of Arimathea is mentioned in all four gospels and his historical testimony is therefore, very strong.
    William Lane Craig mentions him and this fact all the time in the first point of his case for the resurrection.

    William Lane Craig:

    “The answer of the New Testament is: the resurrection of Jesus. “God will judge the world with justice by the man He has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead” (Acts 17.31). The resurrection is God’s vindication of Jesus’ radical personal claims to divine authority.

    So how do we know that Jesus is risen from the dead? The Easter hymnwriter says, “You ask me how I know he lives? He lives within my heart!” This answer is perfectly appropriate on an individual level. But when Christians engage unbelievers in the public square—such as in “Letters to the Editor” of a local newspaper, on call-in programs on talk-radio, at PTA meetings, or even just in conversation with co-workers—, then it’s crucial that we be able to present objective evidence in support of our beliefs. Otherwise our claims hold no more water than the assertions of anyone else claiming to have a private experience of God.

    Fortunately, Christianity, as a religion rooted in history, makes claims that can in important measure be investigated historically. Suppose, then, that we approach the New Testament writings, not as inspired Scripture, but merely as a collection of Greek documents coming down to us out of the first century, without any assumption as to their reliability other than the way we normally regard other sources of ancient history. We may be surprised to learn that the majority of New Testament critics investigating the gospels in this way accept the central facts undergirding the resurrection of Jesus. I want to emphasize that I am not talking about evangelical or conservative scholars only, but about the broad spectrum of New Testament critics who teach at secular universities and non-evangelical seminaries. Amazing as it may seem, most of them have come to regard as historical the basic facts which support the resurrection of Jesus. These facts are as follows:

    FACT #1: After his crucifixion, Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea. This fact is highly significant because it means, contrary to radical critics like John Dominic Crossan of the Jesus Seminar, that the location of Jesus’ burial site was known to Jew and Christian alike. In that case, the disciples could never have proclaimed his resurrection in Jerusalem if the tomb had not been empty. New Testament researchers have established this first fact on the basis of evidence such as the following:

    1. Jesus’ burial is attested in the very old tradition quoted by Paul in I Cor. 15.3-5:

    For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received:

    . . . that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,
    and that he was buried,
    and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,
    and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve.

    Paul not only uses the typical rabbinical terms “received” and “delivered” with regard to the information he is passing on to the Corinthians, but vv. 3-5 are a highly stylized four-line formula filled with non-Pauline characteristics. This has convinced all scholars that Paul is, as he says, quoting from an old tradition which he himself received after becoming a Christian. This tradition probably goes back at least to Paul’s fact-finding visit to Jerusalem around AD 36, when he spent two weeks with Cephas and James (Gal. 1.18). It thus dates to within five years after Jesus’ death. So short a time span and such personal contact make it idle to talk of legend in this case.

    2. The burial story is part of very old source material used by Mark in writing his gospel. The gospels tend to consist of brief snapshots of Jesus’ life which are loosely connected and not always chronologically arranged. But when we come to the passion story we do have one, smooth, continuously-running narrative. This suggests that the passion story was one of Mark’s sources of information in writing his gospel. Now most scholars think Mark is already the earliest gospel, and Mark’s source for Jesus’ passion is, of course, even older. Comparison of the narratives of the four gospels shows that their accounts do not diverge from one another until after the burial. This implies that the burial account was part of the passion story. Again, its great age militates against its being legendary.

    3. As a member of the Jewish court that condemned Jesus, Joseph of Arimathea is unlikely to be a Christian invention. There was strong resentment against the Jewish leadership for their role in the condemnation of Jesus (I Thess. 2.15). It is therefore highly improbable that Christians would invent a member of the court that condemned Jesus who honors Jesus by giving him a proper burial instead of allowing him to be dispatched as a common criminal.

    4. No other competing burial story exists. If the burial by Joseph were fictitious, then we would expect to find either some historical trace of what actually happened to Jesus’ corpse or at least some competing legends. But all our sources are unanimous on Jesus’ honorable interment by Joseph.

    For these and other reasons, the majority of New Testament critics concur that Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea. According to the late John A. T. Robinson of Cambridge University, the burial of Jesus in the tomb is “one of the earliest and best-attested facts about Jesus. [1]”

    Like

  4. No Ken,

    You can’t hang Christianity on the legend of the empty tomb.

    Even if the empty tomb story is true, it does not prove Jesus is God or Son of God or a part or person of a trinity, etc.

    But the empty tomb story just does not work as a likely explanation

    as explained by Richard Carrier.

    I don’t like to recommend anyone read Carrier since he is an atheist and kind of a lunatic atheist.

    But he does deconstruct the empty tomb legend.

    https://www.richardcarrier.info/faqs.html

    Liked by 1 person

    • Richard “Carrier since he is an atheist and kind of a lunatic atheist.”

      Indeed.
      LOL

      He is a nut job and got discredited by his own atheist on-line community for dishonesty and adultery (multiple) and justified it, because he has no moral basis for the idea of “right and wrong”.

      He lost all the debates I have heard him on the resurrection with William Lane Craig and Mike Licona.
      Craig and Licona defeated his arguments.

      Like

    • “Craig and Licona defeated his arguments.”
      If you says so.

      Like

    • i think licona lost both of the debates .i was surprised to find christian apologist post on face book where he admitted that carrier done a wrecking job of jonathan mclatchy.

      Like

    • Lateef – It’s amazing how you call the empty tomb a legend. So now as a Muslim, you’re saying that Jesus’ tomb wasn’t empty. So in other words, Jesus WAS killed by crucifixion.

      Like

    • “Royal” pain,
      That is not what Lateef said at all. At least try to be honest.

      Like

  5. However he does deconstruct the empty tomb legend.

    https://www.richardcarrier.info/faqs.html

    Like

    • Can you summarise the points?

      i know that ehrman thinks that it was not historical.

      i heard no one attests to it before mark.

      paul ,in 20,000 words doesnt mention about tomb being discovered .

      Or anything miraculous happening at burial site.

      Like

    • If we ask crosstians, how was josephus buried,they would,without any detail, assume jewish burial or use first century jewish burial practices and picture josephus burial. one wonders if this was the case for marks tomb narrative,the guy was no eyewitness and he was written decades after jesus. What source of information did he have in front of him and how much knowledge of first century jewish burial practice did he employ to create his tomb narrative ?

      Like

  6. Paul clearly testifies to the empty tomb and Jesus’ resurrection from the dead.

    Acts 13:29-30
    When they had carried out all that was written concerning Him, they took Him down from the cross and laid Him in a tomb.

    30 But God raised Him from the dead;

    Like

  7. Also Acts 2:29 speaks about David being buried (same word in I Corinthians 15:4 – and He was buried) and Peter speaks of David’s tomb is sill with us today.

    So when the apostle Paul says in I Cor. 15:3-4, that Christ died for our sins, and was buried, and on the 3rd day rose from the dead, he is indeed testifying of the empty tomb.

    Besides, Jesus appeared to the women, Peter, the other apostles, James, His half brother, and 500 witnesses all at once, and the apostle Paul.

    Jesus Al Masih عیسی المسیح died and rose from the dead.

    Like

    • what were the reasons for the gospel writers to talk about public crucifixion, but COMPLETELY ignore that public 500 “witness” appearance? now don’t lie for jesus and argue from ignorance, show some evidence why FIVE HUNDRED dropped out from the gospel of mark, matthew , luke and john coz EACH writers talks about appearances , one has DEAD saints make public appearance

      think about it. mark is ALLEGED to have known about the “500 witnesses” but ends his story WITH NO APPEARANCES.

      christian apologetic inconsistencies :

      “But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?” 36 Fool! ”

      quote :

      Here is the real sticking point for me. Paul demonstrates throughout his letter he is willing to use numerous tools to make his point—including events in Jesus’ life. Paul indicates he received the 1 Cor. 15 tradition and it is often argued (and been argued in this blog) he received it from Peter and James when visiting Jerusalem. Gal. 1:18. And…it has been argued…they MUST have discussed the resurrection appearances.

      Now if Paul knew of the resurrection accounts as recorded in the gospels—why ever would he not mention them here? You want to know what a resurrection body looks like? “Why,” says Paul, “Let me tell you what Jesus was like.” Then Paul could describe how Jesus’ post-mortem resurrection body could walk, talk, teleport, retain knowledge, touch, see, hear, be touched, eat, float, breath, retain scars, make a fire and cook.

      quote :

      But…are Christian apologists consistent in this? Indeed, in the podcast instigating this blog entry, Pastor Cooper derides my statement the tradition fails to explicitly mention an empty tomb, as…to him…it is clearly inferred. Yet if I indicate the tradition fails to mention the women appearances, now I am (gently) corrected to limit its purpose to the internal statements.

      Which is it? Should we limit it to the tradition or should we broaden the scope to what it infers as well? And I should note, as the tradition is listing appearances, the fact the women are not listed is far more relevant as they are conspicuous by their absence. Why are the Christian apologists allowed to broaden the scope to claim 1 Cor. 15 supports an empty tomb, but we must then immediately shrink the scope back to the precise wording when it comes to the women appearances?

      I quite agree with your statement, “If women were witnesses, then it would be unreasonable to assume Paul omitted this point…for nearly the space of two years.” Pretty big “IF.” If they were not (as I contend) then it is quite reasonable Paul would omit this point, as he has no knowledge. Staying consistent within this small method—it is reasonable Paul would know of Jesus’ physical appearances, yet omit the point when arguing for what a resurrection body would be like? Is it reasonable Paul knew Jesus’ resurrection physical abilities yet when describing what a post-resurrection body was like Paul would use every tool in his belt such as tradition, analogy (seeds and clothes), church practices (baptism for the dead), and argument (“our faith would be in vain.”)? But not the far more simplistic act of describing Jesus’ body? Something—under this method—it would be unreasonable to assume he omitted for nearly two years.

      Paul starts 1 Cor. 15 with, “Remember what I told you” and then repeats what he told them. But when it comes to the physical properties, Paul goes through arduous, complicated descriptions rather than simply state, “Remember what I told you” and repeats the resurrection accounts? While I would agree we cannot ask the tradition to do more than intended, the later arguments of Paul in the same chapter make it far more likely Paul had no knowledge of the appearances as later generated and recorded in the gospels.

      /////////////////

      Like

    • 6 After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; 1 Cor. 15:6

      Paul is saying, if you don’t believe me, go ask them, for most of them are still alive as I write this letter (around 55 AD)

      All scholars see the testimony of Paul there in 1 Cor. 15:1-9 of “what I received” as the teaching tradition going back to the first few months or years after Jesus resurrection – sometime around 34-35 AD. It does not have to be repeated in the gospels for it to be true. Truth can be spoken in one verse of holy God-breathed Scripture.

      Like

    • paul added himself to the list, he also omitted stuff , the 500 witnesses could have been added too because christianity doesn’t care about telling the truth.

      Like

    • thousands could believe in rumours

      Acts 21:17-24

      how to tell what is rumour and what is fact in the gospels?

      Like

    • It is all God-breathed truth. no rumors. God has to open your mind to the truth. Luke 24:45; Acts 16:14; John 6:44; 1 Cor. 2:14-16; 2 Cor. 4:4-6

      Like

    • so do you believe many dead saints literally came out of their tombs and appeared to many people in a city?

      Like

    • “It is all God-breathed truth. no rumors. God has to open your mind to the truth. Luke 24:45; Acts 16:14; John 6:44; 1 Cor. 2:14-16; 2 Cor. 4:4-6”

      quote :

      But even if we did not know that, Matthew accidentally reveals to the reader that his story about the Jewish leadership trying to hush up the resurrection is a lie. The bribe itself shows that the story is a fabrication, because the leadership acts on knowledge that they did not and could not have. At Matthew 28:13, the priests and elders wish the guards to say that the disciples came and stole the body. In writing this, Matthew has just shown us that the story is a lie.

      The leadership cannot at that point know what is going to happen. For all they know, Jesus is going to begin walking around the streets of Jerusalem healing people, preaching, and attracting an even larger following than before. He could show up at any moment and demand that they acknowledge him as a prophet, now that he has fulfilled his predicted resurrection. So, how is it that they bribed the guards to say that the disciples took the body? No, they did not do such a thing, because they could not know that Jesus would never show himself. This story is an invention.

      Moreover, the story shows that Jesus did not show himself publicly. If he had, no such story could have been circulated. The story is built on the premise that Jesus came only to a few here and a few there, privately.

      Matthew’s fabrication has two purposes. First, he wants to draft the Jewish leadership into his argument. He wants to support belief in Jesus from the opposition. To do this, he invents testimony on their behalf. And it is shocking how much Christians and general lovers of Jesus believe whatever the NT tells them about the Jews and the Pharisees. They accept the writings of the NT as if it were the direct testimony of the Pharisees, when it obviously is not. Second, he wants to vilify the Jews, especially the leadership. The Jewish people were not on board with the message of Jesus and his followers, generally speaking. This had to be explained, inasmuch as Jesus is supposed to be their Messiah. So, the Jews become the villains. And how dastardly they are, according to Matthew. He wants us to believe that the Jewish leadership knew the truth but rejected Jesus anyway. Matthew’s lies would be one of the causes of 2,000 years of Jewish persecution.

      But the story was not true. It could not be, because as I pointed out, the Jewish leaders are acting as if they know Jesus will not show himself. Obviously this story was fabricated much later, after Christians started teaching that Jesus came back from the dead. And Matthew did not account for what would have been the Jewish leadership’s perspective and knowledge. That Matthew lied at the end of the book should have surprised nobody who had read the beginning. But the book, given to the Torah-ignorant gentiles was believed by them, and it caused great damage to the Jewish people. Two thousand years of suffering ensued.

      Clearly, Jesus did not show himself to the Jewish leadership.

      Like

    • quote :
      29 “Fellow Israelites,[d] I may say to you confidently of our ancestor David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Since he was a prophet, he knew that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would put one of his descendants on his throne. 31 Foreseeing this, David[e] spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah,[f] saying,

      ‘He was not abandoned to Hades,
      nor did his flesh experience corruption.’

      32 This Jesus God raised up, and of that all of us are witnesses.

      ///////////////////

      this is a resurrection passage.

      Acts 13:29-30
      When they had carried out all that was written concerning Him, they took Him down from the cross and laid Him in a tomb.

      https://celsus.blog/2018/01/20/bart-ehrman-and-jodi-magness-on-the-burial-of-jesus-and-the-empty-tomb/

      Like


    • Paul is saying, if you don’t believe me, go ask them, for most of them are still alive as I write this letter (around 55 AD)”

      who went and checked ? if matthew and mark knew of this , why didn’t they corroborate paul?

      quote :
      All scholars see the testimony of Paul there in 1 Cor. 15:1-9 of “what I received” as the teaching tradition going back to the first few months or years after Jesus resurrection

      then why didn’t the gospel of mark corroborate paul on this if this 500 part was an EARLY tradition ?

      i will ask, why did luke use mark as a source when he had 500 eyewitness testimony? why didn’t he tell us the experience of 40 of these witnesses?
      what happened to the first person testimony of these witnesses?

      do ALL scholars agree that the 500 part goes back to early tradition ?

      Like

    • ” It does not have to be repeated in the gospels for it to be true”

      we are talking about 500 hundred INDEPENDENT witnesses here and not one christian writer bothered preserving their first person testimony, you are not suspicious one bit?

      Like

  8. There are so many other appearances of Jesus to the women and disciples in Matthew 28; Mark 16; Luke 24 and John 20-21 that show that multiple eyewitness testimony together proves the death and resurrection of Jesus; all 600 years before Islam came on the scene and with one verse in the Qur’an (Surah 4:157) tried to undue all of established history on that; and you have no Hadith or early commentary on Surah 4:157.

    Amazing.

    I don’t hold to the idea that Luke is slavishly using Mark. The fact that some things are repeated only shows that they are both using credible eyewitness testimony to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, Al Masih.

    All 27 books of the NT are “God-breathed” and infallible and inerrant.

    Like

    • “Do not be alarmed; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised; he is not here. Look, there is the place they laid him. 7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you.” 8 So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid”

      who told mark that the women didn’t tell anyone ? what happens to the joy of the women, didn’t that MAKE them report in matthews version? mark leaves out the joy because he was waiting for matthew to change his story?

      why does MARK NEVER HAVE 14:28 FULFILLED? WHY DID HE NOT CORROBORATE PAUL ?

      what we have here is an unknown telling unknown women what to report, the women don’t report because they were over taken by fear.

      why do you say “credible” YOU don’t even know who is who in the nt. what is the credibility of peter? or mary? or andrew?

      what happen to the first person testimony of the 500. you telling me 500 people had FIRST hand experience and now we have nothing from these 500. why did the first hand testimony from the 500 not worth preserving ?

      Like

    • HERE IS testimony from matthew that people doubted jesus was crucified :

      16 Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. 17 When they saw him….. but some doubted.

      choose :

      1. they didn’t think it was jesus
      2. they didn’t think it was crucified
      3.they were drunk
      4.they were confused
      5.the jewish holy ghost told them that the appearance is of shape shifting devil and one should not worship random man appearing on mountain and claiming to be yhwh

      ” that show that multiple eyewitness testimony together proves the death and resurrection of Jesus”

      but these are ALL PRIVATE experiences, why wasn’t the public experience worth preserving?

      Like

    • They did not doubt that Jesus was crucified; obviously some of them were struggling with the amazing miracle of the resurrection from the dead. There was no doubt that He was crucified and dead.

      But the doubts were later gone; Acts 2 – and the whole book and church history they were bold and confident about the resurrection.

      Even Yusuf Ali’s notes in the Qur’an produced by Saudi Arabia admits that the disciples of Jesus became the dominant and manifest ones who conquered the Roman Empire by love and truth, for over 300 years. see his comments on Surah 3:55 and 61:14.

      Like

    • they became dominant ? the same cowards who left their teacher to get mauled by romans? the same cowards who witnessed all the amazing miracles and ran off? the same cowards who took false oath to save their behind ?

      “They did not doubt that Jesus was crucified; obviously some of them were struggling with the amazing miracle of the resurrection…”

      but maybe there was no “miracle of resurrection”
      maybe jesus was saved and explained through scripture how isaiah and psalm predicted that the messiah would be saved ?

      “….from the dead. There was no doubt that He was crucified and dead.”

      but how did the ones who DOUBTED know this ? none of the pals of jesus WITNESSED crucifixion, mark says that they ALL fled. so the doubt needs further investigation.

      Like

    • “. There was no doubt that He was crucified and dead.”

      “Then all his disciples deserted him and ran away.”

      some 70 miles away :

      “When they saw him…. but some doubted.”

      Like

    • “all 600 years before Islam came on the scene and with one verse in the Qur’an (Surah 4:157) tried to undue all of established history on that”

      history full of doubt, conjecture, lies, forgery and no FIRST person testimony.

      why didn’t christianity PRESERVE THE FIRST PERSON TESTIMONY OF AT LEAST 50 FROM THE 500 PEOPLE ?

      you wouldn’t need peters doubts any more or the DOUBTS of the some from the 11, you wouldn’t even need matthew to have the romans spread lies because 500 witnessing would have trumped the jewish ability to spread the lies of stolen body.

      ALL of jerusalem would have had to create new responses because of all this witnessing, you would not find the stuff in the gospels if there were actual 500 witnesses.

      Like

  9. 36 Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.”

    37 Therefore Pilate said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.”

    38 Pilate *said to Him, “What is truth?”

    John 18:36-38

    John 14:6 – Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through Me.”

    John 17:17 – Jesus said, “Your Word is Truth; sanctify them in the Truth”

    All the NT testifies to Truth.

    Like

  10. “but how did the ones who DOUBTED know this ? none of the pals of jesus WITNESSED crucifixion, mark says that they ALL fled. so the doubt needs further investigation.”

    John 19 v 25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. 26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! 27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.

    Like

    • “40 Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joseph,[d] and Salome.”

      So were they standing by the cross or were they watching from a distance? Your gospels accounts are contradictory.

      Like

    • quote :
      So were they standing by the cross or were they watching from a distance? Your gospels accounts are contradictory.

      john had to close the distance .

      think about it. mark creates a distance and thinks thats all his audience needs to hear.
      matthew does not close the distance either, he also thinks that mark is right and that the women were observing from a distance

      mark has all of them flee from the tomb and say NOTHING to anyone, mark seems to be happy that his audience is hearing this, he is not closing the distance and he is not saying that he got his info from the women, he explicitly says they told no one that they were WATCHING from a distance.

      QUOTE :
      John, the last Gospel written, bursts this mold open. The women are no longer watching the crucifixion ‘at a distance’ as in Mark and Matthew, but ‘they were standing by the cross of Jesus,’ and now there is also at least one man with them. This is a necessary redaction, since John has two men race each other to the tomb once Mary Magdalene tells the disciples it is empty, and they couldn’t run there unless they knew where it was, and they couldn’t know unless they had attended the crucifixion, which John says they did.

      ///////////////////////

      that’s exactly what you would expect when one would have problems with the earlier accounts “close the distance” CUT out the doubts
      answer your audiences concerns

      Like

  11. “ALL of jerusalem would have had to create new responses because of all this witnessing, you would not find the stuff in the gospels if there were actual 500 witnesses.”

    But nobody knew what response God wanted until the gospel was preached. So nobody could demand a response until the gospel was given with power.

    Like

  12. “why didn’t christianity PRESERVE THE FIRST PERSON TESTIMONY OF AT LEAST 50 FROM THE 500 PEOPLE ? ”

    Why do you demand more witnesses than your Sharia does?

    How many eye witnesses do you demand for Gabriel giving Mohammed the Quran you hypocrite?

    Like

    • His point is why are none of the testimonies of these alleged “500 witnesses” preserved. What’s the point of even mentioning them if they cannot be verified? We already know that the “testimonies” of the gospels are invalid because of all the contradictions. So the next best thing would have been to preserve the testimonies of the 500 witnesses. But alas, we have none.

      Your gospels require at least 2 witnesses for every matter to be established. How many witnesses were there for Peter’s vision of the table from heaven? Only one: Peter. So this alleged “vision” which made it permissible all types of food, even the “unclean” ones, is based on a vague testimony made not by Peter but by the author of Acts. So, not only do you not have the minimum of 2 witnesses, even the one witness is mentioned through a third party source (the book of Acts). In any case, it violates your gospels.

      Liked by 2 people

    • “Why do you demand more witnesses than your Sharia does?”

      moron, if there were resurrections going on in 7th century arabia and tombs being found empty, i would have also demanded more witnesses, wouldn’t you ?

      you might enjoy this discussion, elvis preseley has better evidence for his appearances than jesus

      https://celsus.blog/2018/01/20/bart-ehrman-and-jodi-magness-on-the-burial-of-jesus-and-the-empty-tomb/comment-page-1/#comment-8251

      Like

    • Those people don’t even use their brains!

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Inspiration needs no “verification” and “verification”, whatever you mean by that, is not proof of what is supposed to be verifying.

    You’re welcome to attempt to prove that verification proves anything.

    “Your gospels require at least 2 witnesses for every matter to be established. How many witnesses were there for Peter’s vision of the table from heaven? Only one: Peter.”

    God is free, his giving of visions is not subject to any law. Silly to think so is it not?

    ““40 Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joseph,[d] and Salome.”

    It says SOME women were watching from afar, not ALL.

    “mark has all of them flee from the tomb and say NOTHING to anyone,”

    I thought they told the disciples.

    “quote :
    So were they standing by the cross or were they watching from a distance? Your gospels accounts are contradictory.”

    I’m sure they could all walk.

    Like

    • LOL, typical Christian response. It was your god who said to rely on 2 witnesses, did he not? Why then did your god make such a radical change in the dietary laws and yet only provide 1 witness through a third party source? It seems your god can’t even stay consistent.

      “You’re welcome to attempt to prove that verification proves anything.”

      Oh boy, Christian logic rears its ugly head again. Since you don’t seem to think that verification proves anything, I guess it is not surprising that you are relying on contradictory gospels and hearsay.

      I suppose when police officers interview witnesses to a crime, they are not actually proving anything, even if the witnesses provide similar details independently.

      I have said before and I will say it again: Christianity is an irrational religion.

      “It says SOME women were watching from afar, not ALL.”

      LOL, yes and yet John says that Mary Magdalene and Mary were standing near the cross with John! Hence the contradiction! The “some” women of Mark are the same women in John. But they can’t be watching from a distance and yet also be at the cross, can they?

      Liked by 1 person

  14. “moron, if there were resurrections going on in 7th century arabia and tombs being found empty, i would have also demanded more witnesses, wouldn’t you ?”

    Would you charge an entry fee as well?

    Paul gave you 500, how many more do you want?

    Like

    • ““40 Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joseph,[d] and Salome.”

      It says SOME women were watching from afar, not ALL.

      ////////////

      AND where did mark LEAVE EVEN ONE hint that OTHER women were NEAR the cross chatting to your flesh god ?

      why would he identify women from “afar” but not leave even ONE hint to women who were NEAR the cross?

      like i said, mark thinks thats ALL his audience NEEDS to know , but why ?

      why do they NEED TO KNOW just that ? why? what use is it to TELL about women watching from a DISTANCE ?

      mark even IDENTIFIES who these women are, he couldn’t have known this because he says RIGHT at that end that the WOMEN said nothing to anyone

      Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices,

      how did mark learn of the story about who was WATCHING from afar, when he said the WOMEN said NOTHING TO anyone ?

      “mark has all of them flee from the tomb and say NOTHING to anyone,”

      “I thought they told the disciples.”

      mark SAID “they said NOTHING to ANYONE…”

      tell the TRUTH, had you have mark as your “gospel”
      WHERE would you be able to derive from it that the women TOLD the disciples?

      Like

    • “Paul gave you 500, how many more do you want?”

      and kenya gave you 6000

      QUOTE :
      There was a report from Kenya in 1988 that Christ was seen by 6,000:
      https://web.archive.org/web
      They’re still talking about it. The movement is Christianity BTW. At least it was 6,000 Christians who were calling him “Jesus.” Although others later claimed him to be Maitreya, the crowds were calling “Jesus! Jesus! Jesus of Nazareth!”. As it says on the website 6,000 believed they saw Jesus Christ, in broad daylight. They are not the only Christians who have claimed to see Christian figures to the embarrassment of other Christians as I know you are well aware.
      https://web.archive.org/web… was for light relief mostly, but with one serious point which I wondered if anyone would pick up on. That is the gullibility of crowds. 6,000 puts 500 to shame – and see how easily they believed this was Jesus. First hand witnesses even testified with multiple attestations and photographs which is far more impressive than what 1 Cor. 15:6 gives us.

      Liked by 1 person

    • But who were they?! What did they actually see? If I told you that I saw Bigfoot and that 500 other people also saw it, would you simply accept that? Come on Ignoramus, be honest for once!

      Like

    • “Paul gave you 500, how many more do you want?”

      i find it strange that NOT ONE crosstian LEFT FIRST HAND TESTIMONY as to what he saw, touched , smelt , kissed, poked, etc etc

      none of this makes any sense. this is suppose to be the reason why you are SAVED from hell, but EVERY crosstian left it to some PERSECUTOR to tell you “hey, there were 500….”

      ?

      what is this? what were these 500 doing while the jews , with the help of romans were spreading lies about stolen body? HOW CONVINCED were these 500 that the jinn they saw was REALLY jesus ? none of these questions can be answered thanks to your pagan religion NOT PRESERVING at least 40 INDEPENDENT TESTIMONIES.

      luke WASTED his time STEALING AND corrupting his sources, but those 500 DO not seem important to him. why ?

      Like

  15. Ken, being dominant or superior from a religious point of view isn’t the same as being superior and dominant in a more secular sense. There are and have been many civilizations and empires who are dominant but are not righteous and hence not superior in a spriritual manner. Doesn’t your own gospels say that “Whoever is the least among you is the greatest”.

    Whoever follows truth and rightousness is superior spiritually and that is the only type of superiority that is worth anything at the day of judgement; not inhereting the Roman empire and spreading corruption and idolatry in the world.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. “@LOL, yes and yet John says that Mary Magdalene and Mary were standing near the cross with John! Hence the contradiction! The “some” women of Mark are the same women in John. But they can’t be watching from a distance and yet also be at the cross, can they?”

    Mary Magdalene changed her position during the crucifixion. It would be a natural thing to do in the situation. They are not riveted to the spot are they? So Mark is giving the intial position of the women, John is giving the situation, in regard to Mary Magdalene at a later point in time. Is life too complicated for you guys, can’t get your brains round the possibilities? Or maybe your bias is blinding you? Maybe some of both uh?

    “AND where did mark LEAVE EVEN ONE hint that OTHER women were NEAR the cross chatting to your flesh god ? ”

    Why should reports always be duplicated and replicated by each of the evangelists?

    ““mark has all of them flee from the tomb and say NOTHING to anyone,”
    “I thought they told the disciples.”
    mark SAID “they said NOTHING to ANYONE…”
    tell the TRUTH, had you have mark as your “gospel”
    WHERE would you be able to derive from it that the women TOLD the disciples?”

    That holds true until they reach the disciples. So Mark is telling they did not tell anyone on the way.

    Like

    • its not about truth is it? Its just about what gospel you can invent to fix the problem .
      the women run away from the tomb because the markan version said that FEAR overtook them…why would mark take JOY out of the mix? Why would this writer have them run away with FEAR and say FEAR caused them to RUN away like the COWARDICE disciples RAN away ? in mark, FEAR is a FAITH killer and lo and behold FEAR was the LAST THING MARK ATTRIBUTED TO the women

      if mark knew that the story was taken to PETER and that the women DID speak to jesus AS they ran off,mark then they DID speak to SOMEONE as they were going.

      Like

    • “Until they REACH….”

      but read matthews text, before they reach disciples, matthew has them crash into jesus. this mean “as they WERE GOING…..”
      now lets be honest here, mark KNOWS that women REACHED jesus himself as they were GOING, but mark left it out? mark KNEW they spoke to SOMEONE but said that they WENT with fear and SAID NOTHING to anyone ?

      and why is it that WHENEVER mark USES EXCEPTION he always identies WHAT the exception is ?

      take nothing with you EXCEPT

      no one is good EXCEPT

      they said nothing to anyone EXCEPT…..

      why do you crosstians abuse markan writing style ?

      Like

    • “Mary Magdalene changed her position during the crucifixion. It would be a natural thing to do in the situation. ”

      do you know that you will go to hell if you distort your gospels?

      adela y collins translation
      ” WOMEN observing from a DISTANCE”

      other examples ” seeing in the DISTANCE a fig tree”

      Goodacre (2004) writes “The note that they were watching [greek deleted] echoes the wording of Psalm 38.11 LXX.” (38:11 says: “those who were close to me stood from a distance” (Brown 1994, p1158))

      ehrman
      Mark’s Jesus does not quote the end that is a word of comfort; he quotes the beginning which is a word of despair. Because for Mark, Jesus is in despair. He has been betrayed and denied; his followers have not stood up for him but have fled; he has been ridiculed by the Jewish authorities, the Roman soldiers, people passing by the cross; an even by both criminals. In the end he dies feeling forsaken of God.

      it is not that mark “changed her position ” it is christians ABUSING marks texts and forcing him to say what he is not saying

      if FEAR MIXED with joy, mark would have said that they REPORTED to the 11

      he would not add the ADDITIONAL words “AND THEY SAID NOTHING to ANYONE”

      8 So they left the tomb quickly with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples.

      vs

      8 So they left the tomb quickly with fear and great joy
      They said nothing to anyone

      vs

      So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid

      terror , amazement , AFRAID all contributes to silence. “said NOTHING to anyone”

      Like

    • ” I showed that the Greek text used “kai idou” to introduce the earthquake and that this expression was consistently used to introduce a new event in a narrative.”

      so KAI IDOU INTRODUCES NEW INFORMATION

      matthew has the women run and KAI IDOU

      they SPOKE TO some one

      mark has the women depart with terror and amazement AND THEY spoke to no one :

      So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid

      MAtthew:

      8 So they left the tomb quickly with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9 Suddenly Jesus met them and said

      clearly matthew is not happy with his source. notice the TWO “ands” in mark?

      mark doesnt say GREAT joy mark says terror and amazement seized them.

      Original Word: ἔκστασις, εως, ἡ
      Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
      Transliteration: ekstasis
      Phonetic Spelling: (ek’-stas-is)
      Short Definition: bewilderment, amazement
      Definition: (properly: distraction or disturbance of mind caused by shock), bewilderment, amazement; a trance.

      sounds like DEVILISH possession

      it caused them to be AFRAID:

      and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid

      phobeó: to put to flight, to terrify, frighten
      Original Word: φοβέομαι
      Part of Speech: Verb
      Transliteration: phobeó
      Phonetic Spelling: (fob-eh’-o)
      Short Definition: I fear, am terrified
      Definition: I fear, dread, reverence, am afraid, terrified.

      IN OTHER WORDS the women SHIT themselves and SOUGHT SAFETY IN FLIGHT!

      Like

    • ” So Mark is telling they did not tell anyone on the way.”

      NO, you are lying for jesus. they met jesus on the way. they spoke to someone . in johns version, the woman SPEAKS to SOMEONE.

      they said SOMETHING TO SOMEONE. mark says they SAID NOTHING TO anyone.

      Like

    • “Mary Magdalene changed her position during the crucifixion. It would be a natural thing to do in the situation. They are not riveted to the spot are they? So Mark is giving the intial position of the women, John is giving the situation, in regard to Mary Magdalene at a later point in time. Is life too complicated for you guys, can’t get your brains round the possibilities? Or maybe your bias is blinding you? Maybe some of both uh?”

      The bias is clearly on your part, because you cannot bring yourself around to admit when there is a contradiction. Instead, you look for silly excuses which you probably know in the back of your mind don’t really make much sense.

      Mark 15 says that the women watched from a distance. It says this after Jesus has already died. In other words, Mark says that they watched the whole crucifixion from a distance. But along come John who says that the women were standing near the cross the whole time! The contradiction lies in the fact that Mark only mentions the women after the crucifixion is already over and Jesus has died. If he had said that at the beginning of the crucifixion, then you could argue that it is not a contradiction and you could argue that they moved closer during the crucifixion so as to be within talking distance to Jesus.

      Liked by 1 person

    • matthew :
      55 Many women were there, watching from a distance. They had followed Jesus from Galilee to care for his needs. 56 Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph,[f] and the mother of Zebedee’s sons.

      luke :
      49 But all his acquaintances, including the women who had followed him from Galilee, stood at a distance, watching these things

      all the synoptic seem to agree that the females were watching from a distance.

      Liked by 1 person

  17. “So Mark is giving the intial position of the women, John is giving the situation, in regard to Mary Magdalene at a later point in time. Is life too complicated for you guys, can’t get your brains round the possibilities? ”

    its not about possibilities, it is about what is probable.

    john is the last written gospel
    the author must be aware that his sources have ALL the women at a distance, so what does he do? you tell me.

    Like

  18. It doesn’t matter if one million women watched the crucifixion just below the feet of whoever was hanging there, because we only have four testimonies and they contradict each other and each one is conveying one particular belief perspective (i.e not necessarily the truth but a particular belief).

    The gospels are unreliable period! The fruit of unreliable scripture is confusion.

    “They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.”

    What may this assumption be? hmmmmmm. UNRELIABLE and CONTRADICTORY scripture!

    Liked by 1 person

  19. By the way brothers in Islam may Allah reward you for all the dawah you’re doing on this site! Many of you write tirelessly for the purpose of dawah!

    I thought that since it’s ramadan I would allow myself to be a bit sentimental and affectionate.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. “john is the last written gospel
    the author must be aware that his sources have ALL the women at a distance, so what does he do? you tell me.”

    More unproven assumptions.

    John the eyewitness apostle, who does not need sources, makes a statement, from his own experience, about the women near the cross.

    This statement refers to a different point in time ref Mary Magdalena vis a vis Marks statement.

    So the two accounts are complementary, not contradictory.

    Like

    • Lol, talk about “unproven assertions”. What’s wrong madman, you sound…mad. Hahahaha…

      Face it. There is no evidence for your views. Its just hearsay, juse like any myth. The gospel was not written by any “eyewitness”. In fact, neither were the Synoptics. They were all written by third parties who were not present at the event; hence the contradictions. It’s called myth-making.

      Liked by 1 person

    • “John the eyewitness apostle, who does not need sources, makes a statement, from his own experience, about the women near the cross.”

      49 But all his acquaintances, including the women who had followed him from Galilee, stood at a distance, watching these things

      what are “these things ” ?
      from what point are they “watching these things” ?

      why did the synoptics ignore this “john the eyewitness apostle” ? i say “ignore” just based on ASSUMPTION because i have no evidence they even KNEW “beloved desciple ” who was jesus’ favourite.

      in the pagan world of crosstianity

      “me, my children and wife were near the explosion”

      is the same as “me, my wife and children watched the explosion from a distance”

      Like

    • “This statement refers to a different point in time ref Mary Magdalena vis a vis Marks statement.”

      where do you derive your “different point in time” when the text says
      “…. stood at a distance, watching these things”

      WHO is lying for jesus ? who is telling the TRUTH and nothing BUT the truth?

      But all those who knew him, including the women who had followed him from Galilee, stood at a distance, watching these things.

      jesus refers to his mother as “woman”

      the women were watching these things ?

      how did MARk KNOW what the women said when he said that they FLED (literally taking SAFETY in flight ) and SAID NOTHING TO anyone (they were AFRAID to SPEAK ) ?

      NAME to us your “chain of transmission”

      Like

  21. But Mary Magdalene could have moved from one group to another during the crucifixion.

    This is why Mark’s eye witness would remember her with the group that stood at some distance and John would remember her in his group.

    “and SAID NOTHING TO anyone (they were AFRAID to SPEAK ) ?” until they reached the group of disciples.

    A chain of transmission just associates a name with a text. It doesn’t actually verify the truth of that text.

    Like

    • mark said they FLED the tomb, the greek word means to seek safety in flight…

      Where did they seek safety?

      Then

      “and they said nothing to ANYONE…” is additional piece of information
      the fleeing was COMPLETED and they SAID NOTHING to anyone for they were AFRAID.

      here is the greek:

      To NONE NOTHING THEY SPOKE…..

      Like

  22. “But Mary Magdalene could have moved from one group to another during the crucifixion.

    This is why Mark’s eye witness would remember her with the group that stood at some distance and John would remember her in his group.”

    Except that Mark says she was standing at a distance and watched the entire crucifixion and also Jesus’ death from that area. John says she was standing near the cross the whole time and heard Jesus speak. They both cannot be true, regardless of your excuses.

    Like

  23. “Except that Mark says she was standing at a distance and watched the entire crucifixion and also Jesus’ death from that area. John says she was standing near the cross the whole time and heard Jesus speak.”

    No, these are your add-ons.

    Like

  24. mark says that the women who fled from the tomb were gripped by some kind of trance . Early in the morning , who other than cats,dogs street sleepers were hanging about ? Oh wait, marks informant apostle peter said that the women ran into jesus, but peter the truth teller said “to no one , NOTHING they spoke….

    what mark means is that the women REALLY REALLY kept their mouth closed even when they were surrounded by people. Thats the natural reading.

    “They said NOTHING TO NO ONE ” really means to none they relayed the “good news”

    Like

  25. If, for arguments sake, MM watched the crucifixion for a total of 4 hours, during which she spent the first 3 hours in Mark’s group and the last hour in Johns group there is no contradiction between the two gospels. Both statements are true.

    Like

    • Your argument makes no sense because Mark says that the women watched the whole sequence of events from a distance, up to and including Jesus’ death. You can play these games all you want, but the contradiction remains.

      Like

  26. “Mark says that the women watched the whole sequence of events from a distance, up to and including Jesus’ death. ”

    Where?

    Like

    • Lol, oh brother! Are you being willfully dense? We have already been through this! After stating that Jesus died, Mark says that the women were watching from a distance. They were not near the cross when Jesus died.

      Grow up and accept the facts for once.

      Like

  27. The text does NOT necessarily imply that every one of those women watched from a distance from the point that Jesus was nailed to the cross to the point that he was taken down.

    Grow up and accept the facts for once.

    Like

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: