Author Topic: RE: Contradictions in the jesus resurrection? (Read 4177 times)

euroclydon · « **on:** June 12, 2012, 10:07:35 PM »

DID YOU MISS ME?

I GUESS NOT!

ATTENTION! THIS IS A RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING:

Are we endeavoring to create an equality between an omission and a negation?

I'm no good with msPaint. How good are you with Statement Analysis, Spreadsheets, and Truth Tables?

Quote

Matthew 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

Factually, by the process of pure Statement Analysis, I can say that Matthew 28:1 affirms “Mary Magdalene” AND “the other Mary”.

P: Mary Magdalene

Q: the other Mary

P ^ Q

But if I declared that Matthew 28:1 contains a negation of Salome, there would be no text in that verse with which to make the “conclusion”. It would be an Unvalidated Claim. The same applies to the rest.

Quote

Mark 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

P: Mary Magdalene

Q: “Mary the mother of James” (If this is NOT “the other Mary”, then another variable can be assigned. It's not going to make any difference.)

R: Salome

P ^ Q ^ R

Quote

Luke 24:10 It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.

P: Mary Magdalene

Q: “Mary the mother of James”

S: Joanna

T: and other women

P ^ Q ^ S ^ T

Quote

John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

P: Mary Magdalene

Therefore, working with the assumption that all Scripture is true, we have:

P ^ Q ^ R ^ S ^ T

This is a series of Logical Conjunctions, and generates the following Truth Table:

P
Mary Q T
Magdalene the other R S And other P ^ Q P ^ Q ^ R P ^ Q ^ S ^ T
John 20:1 Mary Salome Joanna women Matt 28:1 Mar 16:1 Luk 24:10 P ^ Q ^ R ^ S ^ T
TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE VALID
TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE
TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE FALSE
FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE
FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE     FALSE

If Matt 28:1 were contrary, it would contain a negation of R ^ S ^ T, which it does NOT.

If Mark 16:1 were contrary, it would contain a negation of S ^ T, which it does NOT.

If Luke 24:10 were contrary, it would contain a negation of R, which it does NOT.

If John 20:1 were contrary, it would contain a negation of Q ^ R ^ S ^ T, which it does NOT.

euroclydon · « **Reply #1 on:** June 12, 2012, 10:23:57 PM »

"One suggestion would be to do it in crayon to place it on their emotional/intellectual level."

Quote

Matthew 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

Quote

Mark 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

No variable for "came unto" in Matt 28:1, but “came to see”. Unlike Variables. INVALID COMPLAINT.

Quote

John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

A: “early”

B: “yet dark.”

IF it was “early” (A), THEN it was “yet dark”. (B) John 20:1

Working with the assumption that all Scripture is good "for instruction" (II Timothy 3:16):

Quote

Judges 9:33 And it shall be, in the morning, about the sunrise, you shall rise early and charge against the city. And, behold, he and the people with him will come out to you; and you shall do to him as you find your hand able to do .

C: “in the morning, about sunrise”

A: “early”

IF it was “in the morning, about sunrise” (C), THEN it was “early”. (A) Judges 9:33

IF it was “early” (A), THEN “it was yet dark”. (B) John 20:1

THEREFORE, IF it was “in the morning, about sunrise” (C), THEN it was “yet dark” (B).

C -> A
A -> B
Therefore, C -> B

VALID REASONING.

JeffPT · « **Reply #2 on:** June 12, 2012, 10:51:16 PM »

This is where the problem is.

Quote from: euroclydon on June 12, 2012, 10:07:35 PM

Therefore, working with the assumption that all Scripture is true, we have:

None of that stuff you posted matters if scripture isn't true. You're currently posting on a website full of people who do not accept scripture as true. Do you have any proof that scripture is true? I'd be interested in hearing that, because I've never heard it. The whole thing is pretty worthless otherwise. I skimmed it to see if you put any proof in there that scripture is true, but I didn't see any.

What I'd like to know is why you just don't say something simple like... "Just because we have different accounts of who arrived at the tomb and what time of day it was, doesn't mean they were all contradictory... It could simply have meant that a person or two was left out in each gospel." That's the core of your argument is it not? All that fancy shit is just stupid. You did a lot of typing to get a point across that you could have written one line to explain.

The moral of the story, however, is that by your reasoning, not a single one of the gospel accounts actually have it correct as to who came to the tomb. You're making up your own gospel account taking all of them into consideration. You are saying that all 5 of those players were at the tomb, but if we look to the author of Matthew to know about who came to the tomb, the answer he gives is wrong. If we ask the author of Mark, the answer he gives is wrong. If we ask the author of Luke, the answer is wrong. If we ask the author of John, his answer is also wrong. Are you forgetting that all 4 of those books were written by different people, at different time periods, all with different ideas about who Jesus was and what he was doing? It makes a lot more sense as to why some people were said to be at the tomb and some were not if you look at it in that context.

It still doesn't matter. The whole story is a myth. Even if there was an empty tomb, the most reasonable conclusion is that somebody moved the fucking body. The most ridiculous conclusion is to say that he was resurrected.

BaalServant · « **Reply #3 on:** June 13, 2012, 01:10:59 AM »

I see you've chosen to ignore the actual contradictions between the accounts, euroclydon.

Pretending that details were left out is one thing, but ignoring the details that can't coincide is quite another.

Grimm · « **Reply #4 on:** June 13, 2012, 11:05:39 AM »

... and JeffPT is right:

A truth table is a lovely device.. that's completely worthless if you're using it to prove a premise that is essentially fundamentally flawed. No, I don't mean scripture, rather, I mean that the one thing you (and no one else either!) don't get to do is to create a new gospel narrative by smashing together the existing bible narratives.

In other words, you have no reason to believe that any of the individual gospel narratives are incomplete, and thus you are using them to support your preexisting conclusion.

In doing so, you commit the fallacy of the single cause, cherry picking, and a dash of special pleading for good measure.

You assume that the gospels are true, ergo if they are true, then the story must include all of the visitors to the tomb in some combination at the times listed. However, that very assumption is the fallacy of the single cause, the assumption that there is a simple way to reconcile the gospels because they must be true. It ignores the other possibilities: the authors were lying, the authors had incomplete information, the authors had agendas.. well, the list goes on. Until these have been eliminated, then you cannot simply assume a truth that would allow the resolution you propose.

Additionally, you have cherrypicked data, taking on only the facts that support your argument without dealing with the issues that do not.

Finally, you give the bible authority without substantial cause, leading you to special pleading: the Koran flat out says your bible is a lie, yet you ascribe it no particular value.

Now, we are just playing the apologetic game, so there's that - the last is me being nitpicky. However, this idea of 'smashing all the gospels together to get a single narrative' is a relatively modern invention, used as an apologetic to try to fix inconsistencies between the gospels. It is inherently flawed by the assumption that the Gospels were roughly equivalent in both timing and authorship; they are not.

Get the point?

Emily · « **Reply #5 on:** June 13, 2012, 09:45:08 PM »

I think your way of winning an argument is to bore your opponent into submission.

sun_king · « **Reply #6 on:** June 13, 2012, 10:08:09 PM »

Quote from: Emily on June 13, 2012, 09:45:08 PM

I think your way of winning an argument is to bore your opponent into submission.

As far as I am concerned, he is winning.

euroclydon · « **Reply #7 on:** June 13, 2012, 11:38:15 PM »

Quote

IF it was “in the morning, about the sunrise” (C), THEN it was “early”. (A) Judges 9:33.

IF it was “early” (A), THEN “it was yet dark”. (B) John 20:1.

THEREFORE, IF it was “in the morning, about the sunrise” (C), THEN it was “yet dark” (B).

C ? A
A ? B
Therefore, C ? B

In fact, it was “very early in the morning, ...at the rising of the sun.” Mark 16:2.

“very early in the morning” Luke 24:1.

Continued...

“The sarcasm makes the point...”

Matthew 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

L: "the end of the sabbath"

M: "the first day of the week"

IF it was "the end of the sabbath" (L), THEN it was "the first day of the week". (M)

L -> M

Mark 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

Mark 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

L: "the sabbath was past"

M: "the first day of the week"

IF "the sabbath was past" (L) THEN it was "the first day of the week". (M)

L -> M

Luke 24:1 Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.

M: "the first day of the week"

John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

M: "The first day of the week"

(M)
Matt 28:-1
L Mark 16-1
Matt 28:1- Luke 24:1
Mark 16:1- John 20:1- L ? M
TRUE     TRUE     TRUE     VALID
TRUE        FALSE     FALSE     INVALID
FALSE     TRUE     TRUE     VALID
FALSE     FALSE     TRUE     VALID

Line 2 of the Truth Table for L ? M demonstrates that only Denying the Consequent (M), “the first day of the week”, will invalidate the statements.

But “the first day of the week” is affirmed in each Gospel.

This means that we have:

The visit of the
women at the
close of the
weekly
Sabbath, on
"the first day
of the week".

Matthew 28:1

Mark 16:1-2

Luke 24:1

John 20:1-

Mark 16:3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?

AA: "they said" (speaking)

A question is not a statement.

Matthew 28:2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: FOR the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.

XX: FOR... the stone was "rolled back"

YY: "there was a great earthquake"

IF the stone was "rolled back" (XX), THEN "there was a great earthquake" (YY)

Matthew 28:3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:

Matthew 28:4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.

Matthew 28:3-4 have no bearing on the women.

Mark 16:4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.

BB: "they looked" (observing)

XX: "the stone was rolled away"

Luke 24:2 And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.

BB: "they found" (observing)

XX: "the stone rolled away"

John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

BB: "and seeth" (observing)

XX: "the stone taken "away"

IF "they looked" (BB), THEN the stone was "rolled away". (XX)

IF the stone was "rolled back" (XX), THEN "there was a great earthquake" (YY)

THEREFORE, IF "they looked" (BB), THEN "there was a great earthquake" (YY).

BB -> XX
XX -> YY
Therefore, BB -> YY

If the rolling back of the stone and the earthquake caused the women to look (find, see), then we have:

The visit of the women at the close of the weekly Sabbath, on "the first day of the week".	Matthew 28:1	Mark 16:1-2	Luke 24:1	John 20:1-
"Who shall roll us away the stone?"		Mark 16:3
The stone rolled away.	Matthew 28:2-4
They observe the stone rolled away.		Mark 16:4-5	Luke 24:2	John 20:-1.

sun_king · « **Reply #8 on:** June 14, 2012, 01:33:47 AM »

Euroclydon, how about this?

EXO 33:20 And he said Thou canst not see my face for there shall no man see me and live (XX)
EXO 33:10 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face as a man speaketh unto his friend (YY)
Observation: Moses lived on (ZZ)

So:

IF XX and YY then ZZ is FALSE -> Moses is the first zombie, not JC.

VALID Reasoning

BaalServant · « **Reply #9 on:** June 14, 2012, 05:05:44 AM »

Quote from: BaalServant on June 13, 2012, 01:10:59 AM

I see you've chosen to ignore the actual contradictions between the accounts, euroclydon.

Pretending that details were left out is one thing, but ignoring the details that can't coincide is quite another.

Perhaps you were too busy obfuscating to notice this post, euroclydon.

I'm well aware that you can assume that details were left out from account to account, but when details that are present contradict each other, it's obvious that the truth isn't being told.

If you're having trouble finding any contradictions, I'll point one out to you.

Who was seen at the tomb?

Was it an angel of the lord that descended and sat upon the giant stone?

Was it a man inside the tomb?

Was it two glowing men inside the tomb?

Was there no one at the tomb?

euroclydon · « **Reply #10 on:** June 14, 2012, 06:37:07 AM »

SORRY!

I meant to say that if the Antecedent is tue BUT the Consequent is false then the statements are invalid

(AA) Mark 16:4- Luke 24:2- John 20:-1-	(BB) Mark 16-4 Luke 24:-2 John 20:-1	AA -> BB
TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	VALID
TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	INVALID
FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	VALID
FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	VALID

The close of the weekly Sabbath "the first day of the week".	Matt 28:1	Mar 16:1-2	Luk 24:1	Joh 20:1-

"Who shall roll us away the stone?"		Mar 16:3

The stone rolled away.	Matt 28:2-4

They find the stone rolled away.		Mar 16:4, 5	Luk 24:2	Joh 20:-1

Transferring spreadsheets to the forum format was problematic but I think I've got a System down.

JeffPT · « **Reply #11 on:** June 14, 2012, 10:23:10 AM »

Quote from: euroclydon on June 14, 2012, 06:37:07 AM

Transferring spreadsheets to the forum format was problematic but I think I've got a System down.

Has there ever been a better reason to ban someone than this?

pianodwarf · « **Reply #12 on:** June 14, 2012, 10:37:37 AM »

Quote from: JeffPT on June 14, 2012, 10:23:10 AM

Quote from: euroclydon on June 14, 2012, 06:37:07 AM
Transferring spreadsheets to the forum format was problematic but I think I've got a System down.

Has there ever been a better reason to ban someone than this?

While I can understand why the posting style might be annoying to some, no, it is not ban-worthy. (Not certain whether this needs to be made clear or not, so I'm erring on the side of caution.

euroclydon · « **Reply #13 on:** June 14, 2012, 11:06:00 AM »

FACT: verse numbers were added later by the trtanslators, and do not necessarily reflect where a subject or object begins or ends.

"...it is knowledge that the Buybull was written by ignorant goat herders that had no idea how the world works."

THEORY:

A: "There was only ONE commission."

Luke 24:33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,

Luke 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

B: they were in Jerusalem.

Matt 28:16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.

Matt 28: 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Matt 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

~B: they were in Galilee

IF "there was only on commission" (A), THEN they were in Jerusalem. (B) Luke 24:33, 47.

They were in Galilee (~B) Matt 28:16-20.

THEREFORE, there was NOT "only ONE commission". (~A)

A -> B
~B
THEREFORE, ~A

Mark 16:12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.

Luke 24:13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.

D: the Lord appears unto "two of them"

Luke 24:36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

E: He "stood in the midst" of them (the others).

IF the Lord appears unto "two of them" (D), THEN it was before He "stood in the midst" of them. (E) Mark 16:12. Luke 24:13, 36.

John 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

E: He "stood in the midst" of them.

Johm 20: 26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.

F: He "stood in the midst" of them "after eight days".

IF the Lord "stood in the midst" of them (E), THEN it was before He "stood in the midst" of them "after eight days." (F) John 20:19, 36

THEREFORE, IF the Lord appears unto "two of them" (D), THEN it was before He "stood in the midst" of them after eight days. (F)

D -> E
E -> F
THEREFORE, D -> F

Therefore we have:

the Lord appears unto "two"		(D) Mark 16:12	(D) Luke 24:13-32

Their return to the eleven.		Mark 16:13	Luke 24:33-35

The first appearance of the Lord to the eleven.			(E) Luke 24:36-44	(E) John 20:19 - 23

The FIRST COMMISSION.			(A) Luke 24:45-49

The second appearance to the eleven (and Thomas).		Mark 16:14		(F) John 20:24 - 29
The SECOND COMMISSION.		Mark 16:15-18
(Parenthetic statement by the Evangelist).				(John 20:30, 31)

Departure of the eleven into Galilee.	(~B)Matt 28:16-18

The THIRD COMMISSION.	(~A) Matt 28:19, 20

mrbiscoop · « **Reply #14 on:** June 14, 2012, 01:29:21 PM »

Hey euro. at least you are consistent.

BaalServant · « **Reply #15 on:** June 14, 2012, 05:27:17 PM »

Quote from: pianodwarf on June 14, 2012, 10:37:37 AM

While I can understand why the posting style might be annoying to some, no, it is not ban-worthy. (Not certain whether this needs to be made clear or not, so I'm erring on the side of caution.

I wouldn't necessarily want to see them banned, but it would be nice if they'd address the contradictions that can't be explained away by assuming the discrepancies are only errors of omission.

I say keep them around, as they provide an excellent example of what lengths the religious will go to to avoid actually confronting the meat of the discussion.

Emily · « **Reply #16 on:** June 14, 2012, 06:08:58 PM »

In Matthew Chapter 28 is says that "He is going before you in Galilee; therefor you will see him... And as they went out to tell His disciples, behold, Jesus met them... and said, "Do not be afraid. God and tell My brethren to go to Galilee""(Matt 28:7-10), and then further in that chapter, while in Galilee, Jesus gives his disciples the 'Great Commission': "...Go therefor and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe..." (Matt 28:18-20). These verses are echoed in the book of Mark, Chapter 16:12-18, almost word for word.

This is also the first time that anyone had seen Jesus since his death, according to Matthew and Luke, and according to my bible[1] since both chapters begin with the header 'He Is Risen'.

In Luke Jesus first appears in a different place, perhaps in Emmaus, which is 7 miles from Jerusalem (Luke 24:13). The disciples returned to Jerusalem (Luke 24:33) Jesus appeared to his disciples, who appeared 'terrified, and frightened, and supposing they had seen a spirit' (Luke 24:37).

When Jesus appeared in front of his disciples in Matthew and began giving the commission '..some doubted[2]. In Mark, when Jesus appeared he 'Rebuked their unbelief, and hardness of heart'(Mark 16:14).

Now, in Luke they were terrified, in Matthew and Mark some doubted what they had seen. If they is more than one commission in two or more different places then why did the disciples appear in some form of doubt or terror. If Jesus did appear to them in two different places to give his disciples two different commissions it makes absolutely no sense for the disciples to show either terror, or doubt in either place.

Even after Jesus' first appearance and commission, according to you, in Luke (and John) why did the disciples doubt Jesus' appearance in the books of Matthew and Mark? They had seen Jesus before. Luke even says that Jesus led them to 'as far as Bethany' So after this first meeting with Jesus, and their first given commission by Jesus the dispels would already at least know how Jesus' post-living body appears to them from the short time they walked with Jesus to Bethany[3].

The disciples' reaction to the newly risen Jesus according to Matthew and Mark doesn't add up. One would think that since the first commission (in Luke when they became believers in his ascension) they wouldn't have any sort of doubt or terror in seeing their Lord, and being given another commission (of you are correct about their being more than one)

IDK: To me it does seem like there is some inconsistency between the appearance of Jesus to his disciples after his death, which would lead me to believe that there is some contradiction between the different accounts, bases solely on the disciples' reactions alone. I highly doubt that the disciples would appear fearful and doubtful no matter which appearance happened first.

If Jesus appeared to them first in Luke they'd know and recognize his figure and Matthew and Luke, and wouldn't doubt they were seeing Jesus in Matthew or Luke, and vice-versa.

And even if they did appear frightened at Jesus' appearance after he rose these guys are supposed to help recruit Jesus' army for the war against Satan. The disciples are a bunch of cowards.

-Emily

1.	Nelson's KJV Study Bible, General Editor Earl D. Radmacher, Th.D
2.	beginning sentence says When they saw him they worshiped him, but...' (Matthew 28:17)
3.	According to my study bible maps Bethany is a city right next to Jerusalem, so it's a couple mile walk

euroclydon · « **Reply #17 on:** June 14, 2012, 06:34:55 PM »

YESSSS!
NO MORE
OB · FUS· CAT· SHUN

P Mary Magdalene John 20:1	Q (the other) Mary the mother Of James	R Salome	S Joanna	T And other Women	P ^ Q Matt 28:1	P ^ Q ^ R Mar 16:1	"P ^ Q ^ S ^ T Luk 24:10"	P ^ Q ^ R ^ S ^ T

TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	VALID
TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE
TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	TRUE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE
FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE	FALSE

That's a simple enough Table.
If I've pulled your underwear over your head, then c'mon!

http://www.moviesoundclips.net/download.php?id=2521&ft=wav

http://www.moviesoundclips.net/download.php?id=2521&ft=mp3

http://www.moviesoundclips.net/download.php?id=2521&ft=ogg

Emily · « **Reply #18 on:** June 14, 2012, 06:39:15 PM »

Begin discussing thing, dude, or else shut up.

Quote from: euroclydon on June 14, 2012, 06:34:55 PM

If I've pulled your underwear over your head, then c'mon!

If you even reach for my panties dude I'll break your fucking neck.

Do you have a point to make, euro, or what. If so, make it; if not GTFO.

Discussing things with you is like playing chess[1] with a pigeon.

1.	EDIT: I originally spelled cheese. ::embarrassed::

euroclydon · « **Reply #19 on:** June 14, 2012, 07:06:59 PM »

An ommission is NOT a negation.

Verse numbers were added by the translators, and can be quite arbitrary.

THEREFORE, IF it was “in the morning, about sunrise” (C1), THEN it was “yet dark” (B1). (Gr. skotia: dimness, obscurity)

Angels are called "men", "even the man Gabriel", Dan 9:21., and the visit is comporable to Yahveh (altered by the Sopherim) and two "men" Gen 18:1-3, 16; 19:10-11.

In fact, it was "very early in the morning" Mark 16:2

"very early in the morning" Luke 24:1

The language of Matt 28:2 suggests that the movement of the rock caused the earthquake, and the rock "was very great." Mark 16:4. The quake would undoubtedly be sufficient to catch their attention:

THEREFORE, IF "they looked" (BB), THEN "there was a great earthquake" (YY).

THEREFORE, there was NOT " only ONE commission". (~A)

THEREFORE, IF the Lord appears unto "two of them" (D), THEN it was before He "stood in the midst" of them after eight days. (F)

	MATTHEW	MARK	LUKE	JOHN
The visit of the women at the close of the weekly Sabbath, on "the first day of the week".	(C1)(B1) 28:1	(C1)(B1) 16:1, 2	(C1)(B1) 24:1	(C1)(B1) 20:1-
"Who shall roll us away the stone?"		16:3
The stone rolled away.	(XX)(YY)28:2-4
They observe the stone rolled away.		(BB)(XX) 16:4, 5	(BB)(XX) 24:2	(BB)(XX) 20:-1
Address of the angel to the women.	28:5 - 7	16:6, 7	24:3 - 7
Departure of the women.	28:8	16:8	24:8, 9
They meet the Lord.	28:9, 10
And tell His disciples, and Peter.		16:9 - 11	24:10, 11	20:2
The report of the watch.	28:11 -15
The visit of Peter and John.			24:12	20:3 - 10
Mary's visit to the sepulchre.				20:11 - 18
The appearing to the two going to Emmaus.		(D) 16:12	(D)24:13 - 32
Their return to the eleven.		16:13	24:33 - 35
The first appearance of the Lord to the eleven.			(E) 24:36 - 44	(E) 20:19 - 23
The FIRST COMMISSION.			(B) 24:45 - 49
The second appearance to the eleven (and Thomas).		(F) 16:14		(F) 20:24 - 29
The SECOND COMMISSION.		16:15 - 18
(Parenthetic statement by the Evangelist)				(20:30, 31)
Departure of the eleven into Galilee.	28:16 - 18
The THIRD COMMISSION.	(~A) (~B) 28:19, 20
The appearance to the seven in Galilee.				21:1 - 23
The Ascension and after.		16:19, 20	24:50 - 53
(Closing statement of the Evangelist)				(21:24, 25)

BaalServant · « **Reply #20 on:** June 14, 2012, 08:32:04 PM »

Quote from: euroclydon on June 14, 2012, 07:06:59 PM

An ommission is NOT a negation.

Good Ba'al. When are you going to confront the contradictions that can't be explained if you put words into the bible's mouth?

I see that you think yourself to be quite the showman. I've already told you, I'm not interested in the contradictions that you can claim are simply negations.

What of the situations that are mutually exclusive? I'd normally link to the post where I've already pointed one out for you, but it's only fair that you should have to search through this excessively cluttered thread to refer to what I'm referring to.

I praise Ba'al for your avoidance and demonstration that all you have to provide is stonewalling.

BaalServant · « **Reply #21 on:** June 14, 2012, 08:33:59 PM »

Edit: Anyone want to rent some space? I apparently made a double post. : )

screwtape · « **Reply #22 on:** June 14, 2012, 08:46:37 PM »

euroclydon,

You are not communicating. What you are doing amounts to to preaching, if I am being generous, or masturbation, if I am not being generous. Cut it out and use plain language.

Thanks.

kin hell · « **Reply #23 on:** June 18, 2012, 11:36:46 PM »

Quote from: screwtape on June 14, 2012, 08:46:37 PM

euroclydon,

You are not communicating. What you are doing amounts to to preaching, if I am being generous, or masturbation, if I am not being generous. Cut it out and use plain language.

Thanks.

it is not impossible that he is doing both
I am not saying he is a preaching wanker
only that he appears to display all the annoying attributes of a preaching wanker but without the normal social skill set

euroclydon · « **Reply #24 on:** July 03, 2012, 10:16:27 AM »

Quote from: kin hell on June 18, 2012, 11:36:46 PM

Quote from: screwtape on June 14, 2012, 08:46:37 PM
euroclydon,
What you are doing amounts to to preaching, if I am being generous, or masturbation, if I am not being generous. Cut it out and use plain language.

FALLACY: FALSE DILEMMA

The rules here are NOT one way street.

euroclydon · « **Reply #25 on:** July 03, 2012, 10:23:59 AM »

Quote

Good Ba'al. When are you going to confront the contradictions that can't be explained if you put words into the bible's mouth?

FALLACY: Loaded Question.

Quote…

"How am I to get in?" asked Alice again, in a louder tone.

"Are you to get in at all?" said the Footman, "That's the first question, you know."

…Unquote

Source: Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, Ch. 6.
Form:

A question with a false, disputed, or question-begging presupposition.

As you can already see, I will post where ever I see fit, at ay time, and I post on a wide range of subjects

euroclydon · « **Reply #26 on:** July 03, 2012, 10:27:04 AM »

Sorry responses one and all.

And a hypocritical diversion from some guy, and a bunch of cheerleaders.

Make your suggestion about what I'm doing to me personally, or I will insult you publically.

Emily · « **Reply #27 on:** July 03, 2012, 10:30:41 AM »

Back to this topic again. Ugh!

I still don't get it. Based on the emotions and expressions that disciples showed wherever they met Jesus and however many times that gave them a commission, I'm happy to think that the different accounts of a commission is just poor storytelling, and that Jesus only gave one but the authors of the bible got their stories confused with one another.

Just me expressing how i am not convinced with your 'logic', euro.

-M

One Above All · « **Reply #28 on:** July 03, 2012, 10:32:09 AM »

euroclydon, I think it's time to take your meds.

News:

Author Topic: RE: Contradictions in the jesus resurrection? (Read 4177 times)